5 Filters

Mercola: 4,000 Coronavirus Patents Since 1999 Expose Corrupt Dealings

The meat of this story is in the interview with Dr David Martin, who is functioning as a patent whistle blower. Transcript here, but I suspect it will not survive the 48 hour guillotine imposed against Mercola by Dr Tony Soprano

The place the story starts is interesting (highlighted)
ED

Story at-a-glance

  • In the early 2000s, David Martin, Ph.D., founder of M-CAM International, started finding large numbers of patents that violate biological and chemical weapons laws
  • In 1999, Dr. Anthony Fauci funded research to create ā€œan infectious replication-defective recombinant coronavirus.ā€ In 2002, Ralph Baric, Ph.D. and colleagues at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, filed a patent on recombinant coronavirus, and within a year, we got the worldā€™s first SARS outbreak
  • Since 1999, at least 4,000 patents involving coronavirus have been filed, including patents detailing key features of the so-called ā€œnovelā€ SARS-CoV-2 virus
  • The 2001 anthrax attack, which came out of medical and defense research, led to the passage of the PREP Act, which removed liability for manufacturers of emergency medical countermeasures
  • The funds for entitlement programs and pensions will dry up by 2028, at which point the drug industry will go bankrupt as well. With a burgeoning population that is sick from the COVID jabs, we need to prepare new systems to care for each other

In this interview, we continue our coverage of the COVID ā€œplandemicā€ by speaking to David Martin, Ph.D., who has done a phenomenal job uncovering the paper trail behind the virus now known as SARS-CoV-2. As it turns out, this is not a novel virus at all, as patents and government grants detailing key features of the virus go back two decades.

Martin finished his doctorate at the University of Virginia in 1995, after which he was hired on to the medical school faculty in radiology and orthopedic surgery. In 2006, he set up the first medical device clinical trials organization for the University of Virginia ā€” a company called IDEAmed ā€” which conducted medical device clinical trials for U.S. Food and Drug Administration submission. So, he has an extensive background working with FDA clinical trials.

Monitoring Biological Weapons Violations

In 1998, he founded another company called M-CAM International, which is focused on finding ways to bring intellectual property into conventional finance. M-CAM also started auditing the U.S. patent system at the request of the U.S. Congress.

In the early 2000s, M-CAM worked with the Senate Banking Committee and was a contractor for the United States Treasury to expose white collar criminal activity around intellectual property and tax fraud. In doing that work, Martin also discovered something else.

ā€œQuite alarmingly, we found an enormous number of patents [detailing] biological and chemical weapon violations,ā€ Martin says. ā€œThat was not something we were looking for. I let people know this was not something we set out to find. This is something that landed in our lap.

I developed a technology a decade earlier called linguistic genomics, which is a means by which you can look at unstructured text data and find the metaphoric meaning inside of what is being communicated. As you can imagine, if people of ill intent are trying to do something, they often hide what theyā€™re doing in plain sight, but they use language that is not conventional.

So, when you find a patent, for example, on a blast-resistant pathogen from a rocket-propelled grenade ā€” did you hear what I just said? ā€˜A blast-resistant pathogen from a rocket-propelled grenade.ā€™ Does that sound like itā€™s a common way to inoculate a population or does that sound like [a bioweapon]?

And so, finding a number of bioweapons patents, we started taking into account some very serious things. I published once a year the literal global phonebook of every biological and chemical weapon violation that took place anywhere in the world.

[It tells you] the who, the where, the who funded it, what their addresses are. It was ā€¦ used by U.S. law enforcement, intelligence communities and elsewhere around the world to track things that were being done inappropriately. And, it was in 1999 [that] we started detecting that there seemed to be an alarming event around coronavirus, which weā€™re going to get into.ā€

Coronavirus Identified as a Potential Vaccine Vector

As explained by Martin, in 1999, the National Institutes of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), headed by Dr. Anthony Fauci, identified coronavirus as a possible vaccine vector.

At the time, the disclosed rationale was to try to come up with an HIV vaccine, and to that end, Fauci, in 1999, funded research to create ā€œan infectious replication-defective recombinant coronavirus.ā€

In 2002, Ralph Baric, Ph.D. and colleagues at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, filed a patent on recombinant coronavirus, and within a year, we got the worldā€™s first SARS outbreak.

The Real Tony Fauci

For more background on Fauci, be sure to read Robert F. Kennedy Jr.ā€™s book ā€œThe Real Tony Fauci,ā€ which details how Fauciā€™s promotion of AZT during the 1980s ended up killing hundreds of thousands of people. And the pattern weā€™re seeing with coronavirus is basically a repeat of previous behavior. Martin says:

ā€œItā€™s important to realize that at the time [in 1984 when Fauci became director of the NIAID] we were transitioning from an STD environment in which syphilis and gonorrhea and those types of STDs were the things that we were concerned about ā€¦

HIV became a political and social hot potato because it was associated in many respects with lifestyle branding, and as a result it became a political issue to essentially identify a class of the population that could be the basis for research without consideration.

The notion by Fauci was that people with HIV had already made decisions that somehow entitled them to less humanity. As a result, the clinical trials around developing both management techniques as well as potential treatments ā€¦ were done in a very reckless fashion. Numerous people died in [those] clinical trials, and by the way, still are ā€¦

He has been obsessed about this HIV situation as a platform to, essentially, use humans that he determines to be some form of sub-human for clinical trials. It is a horrific blight on the United Statesā€™ medical establishment that we have been willing to allow this to go on in the name of science, in the name of health promotion, since 1984, without any significant disruption or check.ā€

The First SARS Outbreak

The first SARS outbreak occurred in late 2002 going into 2003 in China. Curiously, before Baricā€™s team invented and patented a recombinant infectious replication-defective coronavirus, no one had ever heard of SARS.

ā€œIā€™m not drawing a causal relationship,ā€ Martin says. ā€œIā€™m making an observation that humans and what we call coronavirus seem to have cohabitated this earth for hundreds of thousands of years.

And then we manipulate that [virus] in 1999. We start playing around with putting it into different animals and different human cell line models, and then in 2003, we have SARS. Like a lot of other things, itā€™s an observation worth noting.

What makes the observation more problematic, obviously, is this was happening during the unfortunate results of the 2001 anthrax attack, which as you know came out of federal labs ā€¦

[It] became very clear that this was not [due to] a bad actor, per se. This was medical and defense research gone bad that got into the public and people died. But the real benefit, if you will, of the anthrax attack was the passage of the PREP Act.ā€

Anthrax Attack Provided Desired Liability Removal

Inside the PREP Act we now have the carte blanche removal of liability for manufacturers of medical countermeasures. As noted by Martin, the PREP Act has ā€œmade pharmaceutical companies much more capable of instilling terror in the population, coercing a population into taking an untested measure, and doing so with absolute impunity.ā€

Curiously, while Martinā€™s annual report on bioweapons patents was, with only a few exceptions, appreciated and used by agencies around the world, when it comes to the information he has amassed on coronavirus, not a single agency anywhere in the world has been willing to address it.

ā€œNo one ā€¦ seems to be willing to look at the fact that beginning in 2016 we started seeing very alarming language being used, which was ā€˜coronavirus poised for human emergence.ā€™ This was in patents, but also in scientific publications. And when you start referring to a coronavirus allegedly poised for human emergence, after the World Health Organization has declared SARS eradicated, thereā€™s something desperately wrong with that picture.ā€

Racketeering and Organized Crime

The biggest alarm bell was published February 12, 2016, by EcoHealth Alliance president Peter Daszak1 who, according to Martin, has been ā€œthe money laundering agentā€ for gain-of-function research coronaviruses after the U.S. implemented a moratorium on that kind of research in 2014. Rather than close it down, this research was simply moved over to China instead. In 2015, Daszak stated:2

ā€œTo sustain the funding base beyond the crisis, we need to increase the public understanding of the need for medical countermeasures, such as a pan influenza or a pan coronavirus vaccine. A key driver is the media and the economics will follow the hype. We need to use that hype to our advantage to get to the real issues. Investors will respond if they see profit at the end of the process.ā€

That statement was made by Daszak in 2015, and was published in the spring of 2016. The statement ā€œset off alarm bells very loudly within my organization,ā€ Martin says, ā€œbecause when you have somebody who is promoting gain-of-function research, and clearly blurring the line on what is even legal ā€¦ saying we need ā€˜media to create the hypeā€™ ā€¦ and ā€˜investors will follow if they see profitā€™ ā€¦ that doesnā€™t sound like public health.

To me, that sounds like organized crime. That sounds like racketeering, and we need to raise this issue.ā€

What the Coronavirus Patents Show

In all, since 2002, some 4,000 patents have been filed on the genome, vaccines and detection of coronavirus. According to Martin, this is alarming, ā€œbecause you donā€™t file patents on something that you donā€™t intend to commercialize.ā€ Evidence of intended commercialization can also be found by looking at the dates of certain patents by certain companies.

April 28, 2003, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention filed a patent on the genome of the SARS coronavirus. Five days later, Sequoia Pharmaceuticals received a $935,000 grant and filed U.S. Patent 7151163 for a treatment for that same virus. How can you file a patent for the treatment of a virus that was only discovered five days earlier?

ā€œThat sounds like an inside job,ā€ Martin says*. ā€œBecause you cannot have a pathogen identified and a cure for it in five days, when all of the information was held from the public, because when the CDC filed its patent on the genome of coronavirus, it paid to keep that patent secret.*

So, somebody somewhere knows that this thing was going to turn out to be a moneymaker ā€¦ The proliferation of proprietary controls around SARS Coronavirus probably exceeds at least by two or three times most other pathogens ā€¦

Dana Farber had a monoclonal antibody patent system that came out of three NIH grants. Their patent 7750123 on the monoclonal antibody for SARS-Cov treatment took place in 2003.ā€

So, while weā€™ve been told that SARS-CoV-2 is something weā€™ve never seen before, there are 4,000 patents and patent applications that say otherwise. The same can be said for the testing and the COVID shots. For example, Pfizer filed the first S1 spike protein vaccine patent on coronavirus in 1990 ā€” 30 years ago.

ā€œRegardless of what part of the story we look at, the patent record is full of thousands of patents where commercial interests funded by NIAID and the National Institutes of Health have been building the economic cabal around coronavirus. This is not a new thing. It hasnā€™t been a new thing.

And regrettably, weā€™re being told continuously that somehow or another thereā€™s something novel about this experience, despite the fact that every single part of what we are told is being detected with PCR ā€¦ the injections, every single one of those things has been known and isolated for over 30 years.ā€

How Did We Get Here?

How did we get to a point where taxpayers are funding research on pathogens that are being designed to sicken and kill us, only to drive profits into the drug industry and all these various patent holders, which include the government itself?

In large part, it goes back to the implementation of the Bayh-Dole Act of 1980, which allows the beneficiaries of federal grants to file patents on work derived from federally funded research. The idea was that the economy would benefit by allowing scientists to be entrepreneurs first, rather than simply publishing their research.

This piece of legislation has undermined health care by bringing the patent office, the FDA and CDC into an unholy trinity that serves and promotes private pharmaceutical concerns. So, what we have now is an insidious funding loop. Martin explains:

ā€œCorporations and pharma lobby to get people elected. Once theyā€™re elected, the lobbyists flow an enormous amount of money into the various NIH programs. In the case of NIAID, since Fauci took over [in 1984], $191 billion have gone through his fingers. Now, is that because heā€™s successful?

No, as a matter of fact, under his watch, allergies and infectious diseases have increased over 60 times. Yet somehow or another, heā€™s still the director of a failed [agency] thatā€™s gotten $191 billion to solve a problem that is getting worse every single year.

If it was a company, we would have fired him. The problem is, itā€™s not a company. Itā€™s a money laundering agency. It moves public funds through the hands of a federal agency into the research laboratories, which ultimately are going to conduct research that is then licensed back to the benefactors, which are the pharmaceutical companies that paid to get people into office in the first place.

So, this is a revolving door problem, and the Bayh-Dole Act created an insidious incentive that said that the only research that was going to be conducted was going to be research that ultimately would flow back to the pharmaceutical industry and create juggernauts, where the risk of R&D was taken by the public and the benefit for that R&D was taken by the private. Thatā€™s a horrible thing, and that is exactly what Fauci has run.ā€

Why Did Fauci Pick Moderna as Vaccine Frontrunner?

Martin also points out that Fauci has also lied to Congress about the NIAIDā€™s financial interests in drugs. During this pandemic, Congress and the Congressional Budget Office asked for an accounting of NIH-owned patents where they have potential commercial interest in the drugs being produced. Fauci did not disclose any of them. Instead he lied and said there are none.

ā€œThe evidence is stacked a mile long,ā€ Martin says. ā€œModerna stands alone as the only recipient of NIAID funding that fails to comply with the law and fails to disclose the federal governmentā€™s interest in their intellectual property.

Despite the fact that everyone knew Moderna failed to disclose the federal governmentā€™s interest in its research, Fauci picked Moderna to be the frontrunner for an untested, commercially unsuccessful and entirely unproven mRNA vaccine technology in the spring of 2020.

There was no rational justification for that, and there would have been less rational justification, given the fact that Moderna is on record as having violated the federal law, the Bayh-Dole Act, 141 times at the time they were picked to be the winner.

This is a known fact, but it was overlooked entirely, and not a single law enforcement agent anywhere in the United States has decided that having a criminal organization supply a product sounds like a bad idea.ā€

Violations of Law Everywhere

Since the beginning of this pandemic, the number of rules, laws and regulations that have been broken in the name of public health boggle the mind. Even laws that are absolutely clear and in no way ambiguous are being broken. For example, under Code of Federal Regulations Title 21, section 50, no one can be forced or coerced into a clinical trial of an experimental medical product, even if itā€™s a pandemic countermeasure.

ā€œItā€™s black and white, and this clinical trial does not end until 2023 in the first best instance. So, there is no such thing as an approved or even authorized use of a [COVID ā€˜vaccineā€™] that can be compelled on the population,ā€ Martin says.

And yet theyā€™re bribing, threatening and coercing people everywhere. The drug companies also violated basic principles by eliminating all of the controls and giving the test vaccine to everyone in the trials, leaving us nothing against which to compare side effects. They also do not have an independent investigational review board, or the statutorily required approval processes for the protocol.

The companies themselves decided to modify their protocols midstream, which simply isnā€™t how itā€™s done. Basically, we do not have an actual clinical trial on these COVID shots, because so many of the basic principles of clinical medical research were violated.

Collapsed Judicial System Has Put Big Pharma in Charge

The federal government is also violating the False Claims Act by telling you the COVID shots are safe and effective, when the studies are still years from being completed, and have been undermined in all the ways just mentioned.

ā€œWhat we have is a situation where the deaths are actually considered to be acceptable,ā€ Martin says*. ā€œI donā€™t know what world you have to come from to find that term even remotely speakable. I think the utterance of that phrase is horrific ā€¦ We are killing people willfully, and we are doing it with impunity in the name of what we call a love affair with science.*

The only problem is weā€™ve desecrated science in the process because it turns out that when I did randomized double-blind, placebo-controlled trials, you know what I had to do? I had to keep the populations blinded. I had to keep it placebo-controlled for the whole clinical trial. And the reason I had to do that is because thatā€™s what the statute requires.

This entire process has been willful acts of harm to humanity. And the only hope we have is a very small note in the Department of Justice opinion that took place under the Trump administration, which says that if this was based on felony acts, then the entire emergency use authorization and all its benefits would collapse.

In other words, if we can show that a felony has occurred ā€” racketeering, lying to Congress, the public coercion ā€¦ [and] in the Fauci dossier 3 I outline dozens of felony violations ā€” [it] would bring this entire thing to its knees, because the moment the PREP Act protection falls away from Pfizer, Moderna, Johnson & Johnson, AstraZeneca and others, I can guarantee you [Fauci] will not be promoting a vaccine.

If they are liable for a single injury or death, theyā€™ll pull the plug on what they know to be unsafe. That requires law enforcement to do its job. And somewhere there has to be a prosecutor whoā€™s willing to do their job ā€¦ Right now, I genuinely do not think we have three tiers of government. I donā€™t think there is a Department of Justice.

The judiciary is functionally gone ā€¦ When we allow the judiciary to be an arm of the executive [branch], then what happens is weā€™ve actually lost the three-tiered structure of government. And, as a result, the system collapses. The judiciary was the only thing that was explicitly independent. We donā€™t allow judges to get sponsorship in campaign finance. We donā€™t allow judges to be elected.

We appoint them, we go through an approval process. We do all sorts of things to try to make sure the judiciary is independent. So, the only risk to the pharmaceutical industry, the only risk to an executive out of control, was the judiciary.

By collapsing the judicial system in the United States, we have effectively made the government a servant of its benefactors ā€” and that is the pharmaceutical industry.ā€

How Will It End?

With what appears to be a near-total collapse of the judicial system, it looks like weā€™re on a straight path to global tyranny, with no routes of escape. Martin, however, believes there may be a way out, but it will require action on behalf of rational individuals blessed with foresight. He explains:

ā€œYou have to have currency to buy off politicians. Back in 2008, when we had the global financial crisisā€¦ we instituted a policy that [will] functionally bankrupt our entitlement program (Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid) in 2028 [or 2033] ā€¦

The best math we have is that the annuities and pension programs of the United States functionally run out of their trust fund in 2028. What does that mean? Well, one of the things that people overlook is thereā€™s an unholy alliance between the insurance companies and what we call health care.

Insurance companies are long-dated asset holders. These are the people who have to have money today to cover issues in the future. Thatā€™s what a long-dated asset holder is. The problem is that the Federal Reserve and the European Central Bank and other central banks have suppressed the value of the return on funds, so the funds are running out of money faster than expected ā€¦

You know as well as anybody else that for a politician to stand up and say, ā€˜Iā€™m going to abolish or significantly alter Social Securityā€™ is the death knell to any political aspiration. Tiny problem. But whether they say it or not, the trust fund runs out of money in 2028.

Now, here comes the kicker: So does the pharmaceutical industry because it turns out that the money thatā€™s going into that system is actually paying for the drug dependency of this country.

And if we go all the way back to 1604 ā€” to the establishment of the British East India Company and the establishment of the Virginia Company ā€” weā€™ll realize that the 400-plus-year tradition that we have, where we have built nation states on the back of the drug trade, is coming to its end.

The good news for all of us is itā€™s going to end around 2028, because we have a convergence that they didnā€™t figure out how to cover up. The convergence is that the people with the money, the big pharmaceutical players, are the beneficiaries of a system that is going to bankrupt itself by virtue of their actions.

This is the brontosaurus that ate too much because it was the biggest dinosaur. And the great news is they have the brain the size of a pea, just like the brontosaurus. They are not smart. And the best thing we have going for us furry humans is that we actually are nimble.

Now, does that mean that we are not going to have an ounce of pain through the process? Absolutely not. There is social disruption that we canā€™t even imagine on the horizon in 2026, 2027 and 2028, because 86 million people will lose what they thought was going to be their retirement funds.

When we see that number now go to 100 million people, and the 100 million people are sicker because of what weā€™ve injected today ā€¦ those people who are going to require greater health care then are going to be faced with a bankrupt system incapable of supporting their life and their livelihood. And that is the death knell of this story.

The best news about this is we have time if people of good conscience get together and say, ā€˜Weā€™re not going to let that apocalypse arrive because we have time to start building communities that actually care for each other. We have time to start building accountability structures.

We have time to start doing things that bring our social fabric together so that when that system collapses, we can come back to a rational view of what life and liberty and the pursuit of happiness isā€™ because, until we can reclaim the sovereignty of our health, we cannot celebrate the sovereignty of our life.ā€

What About the 2030 Agenda?

By now, youā€™ve probably heard of the World Economic Forumā€™s Great Reset agenda, which includes the transition to a Central Bank Digital Currency. With that, they can abolish the dollar and ā€œresetā€ the entire global economy that is now tottering on its last leg. However, even here there may be kink in the plan that can save us.

ā€œLike a good [James] Bond villain, heā€™s actually ignorant of history,ā€ Martin says. The reason Martin remains optimistic that the Great Reset doesnā€™t have a chance at all to succeed is because thereā€™s no way the global public will embrace an all-digital system that can be annihilated by an electromagnetic pulse or electromagnetic disruption.

This year alone, weā€™ve seen internet failures, power outages and digital finance hacks that would leave people stranded without a single penny were they reliant on an all-digital financial system.

ā€œThe digital currency illusion is the most bizarre and pathetic Dr. Evil plan anybodyā€™s ever concocted,ā€ Martin says. ā€œThe fact of the matter is the digital currency craze is one of those fantastical illusions that unfortunately has a single-point failure.

We live in a world where actors of both anarchist intent, and very, very laudable privateers and pirates are more than happy to make sure that digital currency never sees the light of day because they will, in fact, hack, crack and disrupt every system out there.

And so, I look at the whole Great Reset as great theater ā€¦ But the entire illusion is being run because theyā€™re out of ideas. And ā€¦ when the incumbency is out of bad ideas, they try desperately to force you into a behavior that you would not otherwise accept. All you have to do is just say no. Just donā€™t play along.ā€

The Financial Incentive for Depopulation

Is it possible that the COVID jabs might cause premature death and be an intentional form of depopulation? Well, since weā€™re following the money, thereā€™s certainly a financial incentive for such a scenario. As noted by Martin, if youā€™ve made financial promises to people who are closing in on retirement, the fewer there are of them the better.

ā€œThe financial interest for depopulation is a thoroughly compelling argument,ā€ Martin says. He recently reviewed this argument in a lecture given at the Church of Glad Tidings in Yuba City, which you can view above.

In short, having people live long enough to tap into their Social Security benefits and live to the full maturity of their life insurance policies is problematic with respect to the financial collapse that is looming.

Based on these financial realities ā€” which certainly are not advertised or publicly discussed ā€” thereā€™s clearly an economic incentive to shrink the population and get rid of as many people as possible before 2028. Unfortunately, based on previous lipid nanoparticle and mRNA trials, the chance of a mass casualty event is high.

ā€œThere is no question ā€¦ they jumped over animal trials for a very important reason,ā€ Martin says. ā€œWeā€™ve been told it was to save time, but it wasnā€™t to save time.

It was to put this particular pathogen into humanity, so that a lot of people suffer and ultimately die of effects that we could have picked up if we had done it the traditional way, which is seven to eight years of safety studies, before we decide to put it in the arms of humans.

Thatā€™s not what we did. And if we look at the safety data from animal studies on mRNA, and on the lipid nanoparticle, there is no question that there is going to be a fatality increase because of this ā€¦

But the concern I have, [which may be] more egregious [than] the death ā€¦ is the malingering morbidity, people who will require around the clock medical care is going to be a drain that will infect our economy so deeply that we may not recover.

Because if we have people who have to stay at home with children who are sick, if we have people who have to care for elderly parents who are sick, if we have people who are caring for a spouse or a family member who are sick, that means we do not have the ability to enjoy life and liberty. And the fact is that I think weā€™re going to have a bigger morbidity than mortality event.ā€
ā€¦
ā€¦
(Post size limited: continues below)

(Contiued due to post size limits)

Now, as if all of that werenā€™t enough, Martin has also discovered CRISPR patents that describe how they can ā€œclipā€ the effects of mRNA/DNA-based vaccines from people. He believes they may be building a pathogen set that is then introduced into the population so that they can later introduce a more expensive technology that can fix what was broken. This, unfortunately, could mean survival may be based on your ability to pay.

Were There Excess Deaths Due to COVID-19?

To backtrack for a moment, while weā€™ve been told COVID-19 caused excess deaths in 2020, one way to double-check that is to look at the number of life insurance policies paid. And in 2020, there were actually fewer life insurance policies paid out than normal, according to Martin.

ā€œWhose numbers are you going to believe? Are you going to believe the CDC whoā€™s trying to pump and dump this terror campaign of people dying, and therefore you need to have your mask on, you need to socially distance, you need to vaccinate?

Or are you going to believe the numbers from the people who actually pay claims when real human life ends? It turns out that if you look at the audited financial statements of the worldā€™s largest life insurance companies, we can find no excess death evidence. Is COVID so smart that it only kills the uninsured? Is that what weā€™re supposed to believe?ā€

Live Consciously, Aligned With Health

In closing, I, like Martin, believe we can survive this and keep our freedom. But we must act. Individually, every single person needs to take actions that are in line with pro-life and liberty morals and ethics. As suggested by Martin, spend your money on certified organic foods and locally grown foods to help build a healthier food system.

Make sure that what you put into your body is aligned to your health. Make sure that what you do with your body is aligned to your health. And then as you do that, invite other people into living a life that in fact models that behavior, so that we start building communities of consciousness. ~ David Martin, Ph.D.

Spend time with friends and family and share information. Start building a sense of community again, in whatever way makes sense to you. When you make a purchasing decision, analyze whether youā€™re supporting the evil being perpetrated, or choking its money supply. We need to start building micro-economies that can later grow into alternative economies. We need to start building support structures for when the financial and health care systems break.

ā€œThe fact is we are in a very unique moment in human history, and it probably is as close to the story of Joseph in Egypt as you can get. You know the seven fat years and then the seven skinny years? Well, guess what? We have a couple of fat years left. You know what we should be doing?

We should be investing in our networks of relationship. We should be investing in our networks of community. We should be building those resilient fibers that hold us together because we know that there is a famine coming. And we are in a unique position right now to actually do something about it.

So, start with yourself. Make sure that what you put into your body is aligned to your health. Make sure that what you do with your body is aligned to your health. And then as you do that, invite other people into living a life that in fact models that behavior, so that we start building communities of consciousness. And as we build those communities, we will start building currencies of consciousness ā€¦

There are a bunch of ways that we can solve these problems, and we can do it using the market. We can do it using our consciousness, but we need our consciousness, we need our community, and we need our currency to be organically aligned to humanity again.ā€

How to Break the Propaganda Cycle

Doing the things mentioned above will also further another task at hand, which is to break the propaganda cycle. The key, really, is to simply live your life as healthily and joyously as possible, so that people around you can see there are others out there who arenā€™t living in fear. Eventually, theyā€™ll start seeing they actually have a choice.

ā€œListen, propaganda cannot stand against the truth of a life well lived,ā€ Martin says*. ā€œIt can never stand against that truth. What weā€™re trying to do is the wrong energy. Weā€™re trying to confront irrationality with rationality. But what we need to be doing is being persistent in showing up and living in a way that people look at it and say, ā€˜Iā€™ll have what sheā€™s having.ā€™*

This is your ā€˜Harry Met Sallyā€™ moment. This is that restaurant scene. This is your moment to be a person who outlasts the half-life of the propaganda reflex. And Iā€™ve seen way too many people try to engage energetically in the debate where they enter into conflict and it destroys their well-being.

Donā€™t be the miserable angry one. Be the one at the table who is the one worth looking at and going, ā€˜Iā€™ll have what heā€™s having. Iā€™ll have what sheā€™s having.ā€™ Live a life that is desirable, and youā€™ll see propaganda become emasculated instantaneously ā€¦

All the time while Gov. [Ralph] Northam here in Virginia was telling us that we could not have gatherings, we continued our workshops. We had our table full of 15, 20, 25 people, and our official policy was that if you signed up for our workshop, for the time you were in our home we adopted you as family, because the legal exemption in Virginia was that family didnā€™t count.

So, we adopted everybody for the week. We had every kind of cousin, uncle, aunt, brother, sister, child, granny. It was all family. We went through the entire shutdown having a table full of fellowship. And you know what? Everybody in the neighborhood said, ā€˜Iā€™d love to have what theyā€™re having.ā€™"

With aggressive efforts by government working with pharmaceutical corporations and medical trade groups to mandate COVID-19 vaccines and partnering with Silicon Valley and corporate media to censor public conversations about vaccination and health, it is critical for you to act now to protect your legal right to make informed, voluntary vaccine choices.

Thankfully, NVIC provides the public with independent, well-referenced information on vaccines and advocates for the inclusion of vaccine safety and informed consent protections in the public health system.

Last year, NVIC sponsored the groundbreaking 5th International Public Conference on Vaccination: Protecting Health & Autonomy in the 21st Century.

The conference featured 51 speakers from around the world talking about the coronavirus pandemic and defending liberty in late 2020, just before the government granted vaccine manufacturers an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) to distribute experimental COVID-19 vaccines in the U.S. You can watch or listen to the conference for free here.

Resources Where You Can Learn More

NVIC Advocacy Portal ā€” Become a registered user of this unique free online communications network that electronically connects you directly with your own legislators and emails you action alerts with talking points so you can be an effective vaccine choice advocate in your state.

You can use it to inform your legislators about why it is necessary to protect vaccine exemptions and your legal right to make voluntary vaccine decisions for yourself and your children.
Ask 8 Vaccine Information Kiosk ā€” Download brochures and reports on vaccination and how to recognize vaccine reaction symptoms, as well as posters and web badges that you can share with your family and friends. Access the illustrated and fully referenced ā€œGuide to Reforming Vaccine Policy & Lawā€ to educate your legislator when you advocate for vaccine informed consent rights.
State Law & Vaccine Requirements ā€” You can easily obtain your stateā€™s current vaccine policies and laws here.
Vaccine Reaction Reporting ā€” Search for and read descriptions of vaccine reaction reports made to the federal vaccine adverse events reporting system (VAERS). Make a vaccine reaction report to NVIC.
Cry for Vaccine Freedom Wall ā€” Read real life stories from people who have been threatened, bullied and sanctioned for trying to make voluntary decisions about vaccination for themselves or their minor children. Post your own experience.
Guide to Flu & Flu Vaccines ā€” This ā€œMini Guide to influenza & Flu Vaccinesā€ is a brief summary of facts about influenza and influenza vaccines.

Ā­Sources and References

https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2021/10/03/david-martin-covid-fraud.aspx

1 Like

Transcript of the Dr David Martin interview

So, our background, in addition to the medical background was figuring out ways to bring
innovation to the marketplace and dropping the cost of capital so that innovative companies
could get much less expensive capital. It was through that, Joe, that an interesting hole opened
up. That was we were starting to audit the United States Patent system. We were asked to do that
by Congress. And quite alarmingly, we found an enormous number of patents on biological and
chemical weapon violations. Now, that was not something we were looking for. I let people
know this was not something we set out to find. This is something that landed in our lap.
Dr. Joseph Mercola:
How did you identify these? Was it some type of digital scanning system or was it a manual
review?
David Martin:
Yeah, so I developed a technology a decade earlier called Linguistic Genomics, which is a means
by which you can look at unstructured text data and find the metaphoric meaning inside of what
is being communicated. As you can imagine, if people of ill intent are trying to do something,
they often hide what theyā€™re doing in plain sight, but they use language that is not conventional.
So when you find a patent, for example, on a blast-resistant pathogen from a rocket-propelled
grenade, did you hear what I just said? A blast-resistant pathogen from a rocket-propelled
grenade. Does that sound like itā€™s a common way to inoculate a population or does that sound
like it sounds?
Dr. Joseph Mercola:
Sounds like it sounds. A bioweapon.
David Martin:
Yeah. And so, finding a number of bioweapons patents, we started taking into account some very
serious things. And I published once a year, I have a copy of the book here. I published once a
year, the literal global phonebook of every biological and chemical weapon violation.
Dr. Joseph Mercola:
Wow.
David Martin:
That took place anywhere in the world, and it is the whoā€™s to it. Itā€™s the who, itā€™s the where, itā€™s the
who funded it, itā€™s what their addresses are. It was actually quite an interesting document that
was what was used by U.S. law enforcement, intelligence communities and elsewhere around the
world to track things that were being done inappropriately. And it was in fact, in 1999 when we
started detecting that there seemed to be an alarming event around coronavirus, which weā€™re
going to get into.
Dr. Joseph Mercola:
So, was this report directed towards governmental agencies primarily?

David Martin:
Thatā€™s exactly right. It was in addition to being directed at government agencies. It was also
shared with law enforcement around the world to try to neutralize this into not a single party kind
of information disclosure. As a matter of fact, at its peak of circulation we had the regular
updates recorded at the Library of Alexandria in Egypt as a neutral party holding this
information. So that posterity would know that we built laws around the prohibition of biological
and chemical weapons with the full intention of breaking those laws routinely, and having a
published record of the who did it, when they did it and who financed it was very important.
Dr. Joseph Mercola:
Okay, so I interrupted you with a question and you were beginning to tell us about this transition
to the coronavirus that you identify.
David Martin:
Well, in 1999, Anthony Fauciā€™s NIAID (National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases)
saw the possibility of using coronavirus as a possible vaccine vector. He actually thought that
there would be a way to co-op nature to be able to be used as a way to inoculate a population.
And at the time, the disclosed rationale for this was to try to come up with an HIV (human
immunodeficiency virus) vaccine. As youā€™re familiar he was obsessed about HIV as well as
influenza vaccines. And as a result, what he was looking for was to see if there was a way to
make ā€“ and now Iā€™m quoting from the funded research, ā€œAn infectious replication defective
recombinant coronavirus.ā€ Now, itā€™s important for you guys to realize that this was 1999. This
was notā€¦ We hadnā€™t had SARS (severe acute respiratory syndrome) yet. We didnā€™t even know
SARS was a thing. But in 1999, that project got funded by NIAID. In 2002, the University of
North Carolina, Chapel Hills Ralph Baric and his colleagues filed a patent on recombinant
coronavirus, and a year later the world got SARS.
Dr. Joseph Mercola:
Yeah. So, I just want to take a step back because you alluded to the Fauciā€™s involvement with
HIV. I just want to wonder if you can give a brief comment on that because Robert Kennedyā€™s
written a book about him called ā€œThe Real Tony Fauciā€ that highlights his nefarious strategies in
the '80s. I mean, he was put into office, longest applied office for 50 years, and set up NIAID.
And basically killed hundreds of thousands of peoples with this promotion of AZT
(azidothymidine).
David Martin:
Yes.
Dr. Joseph Mercola:
So, this pattern that weā€™re seeing with coronavirus is actually a repeat of previous behavior.
David Martin:
Yes, and as a matter of fact, when he joined NIAID as its director in 1984 appointed by the
Reagan administration, itā€™s important to realize that at the time we were transitioning from

largely an STD (sexually transmitted diseases) environment in which syphilis and gonorrhea and
those types of STDs were the things that we were concerned about, obviously, herpes and things
like that. HIV became, as you well know, a political and social hot potato because it was
associated in many respects with lifestyle branding, and as a result it became a political issue to
essentially identify a class of the population that could be the basis for research without
consideration. The notion by Anthony Fauci was people with HIV already had made decisions
that somehow entitled them to less humanity. And as a result, the clinical trials around
developing both management techniques as well as potential treatments became quite
fashionable, but it was done in a very reckless fashion, and numerous people died in clinical
trials, and by the way, still are.
David Martin:
As recently as September of 2020, when the NIAID Advisory Committee met, Anthony Fauci
reported on several clinical trials involving three different continents not specified, where in
phase one trials the alleged proposed treatment was ā€œunsuccessfulā€ and there were loss of life
involved in these trials. So, the fact of the matter is he hasnā€™t stopped this. This was something
that he started in 1984. But he has literally been obsessed about this HIV situation as a platform
to essentially use humans that he determines to be some form of subhuman for clinical trials.
And it is a horrific blight on the United States medical establishment that we have been willing
to allow this to go on in the name of science, in the name of health promotion, since 1984,
without any significant disruption or check.
Dr. Joseph Mercola:
All right. Well, thank you for that historical perspective because itā€™s so important and most
people have no clue that this is repeat behavior for his motives [crosstalk 00:10:00]. So, when I
interrupted you with a question, you were starting to explain how this developed in the late '90s
with Ralph Baric at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. This is even before we had the
first coronavirus epidemic.
David Martin:
Yeah, the first outbreak, as you know is late 2002 going into 2003 in China. So, SARS as a thing,
was not a thing until we made recombinant infectious replication-defective coronavirus. And itā€™s
so critical that we understand that Iā€™m not drawing a causal relationship. Iā€™m making an
observation that humans and what we call coronavirus seem to cohabitate this earth for hundreds
of thousands of years. And then we manipulate that in 1999, we do a number of things to actually
start playing around with putting it into different animals, and in different human cell line
models. And then in 2003, we have SARS. Like a lot of other things itā€™s an observation worth
noting.
David Martin:
What makes the observation more problematic, obviously, is this was happening during the
unfortunate results of the 2001 anthrax attack, which as you know came out of federal labs. The
whole notion that somehow or another we had domestic terror by bioweapons from some sort of
bad actor became very clear that this was not a bad actor, per se, this was medical and defense
research gone bad that got into the public and real people really died. But as you know, Joe, the

real benefit, if you will, for the anthrax attack was the passage of the PREP (Public Readiness
and Emergency Preparedness) Act. [crosstalk 00:11:49].
Dr. Joseph Mercola:
It persists till today. Thatā€™s persistent [crosstalk 00:11:52]-
David Martin:
Oh, absolutely. Absolutely. Because we didnā€™t have in the 1986 act something that covered
medical countermeasures. What we had was childhood vaccines. Inside of the PREP Act, we
now have the effective carte blanche removal of liability to manufacturers of medical
countermeasures, and that carte blanche liability needed an event horizon to create it, and it turns
out that the anthrax scare was the raison dā€™ĆŖtre to actually get that coverage expanded to medical
countermeasures.
David Martin:
I think most people donā€™t understand that the '86 act is really not overly relevant in the
coronavirus situation simply because this is a medical countermeasure under the PREP Act. And
as a result, the breadth of coverage and the accountability for responsibility, including the PREP
Act, does not have a VAERS (Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System) requirement. So,
thereā€™s a lot of things that are inside of the PREP Act that made pharmaceutical companies much
more capable of instilling terror in the population, coercing a population into taking an untested
measure, and doing so with absolute impunity.
Dr. Joseph Mercola:
Now, so you were compiling this information. And at the time, it sounds like youā€™re still working
for the federal government. And Iā€™m wondering if you can, I guess ā€“ I want to go into more detail
what youā€™ve compiled because youā€™ve only touched the surface of the paper trail. So, maybe you
do that, and then in your response help us understand when you made the transition away from
the federal government to informing the public?
David Martin:
Well, Iā€™ve always seen that my role as the person who actually took the time and effort to
aggregate all of this data. Iā€™ve always seen a public interest as part of our mission. And so, we did
not work for the federal government. The federal government was a beneficiary of the
information we provided as were a number of other organizations. As you and your listeners can
go back and review, I testified in Congress for the very first time on the audit of the United
States Patent System back in the early 2000s. Did a lot of work with the Senate Banking
Committee. We were a contractor for the United States Treasury to break open a lot of white
collar criminal activity around intellectual property and its abuses, and tax fraud. So, weā€™ve had a
number of engagements where we were contracted by the federal government to do projects. But
the work on bioweapons was something I did because I felt, as a citizen of the world, it was
absolutely essential that we have public visibility into the violations of biological and chemical
weapons laws and treaties.
David Martin:

And as a result of that, in the mid-early and mid-2000s, the Bush administration asked me on
several occasions to be part of both individual delegations as well as groups of delegations in the
biological weapons conventions programs around the world. And so, I was in Slovenia for the
EUROTOX Conference. I was in the Islamic Republic of Iran and Tehran for the National
Genetic Engineering and Bioengineering conferences that were about the proliferation of these
technologies in the early and mid-2000s. And I was doing all those things at the request of the
federal government.
David Martin:
But always, as a public citizen, my goal has always been to make sure that information that we
have is shared with the authorities who are in fact charged with accountability. Now, as you well
know, the bad news is when other people are doing it weā€™re more than happy to go off and do
investigations. When weā€™re doing it, there seems to be a little bit of a blowback, and in 2005 and
2006, a lot of what I uncovered turned out to be the Bush-Cheney administrationā€™s abuses of a
number of things around the wars in the Middle East. And this ā€œWar on Terror,ā€ which was kind
of like Reaganā€™s War on Drugs.
David Martin:
The fact of the matter is we were just using conflict as a convenient way to move money around
without really having a whole lot of evidence or justification. And so, some of what I uncovered
was not warmly received by the Bureau, by intelligence agencies and whatnot. But by and large,
without exception from 2001 until the present situation, the information that I have provided has
been used in international law enforcement and intelligence operations, and it has been warmly
received, which is the reason why this one stands out so remarkably because all of a sudden no
one not in the U.S., none of our allies. None of the people who are not really our allies seem to
be willing to look at the fact that beginning in 2016 we started seeing very alarming language
being used, which was ā€œcoronavirus poised for human emergence.ā€ Now, Iā€™m not a-
Dr. Joseph Mercola:
Where were you seeing this, in the patents?
David Martin:
This was in patents, but it was also in scientific publications.
Dr. Joseph Mercola:
Okay.
David Martin:
And when you start referring to a coronavirus allegedly poised for human emergence after the
World Health Organization has declared SARS eradicated, thereā€™s something desperately wrong
with that picture. As I have said many, many times, and I canā€™t help myself. I have to remind
your listeners that the biggest alarm bell was published February 12, 2016, when Peter Daszak,
the veterinarian-in-chief who has been the money-laundering agent to get coronavirus research
after the gain of function moratorium here in the U.S. moved over to China said, "To sustain the
funding base beyond the crisis, we need to increase the public understanding of the need for

medical countermeasures, such as a pan-influenza or a pan-coronavirus vaccine. A key driver is
the media and the economics will follow the hype. We need to use that hype to our advantage to
get to the real issues. Investors will respond if they see profit at the end of the process."
David Martin:
That statement made in 2015, published in the spring of 2016 set off alarm bells very loudly
within my organization because when you actually have somebody who is promoting gainer
function research, and clearly blurring the line on what is even legal because at that time it was
illegal to conduct this kind of research in the U.S. Saying that we needed, ā€œMedia to create the
hype. And we need to use the hype to our advantage and investors will follow if they see profit at
the end of the process.ā€ Joe, that doesnā€™t sound like public health to me. That sounds like
organized crime. That sounds like racketeering, and we need to raise this issue.
Dr. Joseph Mercola:
Yeah. So, especially in conjunction with the earlier information you uncovered at the patent
history. Maybe you can take in this direction is it really provides a very powerful evidence. It
would have likely stand up in a court of law of the motivation behind this and the deep historical
records that support that.
David Martin:
Well, listen, from 2002, which is when we have the recombinant coronavirus patent filed by
UNC, Chapel Hill. The 4,000-plus patents that were filed on the genome, on vaccines, and on
detection since 2002 is quite alarming because you donā€™t file patents on something that you donā€™t
intend to commercialize. I mean, itā€™s just not a thing. We donā€™t have an enormous number of
patents on a number of other pathogens, but for some reason coronavirus becomes this target,
which is commercially, exceptionally rich. And what we find is that a couple things were quite
problematic. In 2003, April 28th of 2003, and I want you to listen to the date really important
because the April 23rd, 2003 CDC patent on the genome of the SARS coronavirus, which is
actually something that Iā€™ve talked about before. Somehow or another, five days later, Sequoia
Pharmaceuticals got a $935,000 grant and filed U.S. Patent 7151163. So this is five days after
allegedly the coronavirus has been isolated. Five days later, they file a patent on the treatment of
a thing that had been discovered five days earlier.
David Martin:
Now, call me old-fashioned, but that doesnā€™t sound like my bowtie speaking. That sounds like an
inside job because you cannot have a disease identified, a pathogen identified, and a cure for it in
five daysā€™ period of time when all of the information was held from the public because when the
CDC filed its patent on the genome of coronavirus, it paid to keep that patent secret. So,
somebody somewhere knows that this thing was going to turn out to be a moneymaker. Dana
Farber had a monoclonal antibody patent system that came out of three NIH (National Institutes
of Health) grants. Their patent 7750123 on the monoclonal antibody for SARS-CoV treatment
took place in 2003. We have the January 6, 2004 Bioterrorism Conference where the promise of
coronavirus as a bioterrorism tool becomes popularized, and all of a sudden we have an
enormous number of new treatments being patented. And before long, we have over 4,000
patents and patent applications filed.

David Martin:
Joe, 4,000 patents and patent applications on a thing where quite literally weā€™re saying itā€™s new.
Weā€™re saying itā€™s novel. But if we go back in history, we realize that Pfizer filed the first S1 spike
protein vaccine patent on coronavirus in 1990, 30 years ago. So, even what weā€™re being told is
new, whether itā€™s the pathogen, whether itā€™s the vaccine, whether itā€™s the mechanism of blocking
the vaccine using the spike protein, regardless of what part of the story we look at, the patent
record is full of thousands, not hundreds, thousands of patents where commercial interests
funded by NIAID and funded by the National Institutes of Health have been building the
economic cabal around coronavirus. This is not a new thing, hasnā€™t been a new thing. And
regrettably, weā€™re being told continuously that somehow or another thereā€™s something novel about
this experience despite the fact that every single part of what we are told is being detected with
PCR and everything weā€™re told that we are intervening with the injections. Every single one of
those things has been known and isolated for over 30 years.
Dr. Joseph Mercola:
Yeah, thatā€™s just, itā€™s just so outrageous. Can you compare the number of patents and patent
applications with coronavirus, which is over 4,000 to any other pathogen. I mean, whatā€™s number
two or does this exceed all other pathogens combined?
David Martin:
Oh, this is an order of magnitude more. I mean, weā€™re not even in the same ballpark. So, when
we had Ebola outbreak, for example, it got a lot of national attention. When we had H1N1, if you
remember all the bird flus and the avian influenzas and all of those sorts of things. Weā€™ve had an
enormous number of other pathogens that have been identified and have been worked on with
respect to diagnostics and therapeutics. Coronavirus runs away as a commercial boom for the
industrial and the funding complexes that have supported its promotion. Thatā€™s why itā€™s so
important for us to go back and look at the fact that whether it is the SARS coronavirus, whether
it is coronavirus generally, which throughout the '90s was almost exclusively a veterinary
concern. It was for dogs. It was for rabbit cardiomyopathy. It was things that were actually
involved in veterinary sciences. From then until now, the proliferation of proprietary controls
around SARS coronavirus probably exceeds at least by two or three times most other pathogens.
Dr. Joseph Mercola:
Okay, thatā€™s good for perspective. So, I wanted to delve back bit to Fauci because I know youā€™re
not a big fan of his as am I. Fauci, with respect to the whole process of the system thatā€™s evolved,
which started with HIV, of course, and that heā€™s got these principal investigators at all the major
universities and Pharma that he assigns in the 50 years heā€™s been in office over $1 trillion in
grants, so that these grant money from the federal government, ultimately the U.S. taxpayer, get
recycled into creating these patents and patent rewards and compensation and whole structures
that reward these people and provide a clear motivation for their behavior. So, thatā€™s a poor
description of it, but Iā€™m sure you can describe it in far more articulate terms.
David Martin:
Well, a terrible thing happened in 1980. A law called the Bayhā€“Dole Act, which was a law
signed into law, which allowed the beneficiaries of federal grants to file patents on the work

thatā€™s derived from federally funded research was passed allegedly to support the notion of
entrepreneurship and the development of the biotech and the high-tech industries in the United
States. The principle of the Act was this notion that somehow or another, we would benefit our
economy by having our scientists become first and foremost entrepreneurs rather than publish
their research [crosstalk 00:26:34]-
Dr. Joseph Mercola:
Which sounds rational, absolutely.
David Martin:
It sounds like a brilliant idea, sounds like a lovely idea, and it was the worst piece of legislation
we could have possibly done for the future of health care in the United States because what it did
was it brought the United States Patent Office, the FDA and CDC into an unholy trinity where
effectively what they did was they served as the bench science department for private
pharmaceutical concerns. So, essentially, what happened is we outsourced the basic research that
used to be the responsibility of industry, we outsourced it to the private sector. And the private
sector wound up becoming this unbelievably insidious funding loop. Because hereā€™s what
happens.
David Martin:
Corporations, Pharma, lobby to get people elected. Once theyā€™re elected, the lobbyists flow
surprisingly an enormous amount of money into the various NIH programs. In the case of NIAID
itself, since Fauci took over, $191 billion has gone through his fingers. Now, is that because heā€™s
successful? No, as a matter of fact, objectively, if you look at it, National Institute for Allergy
and Infectious Disease on his watch, allergies and infectious diseases have increased over 60
times.
David Martin:
And somehow or another, heā€™s still the CEO of a failed company thatā€™s gotten $191 billion to
solve a problem that is getting worse every single year. If it was a company, we would have fired
him. But the problem is, itā€™s not a company. What it is, is a money-laundering agency, which
actually moves public funds through the hands of a federal agency into the research laboratories,
which ultimately are going to conduct research then licensed back to the benefactors, which are
the pharmaceutical companies that paid to get people into office in the first place.
David Martin:
So, this is a revolving door problem, and the Bayhā€“Dole Act created an insidious incentive that
said that the only research that was going to be conducted was going to be research that
ultimately would flow back to the pharmaceutical industry and create juggernauts where the risk
of R&D was taken by the public and the benefit for that R&D was taken by the private. Thatā€™s a
horrible thing, and that is exactly what Fauci has run.
David Martin:
Itā€™s amazing to realize, and Joe Iā€™ve mentioned this in the Fauci dossier that I published, that
during this pandemic, Congress and the Congressional Budget Office asked for an accounting of
I think that this is pure 100% unadulterated, sociopathic tyranny. I think this is a guy who clearly
has a contempt for humanity that is probably unrivaled by most, if not all, historical figures.
Dr. Joseph Mercola:
Wow.
David Martin:
And the fact of the matter is, if you have the audacity ā€“ I mean, letā€™s face it, and Joe you know
this. You know this from your own experience. Thereā€™s a thing called the False Claims Act by
the Federal Trade Commission. False Claims Act is when you promote something that doesnā€™t
have at least two independent peer-reviewed clinical trials to justify your claims of either safety
or efficacy, and everybody in the health care industry knows what this thing is. In April of 2020,
the Journal of the American Medical Association official publication said that face coverings and
masks should not be worn by a general population because there was, ā€œNo evidence that they
actually provided any benefit.ā€
David Martin:
As a matter of fact, the only randomized clinical trial that was done by CR McIntyre actually
stated that wearing cloth face coverings increase the risk of influenza-like illness. So the only
study we had was it was potentially bad for you. But in contempt for the Federal Trade
Commission Act, suddenly we were all supposed to put on a thing, which quite literally the data
said not to do. Now, when you have the audacity to not only change your own policy, which he
has now admitted to lie, but he goes one step further, and says that the lie was justified. Those
are definitional criteria for sociopathic behavior.
David Martin:
When you not only donā€™t see the error of your ways, but you actually celebrate the corruption
that says, ā€œI can have contempt for the truth, and I can do it in the best interest of some sort of
self-serving agenda.ā€ And the fact of the matter is like Ralph Baric who if you go on to Google
Earth, you can see he lives in a modest home. This guy has a modest lab when you look at the
pictures of his lab at UNC, Chapel Hill, he has a modest lab. But all of a sudden you realize that
he is invited to be what? The guest of honor here, the guest of honor there, he doesnā€™t need
billions of dollars to live a billionaireā€™s lifestyle. Ralph Baric and Tony Fauci share a common
objective, which is they both have a desire to be most powerful and have 100% immunity from
public accountability. And the fact of the matter is most billionaires would aspire to the control
and power those guys have because it turns out they have something money canā€™t buy. They have
something that can only be acquired through fear and blackmail, which is exactly what they
actually trafficking.
Dr. Joseph Mercola:
Mm-hmm (affirmative). Yeah, well, that is brilliant. I donā€™t really think Iā€™ve ever heard it put that
way before my perspective, but it makes perfect sense. So, thank you for sharing your
observations and assessments, thatā€™s great. But clearly there are financial motivations.
David Martin:

TRANSCRIPT (continued)

Oh, yes, absolutely.
Dr. Joseph Mercola:
And not necessarily to them. But I think the sociopathic behavior might be more relevant as an
explanation, but Iā€™m wondering if you can walk us through the tens, and more likely hundreds of
billions of dollars that are going to accrue to the vaccine manufacturers, and whatā€™s more
egregious and unbelievable beyond sociopathic behavior is that any and every injury and death
will never be compensated for. I mean, to me that is one of the most egregious criminal
behaviors that they instigated in this. And then, on top of that they are mandated by
unconstitutional executive orders to get this vaccine.
David Martin:
Well, remember that under 21 Code of Federal Regulations, section 50, about 23 and 24, no one
can be forced or coerced into a clinical trial of an experimental, even medical countermeasures.
So itā€™s not legal to do it. Thatā€™s very clear. Itā€™s black and white, and this clinical trial does not end
until 2023 in the first best instance. So, there is no such thing as an approved or even authorized
use of a thing that can be compelled on the population. That doesnā€™t mean that people arenā€™t
trying to do it.
Dr. Joseph Mercola:
Excuse me to interrupt, and compounding that to make it even worse is they eliminated all the
controls of this trial. Go on.
David Martin:
So, there is not a clinical trial. Thatā€™s why if we go back and we look at the 21 Code of Federal
Regulations, we see that we have a number of things that fail. We did not have an independent
investigational review board. We did not have any of the statutorily required approval processes
for the protocol. And the companies themselves made determinations about modifying the
protocol midstream. We do not have a clinical trial on this particular injection.
Dr. Joseph Mercola:
Right. Totally agree.
David Martin:
Itā€™s just really pure and simple. And so, once again, violating the Federal Trade Act. All right,
somebody in law enforcement, somebody in the legal community should actually bring them up
on the same thing that they throw against clinicians time and time again. Thereā€™s not a
chiropractor, an osteopath anywhere in this country that hasnā€™t had some sort of False Claims Act
shakedown from the Federal Trade Commission. But you know whatā€™s fascinating? The federal
government is doing the same violation. Theyā€™re telling you a thing works. Theyā€™re telling you a
thing is curative. Theyā€™re telling you a thing is therapeutic, and theyā€™re violating the Federal
Trade Act, and no one is doing a single thing.
David Martin:

But back to your question. What we have is a situation where the deaths are actually considered
to be acceptable. I want you to hear that word. Let that settle in, ā€œacceptable death.ā€ I donā€™t know
Joe, what world do you have to come from to find that term even remotely speakable. I think the
utterance of that phrase is horrific. The idea that we think it is acceptable to have enough deaths
to justify an intervention, which has not been proven, has not been tested, and for which a
clinical trial was disrupted and interrupted so the clinical trial could never happen. We are killing
people willfully, and we are doing it with impunity in the name of what we call a love affair with
science.
David Martin:
The only problem is weā€™ve desecrated science in the process, too. Because it turns out that when I
did randomized, double blind, placebo-controlled trials, you know what I had to do? I had to
keep the populations blinded. I had to keep the placebo controlled for the whole clinical trial.
And the reason I had to do that is because thatā€™s what the statute requires. This entire process has
been willful acts of harm to humanity. And the only hope, by the way, that we have is a very
small note in the Department of Justice opinion that took place under the Trump administration
that says that if this was based on felony acts, then the entire emergency use authorization and all
its benefits would collapse.
David Martin:
In other words, if we can show that racketeering, that lying to Congress, that the public coercion
under Section 802 of the Patriot Act, if we can show that any felony has occurred, which by the
way you know in the Fauci dossier, I outline dozens of evidence of these felony violations. Any
one of those would bring this entire thing to its knees because the moment the PREP act
protection falls away from Pfizer, and Moderna, and Johnson and Johnson, and AstraZeneca, and
others, the moment that protection collapses, I can guarantee you who will not be promoting a
vaccine. If they are liable for a single injury or death theyā€™ll pull the plug on what they know to
be unsafe. That requires law enforcement to do its job. And somewhere there has to be a
prosecutor whoā€™s willing to do their job.
Dr. Joseph Mercola:
Yeah. Well, that would make logical rational sense. And you are very well-studied in this and
really have a deep, clear thinking process going on. So, I want to ask you the obvious question is
what is it that co-opted or captured the federal regulatory agency responsible for this obvious
violations of multiple criminal behaviors, why are they not engaging? Is it because industry
captured them or thereā€™s some other reason that you believe might be a contribution?
David Martin:
Well, people have talked for years about whatā€™s happened at the federal judiciary where the
benches have been stacked by people of limited qualification or ideological affiliation or fill in
the blank. People have been finger-pointing all along. But the fact of the matter is that the
problem is that back when the picture behind me, which by the way is Cornwallis in Washington.
I just happened to fly the flag of liberty and the flag of pharma, and Iā€™m letting you decide
[crosstalk 00:42:26].

David Martin:
The interesting thing is that we have a situation where you and I were taught when we were in
school that we had three legs of the government. We had the legislative, we had the executive,
and we had the judiciary. And the fact of the matter is that somewhere along the line in probably
the 1980s we started having the judiciary undermined while none of us were paying attention.
Where courts were routinely being co-opted for political objectives. And when you have the
executive branch of the government willfully violating laws and making sure that they can be
done with impunity. I mean, go back to Iran-Contra, and people forget that, but those were
felonies, those were laws being broken.
David Martin:
And when we have an executive that says that those crimes can be done with impunity, and then
when we go in, and we start doing other things, like we start doing financial fraud, and we start
covering up the fact that weā€™re robbing the Social Security Administration, and weā€™re doing all
sorts of things. What we do is we undermine the judiciary to the point where right now I
genuinely do not think we have three tiers of government. I donā€™t think there is a Department of
Justice.
Dr. Joseph Mercola:
So, theyā€™ve effectively collapsed the judicial branch?
David Martin:
Thatā€™s correct. The judiciary is functionally gone. And whether it happened with the various
election scandals, which go back to hanging chads once upon a time. You guys remember the
hanging chads conversations in Florida during Bushā€™s election? I mean, when we allow the
judiciary to be an arm of the executive then what happens is weā€™ve actually lost the three-tiered
structure of government. And as a result, the system collapses. And whatā€™s happened is because
the judiciary was the only thing that had ā€“ and Joe, this is really important. The judiciary was the
only thing that was explicitly independent.
Dr. Joseph Mercola:
Yeah, thatā€™s right.
David Martin:
We donā€™t allow judges to get sponsorship in campaign finance. We donā€™t allow judges to be
elected. We appoint them, we go through an approval process. We do all sorts of things to try to
make sure the judiciary is independent. So, the only risk to the pharmaceutical industry, the only
risk to an executive out of control was the judiciary. So, by collapsing the judicial system in the
United States, we have effectively made the government a servant of its benefactors. And that is
industry and not just any industry. As you know the most lucrative sponsor of government right
now is the pharmaceutical industry by almost twice what is paid by Big Oil and defense
combined.
Dr. Joseph Mercola:

Wow. That is one of the best analysis that Iā€™ve ever heard as to the explanation of why this was
allowed to happen, but it makes perfect sense.
David Martin:
Yeah, I mean, if you follow the money, this is not even an open question. This is a willful act.
And not surprisingly, how was it done? It was hidden under the guise of the War on Drugs. How
funny? How funny that drug companies actually use the marketing the War on Drugs to pull this
off?
Dr. Joseph Mercola:
Yeah. So, that really helps a lot. I think it provides a framework for people to easily comprehend
and understand what has happened and why itā€™s happened. So, Iā€™d like to, and if you want to fill
in more details you can. I mean, you have such a wealth of information you can go on for five to
10 hours and not even skip a beat. I get that. But I want ā€“ I canā€™t wait to hear your assessment or
predictions of whatā€™s going to happen as a result of this collapse of the judicial branch because it
looks like theyā€™ve got everything in place for the implementation of global tyranny. I canā€™t see
anything stopping it, and I canā€™t wait to hear your expansion on that on that concept because I
think thatā€™s the key issue that everyone needs to understand.
David Martin:
Well, there is a tiny fly in the ointment.
Dr. Joseph Mercola:
Okay, letā€™s hear it.
David Martin:
The fly in the ointment is 2000 and probably '28 best case scenario, 2027 in a more worst case
scenario. You have to have currency to buy off politicians. You have to have money to
politicians work. And what unfortunately took place was that during the last decade and a half,
and we can go back to certainly 2008 for most peopleā€™s memory, so Iā€™ll try to keep it civilian. The
fundamentals happened before this. But back in 2008, when we had the Global Financial Crisis,
what most people failed to understand was we instituted a policy then, which was going to
functionally bankrupt our entitlement program in 2028. Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid
officially empty the trust fund, according to the most recent study that was done by the actuaries
at Social Security ministration. They say in 2033, but that assumes that we have a 21% reduction
in benefits starting now. You know that thatā€™s not happening. So, the best math we have is that
the annuities and pension programs of the United States functionally run out of their trust fund in
2028.
David Martin:
Now, what does that mean? Well, one of the things that people overlook is thereā€™s an unholy
alliance between the insurance company and what we call health care. Insurance companies are
long-dated asset holders. These are the people who have to have money today to cover issues in
the future. Thatā€™s what a long-dated asset holder is. And the problem is that the Fed and the
European Central Bank and other central banks have suppressed the value of the return on funds

so that the funds are running out of money faster than expected. In other words, whatā€™s
happening is that 2033 window is shrinking. Now, you know as well as anybody else that for a
politician to stand up and say, ā€œIā€™m going to abolish or significantly alter Social Security,ā€ is the
death knell to any political aspiration. Tiny problem. Whether they say it or not, the trust fund
runs out of money in 2028.
David Martin:
Now, here comes the kicker ā€” so does the pharmaceutical industry. Because it turns out that the
money thatā€™s going into that system is actually paying for the drug dependency of this country.
And if we go all the way back to 1604 to the establishment of the British East India Company,
and the establishment of the Virginia Company, weā€™ll realize that the 400-plus year tradition that
we have running where we have built nation states on the back of drug trade is coming to its end.
And the good news for all of us is itā€™s going to end around 2028 because we have a convergence
that they didnā€™t figure out how to cover up.
David Martin:
The convergence is that the people with the money, the big pharmaceutical players are the
beneficiaries of a system that is going to bankrupt itself by virtue of their actions. This is the
Brontosaurus that ate too much because it was the biggest dinosaur. And the great news is they
have the brain the size of a pea, just like the Brontosaurus. They are not smart. Theyā€™re huge.
And the best thing we have going for us furry humans is that we actually are nimble. Now, does
that mean that we are not going to have an ounce of pain through the process? Absolutely not.
There is social disruption that we canā€™t even imagine thatā€™s on the horizon in 2026, 2027, and
2028, because as we see 86 million people lose what they thought was going to be their
retirement funds.
David Martin:
As we see 86 million people lose what we thought were going to be the things we were entitled
to receive so that we could actually have that sunset of the American Dream. When we see that
number now go to 100 million people and the 100 million people are more sick because of what
weā€™ve injected today. They are more impaired by virtue of the medical countermeasures being
used today. Those people who are going to require greater health care then are going to be faced
with a bankrupt system incapable of supporting their life and their livelihood. And that is the
death knell of this story.
David Martin:
The great news is, Joe, weā€™re having this conversation in 2021. The best news about this is we
have time if people of good conscience get together and say, ā€œWeā€™re not going to let that
apocalypse arrive because we have time to start building communities that actually care for each
other. We have time to start building accountability structures. We have time to start doing
things that bring our social fabric together so that when that system designed in the 1930s
collapses, we can come back to a rational view of what life and liberty and the pursuit of
happiness is.ā€ Because until we can reclaim the sovereignty of our health, we cannot celebrate
the sovereignty of our life.

Dr. Joseph Mercola:
Okay, thatā€™s interesting. Iā€™ve got some questions on it because if you look at the World Economic
Forum, which many people believe is leading up this conspiracy trend. Obviously, theyā€™ve had
many times addressed the Great Reset. So, I agree with your mathematical inevitability of the
collapse. It just cannot be sustained.
David Martin:
No.
Dr. Joseph Mercola:
But they can change things and according to the World Economic Forum and everything I know
that theyā€™re projecting is they are going to implement these CBDCs, the Central Bank Digital
Currencies and have the Great Reset, and essentially use this, and essentially abolish the dollar,
so it doesnā€™t matter. Weā€™re going to do a reset, press Ctrl+Alt+Delete.
David Martin:
You know the bad news about Klaus Schwab is heā€™s a terrible historian. I love the nefarious
actions of our Dr. Evils that are out there in the world.
Dr. Joseph Mercola:
He couldnā€™t be a more perfect [inaudible 00:53:16], the absolute perfect bond villain.
David Martin:
Yeah, I mean, but like a good [James] Bond villain, heā€™s actually ignorant of history. The reason
why Iā€™m so optimistic that the Great Reset doesnā€™t have a chance at all to succeed is, oddly
enough, the same reason why the picture behind me is the picture behind me. Cornwallis didnā€™t
lose to Washington. What happened was there were just too many privateers that made
conducting a war from Britain in the United States financially unfeasible. And King George
realized that he had a war on too many fronts, and he had to close one of those fronts. I mean,
people forget that Napoleon was doing some pretty nasty things in the Mediterranean. He was
doing some pretty nasty things in the Atlantic. And it turns out that the same thing is going to
happen to Klaus Schwab because the digital currency illusion is the most bizarre and pathetic Dr.
Evil plan anybodyā€™s ever concocted.
David Martin:
All you have to look at is the internet failures and the power outages that have already happened
across this summer to realize that there is no way that the public is going to ever embrace a
system that can be annihilated by something as simple as electromagnetic pulse, or an
electromagnetic disruption, or a service disruption. The fact of the matter is as much as people
like Klaus Schwab likes to live in their underground lairs under volcanoes with their submarines
or whatever he likes to do. The fact of the matter is the digital currency craziness is merely one
of those fantastical illusions that unfortunately has a single point failure. We live in a world
where actors of both anarchist intent, and very, very laudable privateers and pirates are more

than happy to make sure that digital currency never sees the light of day because they will, in
fact, hack, crack and disrupt every system thatā€™s out there.
David Martin:
And so, I look at the whole Great Reset as ā€“ itā€™s great theater. It sells books. It does, in fact, make
you the caricature of the Dr. Evil. I mean, you couldnā€™t ask for a more perfect Austin Powers
kind of looking ā€“ all he needs is a cat with no hair, and youā€™ve got it. But the fact of the matter is
the entire illusion is being run because theyā€™re out of ideas. And the best thing that you can ever
see people is when the incumbency is out of bad ideas they try desperately to force you into a
behavior that you would not otherwise accept. All you have to do is just say no. Just donā€™t play
along.
Dr. Joseph Mercola:
I would agree. But Iā€™m wondering there are many people whoā€™ve studied this very carefully and
contend that one of the ulterior motivations for implementation is plandemic is a depopulation
strategy.
David Martin:
Thereā€™s no question thatā€™s the case.
Dr. Joseph Mercola:
So, along those lines, and I really want to hear your thoughts on the likelihood of anyone who
receives the COVID jab dying prematurely quickly within the next few years. I mean,
theoretically, thereā€™s a potential that the majority of people who got the shot are going to be dead
in a few years. So, Iā€™m wondering your thoughts on that, and Iā€™m wondering if, in fact, it is a very
highly effective depopulation strategy, and resulting in loss of perhaps half the population or
more if that impacts what you just said.
David Martin:
So, youā€™re on to a very good point. And so, letā€™s unpack the legs of the stool here. First of all, if
youā€™ve made financial promises to senior citizens, or people who are going to be senior citizens,
the fewer promises you have to keep the better. So, the financial interest for depopulation is a
compelling and a very thoroughly compelling argument. I spent an entire hour on this at my
lecture that I gave at the Church of Glad Tidings in Yuba City. If people want to go online, they
can see that.
Dr. Joseph Mercola:
Weā€™ll put a link to it.
David Martin:
Iā€™m sorry?
Dr. Joseph Mercola:
Weā€™ll put a link to it.

TRANSCRIPT continued (looks around for the icon for a donkey with no hind legs) :slightly_smiling_face:

David Martin:
Yeah, in that show, I actually went through the 1914 forward life insurance cabal that is actually
running an enormous amount of whatā€™s happening right now. Iā€™ve gotten to that in nauseating
detail, and it turns out that thereā€™s an economic incentive to get a lot of people dead before 2028.
Thereā€™s an economic incentive. Itā€™s also a political incentive. If you have people over the age of
65 who have taken this shot who are already health compromised in one way or another, the
likelihood that weā€™ve accelerated their loss of life is exceptionally high. If we look at the previous
lipid nanoparticle and mRNA trials that were done in animal studies, we actually are not going to
be surprised to see a mass-casualty event.
David Martin:
So there is no question that whatā€™s being done, jumped over animal trials for a very important
reason. Weā€™ve been told it was to save time, but it wasnā€™t to save time. It was actually to put this
particular pathogen into humanity, so that a lot of people suffer, and ultimately die of effects that
we could have picked up if we had done it the traditional way, which is seven to eight years of
safety studies before we decide to put it in the arms of humans. Thatā€™s not what we did. And if
we look at the safety data out of animal studies on mRNA, and on the lipid nanoparticle from
Acuitas and Arbutus, there is no question, Joe, that there is going to be a fatality increase because
of this.
David Martin:
Now, what percentage of the population is going to be a function of something that we do not
discuss? Because as you are very aware, but your viewers probably not as much, there is a
technology called CRISPR, which is the camelā€™s nose thatā€™s been under this tent. And the
CRISPR technology, which Iā€™ve spent a lot of time looking at. We just did a couple shows with
the several thousand CRISPR patents include a number of patents on clipping the effects of
vaccines from people. So, there is a high probability that weā€™re building a pathogen set that then
goes into people so that we can introduce a more expensive technology, which allows us to then
go fix the thing that we harm, which means that thereā€™s probably going to be an economic class
distinction about whether you live or whether you die.
David Martin:
Now, I am not going to opine on the quality of life. Because if you are constantly dependent on
CRISPR this and then vaccine that and then CRISPR this and then vaccine that, thatā€™s not much
of a life. But the fact of the matter is I think we already see that the CRISPR approvals that have
happened in the last even few weeks are pointing out the direction that weā€™re planning on going
here. What you are saying though, and I want to come back to this because the depopulation
question is not a theoretical. This is something that has been explicitly part of an agenda since
the Eugenics Office was started by the U.S. government in 1914 funded by Andrew Carnegie in
collaboration, surprisingly, with Booker T. Washington, whoā€™s a great patron saint of people who
donā€™t want to read history.
David Martin:
But the fact of the matter is the getting rid of undesirables is actually something thatā€™s been
around for 100-plus years here in the United States. This is a campaign that includes that, and the

fewer people that live to Social Security benefit, and the fewer people who live to the full
maturity of their life insurance policies are quite problematic with respect to this particular reset.
But I want to point out something that is something I mentioned a few months ago and seemed to
be lost on a lot of people. We were told there were excess deaths. We were told that this whole
coronavirus thing and COVID thing led to excess deaths. But thereā€™s a tiny technical problem. If
you want real numbers, go to the people who are the real beneficiaries of death. And who are
they? Theyā€™re life insurance companies. Iā€™ve got a nasty little secret to tell all of you who believe
CDCā€™s (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) numbers. We were told that more people
died in 2020 than were supposed to die except for a tiny little problem that fewer life insurance
claims were paid.
Dr. Joseph Mercola:
Smoking gun, the smoking gun.
David Martin:
Whoā€™s numbers are you going to believe?
Dr. Joseph Mercola:
The smoking gun.
David Martin:
Whose numbers are you going to believe? Are you going to believe the CDC whoā€™s trying to
pump and dump this terror campaign of people dying, and therefore you need to have your mask
on, you need to socially distance, you need to vaccinate? Are you going to believe those numbers
or are you going to believe the numbers of the people who actually pay claims when real human
life ends? And it turns out that if you look at the audited financial statements of the worldā€™s
largest life insurance companies we can find no excess death evidence.
Dr. Joseph Mercola:
Thatā€™s a really powerful point.
David Martin:
Now, hereā€™s the question. Is COVID so damn smart that it only kills the uninsured? Is that what
weā€™re supposed to believe?
Dr. Joseph Mercola:
Thatā€™s right. No. Yeah, thatā€™s brilliant. So, Iā€™m wondering if you would care to speculate as to the
range of lethality of the vaccine within a three-to-five-year time period?
David Martin:
Well, hereā€™s where it becomes a little hard because what we have is something that was not
actually tried. Remember that what weā€™ve done is introduced as an alleged vaccine against a
pathogen called SARS-CoV-2, weā€™ve introduced the synthetic computer simulation of the S1
spike protein. Now, what is so important about that? Letā€™s start with the legal problem. The legal

problem is that when we say we have a vaccination against a virus, but weā€™re not doing anything
to vaccinate against the virus, what weā€™re doing is weā€™re injecting a simulated code to have the
body produce a pathogen that then we hope the body will recognize and then build an immune
response to.
David Martin:
So, this is a ridiculous proposition in the first place. But the vaccine itself has nothing to do with
SARS-CoV-2, it has everything to do with the spike protein. And itā€™s been mislabeled and
misrepresented by every single clinician whoā€™s ever injected anybody with this thing because it
does not protect you against a virus, it actually makes you stimulate a protein associated with one
of the proteins associated with the model of the virus. And you followed all that you got a Ph.D.
in genetics right there.
David Martin:
But hereā€™s the thing. What we donā€™t know is we donā€™t know whether or not the spike protein is
going to have secondary effects that are also undesirable. Weā€™ve already seen the concern that
came out of the Booster review where the FDAā€™s own scientists were concerned about
myocarditis, they were concerned about Guillain-BarrƩ syndrome, they were concerned about
other adverse events. But what we know from a decade of research in dogs and in rabbits is we
know that the spike protein is associated with increased cardiac and vascular and respiratory
tissue damage. So, it is likely that we donā€™t even have ā€“ Joe, at this point in time, itā€™s likely we
donā€™t even have an idea other than we know the systems that weā€™re going to watch fail.
David Martin:
We know weā€™re going to have cardiomyopathy. We know weā€™re going to have vascular damage,
and we know weā€™re going to have lung disorder. But what we do not know is whether those are
lethal or they are simply morbidity events, meaning that your quality of life will functionally
reduce to the fact that you will require some almost consistent palliative care. And what weā€™ll
have is probably a mix of actual deaths.
David Martin:
But the concern I have more egregious to the death as much as it sounds harsh when I say this, I
think the malingering morbidity, which is the ongoing nature of people who require around-the-
clock medical care is going to be a drain that will infect our economy so deeply that we may not
recover. Because if we have people who have to stay at home with children who are sick, if we
have people who have to care for elderly parents who are sick, if we have people who are caring
for a spouse or a family member who are sick, that means that we do not have the ability to enjoy
life and liberty. And the fact is that I think weā€™re going to have a bigger morbidity than mortality
event.
Dr. Joseph Mercola:
Yeah, thatā€™s an interesting speculation. Especially, in light of the fact that the strong predictions
are that they are going to approve this COVID jab, for infants, this year, which is one of the most
reprehensible criminal behaviors in the history of medicine.

David Martin:
Yeah.
Dr. Joseph Mercola:
Itā€™s just disgusting.
David Martin:
But bear in mind that this was this was something Congress approved in 2015. And people, you
got to remember, these things matter. You need to be paying attention to what happens with your
congressmen and women. You need to be paying attention to what happens in the Senate because
we have been funding a universal infant pan-influenza vaccine program in Congress since 2015.
Anthony Fauci has asked for more appropriations every year. They decided to turn the influenza
authorization into a coronavirus authorization, but the fact of the matter is they are trying
desperately to get this as an approved dependency that every single infant gets injected with at
birth. And this is part of the official records of NIAID and the official records of Fauciā€™s
testimony in Congress. See, people before you knew the name Fauci was worth listening to he
was sitting in front of congressmen and women advocating for a universal childhood influenza
vaccine. And guess what Congress did? They appropriated it.
Dr. Joseph Mercola:
Yeah. Itā€™s so reprehensible because thereā€™s absolutely no clinical justification for this. Itā€™s even
less clinically indicated in hepatitis B vaccine.
David Martin:
Yeah, I mean, that youā€™re exactly right. Thereā€™s not a shred of evidence that says that this is
anything other than an economic grab to make sure the public is permanently dependent on
genetically modified injections.
Dr. Joseph Mercola:
Yeah. Okay, I canā€™t thank you enough. Deep expression of gratitude for your incredible insights
into this window, and weā€™ve got to continually expose that brilliant information youā€™re having. I
would really like you to expand on what I think is clearly the conclusion, and the most important
point here, which is what are we going to do? Hopefully, we can continue to educate, inspire and
catalyze a large segment of the 80 million people in United States who have failed and refused to
get the jab. So, I think we have to maintain this core of people who are insulated from the
devastating morbidities you just described. So, Iā€™d like to hear in detail as much as you want to
expand on as to what you believed to be the community solutions that need to be implemented
now while we still have some time to perform an effective alternative to global tyranny.
David Martin:
Well, listen, it starts with conversations like this, Joe. The fact of the matter is you and I have not
had the pleasure of meeting each other and whether or not we have entered into lockstep on
ideologies or anything else is neither here nor there. What we have to do is we have to engage in
respectful conversation where the best and brightest of our minds can actually have open

dialogue. Itā€™s not surprising that one of the first things they did to implement this plandemic is
separate people. And if you want to start Iā€™ll tell you exactly where to start. Invite somebody over
for dinner and cook a homemade meal that doesnā€™t have genetically altered ingredients in that
meal.
David Martin:
The first thing to do is start informing yourself. Live in a way that says that this is something that
matters and I have gone through and I just finished a course that a lot of people have taken on,
integral accounting asset management, which is understanding the all in cost of what youā€™re
doing. If you have 11% of your retirement funds in Pfizer, can you actually say youā€™re against the
jab? I mean, letā€™s start really addressing things people. Letā€™s not pretend like we can turn a blind
eye towards ā€œWell, but we like the investment returns weā€™re getting.ā€ If you actually are against
the thing be against the thing.
David Martin:
The point is we have to start being conscious first because the minute we start being conscious
we are going to make decisions that say, ā€œWeā€™re going to choke off the money supply to the
perpetrators of this evil.ā€ And we need to see that as a first step. As a community, we need to
actually look at the labels of the food that we put into our mouths because it turns out that the
genetic engineering thatā€™s happening in our food, which now 70% of what is sold in a grocery
store, according to the most recent study that General Mills just published, 70% of whatā€™s sold in
a grocery store is genetically engineered, 70%. Guess what? Get rid of the artificial sweeteners,
get rid of the soft drinks, get rid of the things that are harming you, and start making the life
decisions today, which actually show that youā€™re actually concerned about this so that youā€™re not
waiting for a solution in the form of a tablet or a supplement or something else.
David Martin:
Start living correctly now, but do it in community, and community is not, letā€™s all move into a
commune somewhere. What Iā€™m saying about community is get to know your neighbor. Engage
in respectful dialogue with people who disagree with your point of view. Begin the process of
having those conversations. And then what happens out of that is natural networks of economies
are built. I have spent two decades of my life rebuilding post-conflict countries around the world.
Iā€™ve done work in 128 countries directly, many of which have gone through civil wars, many of
which have gone through genocide. And what I have found, Joe, in every instance is the first step
is to build micro-economies.
David Martin:
Micro economies are things that say as simple as if you have a car that youā€™re not using, let
somebody else rent the car. It doesnā€™t have to be an Uber. Use local resources more effectively.
Because what will happen out of this is that weā€™ll start realizing that the promise of America, and
the promise for humanity was not a car in every garage and a chicken in every pot. The promise
of America was people being able to transport themselves, and having an extra seat at the table.
Thatā€™s what the promise of America was. Thatā€™s what Thanksgiving was about. Thatā€™s what all of
these things are about.

David Martin:
We need to go back to what our real roots are because the fact is that we have built an illusion
that says our success is defined by how much we consume for our singular benefit rather than
how much do we steward so that everyone has the ability to experience the best and brightest?
Do we all need a boat? Do we all need a car? Do we all need a tiller for our garden? Do we all
need? No, we donā€™t. What we need is the best used optimally.
David Martin:
So simple. But this is going to require a conscious shift in how we see our world. You all do not
have to have a multimillion-dollar system that can understand the meaning of patents and do all
that kind of thing. You need to know that thereā€™s a bald guy with a bowtie that is more than
happy to share it with you whenever and however you need it. We donā€™t need 10 of me. We need
the one of me. And we donā€™t need the 10 of Joes, we need the one of Joes, but what we need is
we need to be in a world in which we see and value the values that people bring to the table and
we reciprocate the values that we can share.
David Martin:
The fact is we have a very unique moment in human history, and it probably is as close to the
story of Joseph in Egypt as you can get. You know the seven fat years and then the seven skinny
years? Well, guess what? We have a couple years of fat years left. You know what we should be
doing? We should be investing in our networks of relationship. We should be investing in our
networks of community. We should be building those resilient fibers that hold us together
because we know that there is a famine coming. And we are in the unique position right now
ladies and gentlemen to actually do something about it.
David Martin:
So, start with yourself. Make sure that what you put into your body is aligned to your health.
Make sure that what you do with your body is aligned to your health. And then as you do that
invite other people into living a life that in fact models that behavior so that we start building
communities of consciousness. And as we build those communities, we will start building
currencies of consciousness. Those currencies are going to be the ability to create the micro, the
organic Uber in your town, right? Wouldnā€™t it be nice to actually know that you could borrow a
car that wasnā€™t vaccine? That you werenā€™t going to have shedding of a freaking God knows what
spike protein. Wouldnā€™t it be great to be the first organic Uber in your town, the first organic
Grubhub in your town? There are a bunch of ways that we can solve these problems, and we can
do it using the market. We can do it using our consciousness, but we need our consciousness, we
need our community, and we know our currency to be organically aligned to humanity again.
Dr. Joseph Mercola:
Oh, itā€™s great. Thatā€™s exactly what I was looking for. Couldnā€™t agree more with respect to
optimizing your health, and thatā€™s what Iā€™ve been preaching for over nearly a quarter of a century.
And helping people understand and that really helped hundreds of millions of people around the
world. But the fly in the ointment in what you described, and definitely ā€“ Iā€™d like you response to
this and then we can sign off ā€“ is that in my view this is the most effective propaganda campaign
in the history of humanity. And it has created a massive global psychosis that has brainwashed

the population so that dialogue you encourage us to have with our neighbors in their community
is almost physically impossible. It has progressed to the point where they could have someone,
their parent or their sibling die with the jab in their arm and believe it was just a coincidence.
That is how bad it is. So, how do you address the most effective propaganda campaign in history
that ever existed?
David Martin:
So, thereā€™s probably no better question to end on Joe. How do you ever convince people who
bought propaganda to change their mind? Because the decision to buy it wasnā€™t rational.
Dr. Joseph Mercola:
Absolutely.
David Martin:
Therefore, we cannot appeal to rationality to change it. But Iā€™ll tell you what you can do. You can
actually live, and the funny thing about living is, I donā€™t know if you remember the movie ā€œWhen
Harry Met Sally,ā€ but thereā€™s a beautiful scene in that movie where theyā€™re out at a restaurant-
Dr. Joseph Mercola:
Yes, a classic.
David Martin:
And the classic iconic scene where you know the end of it. ā€œIā€™ll have what sheā€™s having.ā€ The
point is that thatā€™s the answer. The answer is live without constraint, without fear. And before
long, what youā€™ll find is people are going to say, ā€œHold on a minute, you mean youā€™re not afraid?
You mean, youā€™re not doing something?ā€ I think hereā€™s the problem. We see the short-term
reflexive effectiveness of propaganda, and we think weā€™ve lost, but we havenā€™t lost. Because it
turns out people like me, people like you, Iā€™m still traveling the country. Iā€™m going all over the
place. Iā€™m doing things, Iā€™m meeting with people. God forbid, Iā€™m shaking hands, Iā€™m doing
selfies, Iā€™m interacting with humanity. And it turns out that people are starting to go, ā€œWell, but
arenā€™t you afraid?ā€ I donā€™t have to answer that question. The evidence is my life.
David Martin:
Listen people, propaganda cannot stand against the truth of a life well lived. It can never stand
against that truth. What weā€™re trying to do is the wrong energy. Weā€™re trying to confront with
rationality and irrational reflex. But what we need to be doing is being persistent in showing up
and living in a way that people look at and say, ā€œIā€™ll have what heā€™s having. Iā€™ll have what sheā€™s
having.ā€ This is your ā€œHarry Met Sallyā€ moment. This is that restaurant scene. This is your
moment to be a person who outlasts the half-life of the propaganda reflex. And Iā€™ve seen way too
many people try to engage energetically in the debate where they enter into conflict and what it
does is it destroys their well-being, it destroys their life, and they walk away being the miserable
angry one. Well, donā€™t be the miserable angry one. Be the one at the table who is the one worth
looking at and going, ā€œIā€™ll have what heā€™s having. Iā€™ll have what sheā€™s having.ā€ Live a life that is
desirable and youā€™ll see propaganda become emasculated instantaneously.

Dr. Joseph Mercola:
So, the refinement of your early recommendation, engage in dialogue with people in your
community is to do not engage with those who have drunk the Kool Aid. You just canā€™t because
you are speaking ā€“ you are hitting a head against a brick wall.
David Martin:
Thatā€™s exactly right.
Dr. Joseph Mercola:
It wonā€™t work. Youā€™re wasting time and effort. Itā€™s going to be highly counterproductive.
David Martin:
When they hear a picnic in your backyard, and they see lights well past the bedtime curfew. All
the time while Governor Northam here in Virginia was telling us that we could not have
gatherings. What we did was we continued our workshops. We had people in our house, we had
our table full of 15, 20, 25 people, and our official policy was if you signed up for our workshop,
for the moment you were in our home we adopted you as family because the legal exemption in
Virginia was if you were family then you actually didnā€™t count. So, what we did was we actually
adopted everybody for the week or the four days or the five days. If anybody knocked on the
door, we just had one of the most inclusive, gender-neutral, socially acceptable, panchromatic,
you name it. We had every kind of cousin, uncle, aunt, brother, sister, child, granny. We had
everybody and it was all family. And we actually went through the entire shutdown having a
table full of fellowship. And you know what? Everybody in the neighborhood said, ā€œIā€™d love to
have what theyā€™re having.ā€
Dr. Joseph Mercola:
Yeah. Well, I donā€™t think thereā€™s a better point to end on. I canā€™t thank you enough for sharing
your insights. I donā€™t think Iā€™ve ever heard a more brilliant compilation of explanations and
practical implementations of what to do in these challenging times. I mean, youā€™ve covered it
from end to end. So, Iā€™m just grateful that someone like you exists whoā€™s used his intellectual
resources for the benefit of people.
David Martin:
Joe, itā€™s an honor to be with you and Iā€™m looking forward to the day that we get to break bread
together and spend some time in each otherā€™s company.
Dr. Joseph Mercola:
All right. Well, thanks so much, and weā€™ll definitely connect.
David Martin:
Very good.

2 Likes

Dr David Martin continues to hammer home the facts.

Dr. David Martin Addressing EU Parliament International COVID Summit III, 2023-05-03

I had already seen a reference to this address, and found a transcript. Unusually for me I decided to watch the video, rather than read the transcript in a fraction of the time. Glad I did. I donā€™t know why I did this - some sixth sense.
Or maybe I fancied being bludgeoned for a change.
You can feel bludgeoned too. I recommend this, as you get Martinā€™s jarring emphasis.

If you do the watch, put any children to bed.
ED

Transcript (below) at

TRANSCRIPT

ā€œPfizer First Spike Protein Vaccine Patent (For Coronavirus) Filed In 1990!!!ā€ ā€“ Dr David Martin PhD

This talk by Dr. David Martin PhD took place at the International Covid Summit Held At The European Union Parliament ā€“ May 2023.

THE BELOW IS AN EXTRACT FROM DAVID MARTIN TALK AT THE EU PARLIAMENT IN MAY 2023.

The very first spike protein vaccine for Coronavirus.
Isnā€™t that fascinating?
Isnā€™t it fascinating that we were, we were told that, well, the spike protein is a new thing.
We just found out that thatā€™s the problem.

No.

As a matter of fact, we didnā€™t just find out it was not just now. Now the problem, we found that out in 1990 and filed the first patents on vaccines in 1990 for the spike protein of Coronavirus. And who wouldā€™ve thought Pfizer?

Clearly the innocent organization that does nothing but promote human health. Clearly, Pfizer, the organization that has not bought the votes in this chamber, in every chamber of every government around the world, not that Pfizer, certainly they wouldnā€™t have had anything to do with this, but oh yes, they did. And in 1990 they found out that there was a problem with vaccines. They didnā€™t work!

You know why they didnā€™t work?

It turns out that Coronavirus is a very malleable model. It transforms and it changes, and it mutates over time. As a matter of fact, every publication on vaccines for Coronavirus from 1990 until 2018, every single publication concluded that Coronavirus escapes the vaccine impulse because it modifies and mutates too quickly for vaccines to be effective.

And since 1990 to 2018, that is the published science ladies and gentlemen, thatā€™s following the science, following the science is their own indictment of their own programs that said, it doesnā€™t work. And there are thousands of publications to that effect, not a few hundred. And not paid for by pharmaceutical companies. These are publications that are independent scientific research that shows unequivocally including efforts of the chimera modifications made by Ralph Bair in the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill. All of them show vaccines do not work on coronavirus.

Thatā€™s the science, and that science has never been disputed!

But then we had an interesting development in 2002, and this date is most important because in 2002, the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill patented, and I quote, an infectious replication defective clone of coronavirus.

Listen to those words ā€¦
Infectious replication, defective.
What does that phrase actually mean?
For those of you not familiar with language, let me unpack it for you.
Infectious replication.
Defective means a weapon.
It means something meant to target an individual but not have collateral damage to other individuals.
Thatā€™s what infectious replication defective means.

And that patent was filed in 2002 on work funded by NIADā€™s Anthony Fauci from 1999 to 2002, and that work patented at the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill mysteriously preceded SARS 1.0 by a year.

ā€œDave, are you suggesting that SARS 1.0 wasnā€™t from a wet market in Wuhan?ā€
ā€œAre you suggesting it might have come from a laboratory in the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill?ā€
No, Iā€™m not suggesting it. Iā€™m telling you thatā€™s the facts we engineered SARS.

SARS is not a naturally occurring phenomenon. The naturally occurring phenomenon is called the common cold.
Itā€™s called influenza-like illness. Itā€™s called gastroenteritis. Thatā€™s the naturally occurring coronavirus.
SARS is the research developed by humans weaponizing a life system model to actually attack human beings, and they patented it in 2002.
And in 2003, giant surprise, the CDC filed the patent on Coronavirus isolated from humans in violation once again of biological and chemical weapons, treaties and laws that we have in the United States, and Iā€™m very, very precise on this.

United States likes to talk about its rights and everything else, and the rule of law and all the nonsense that we like to talk about, but we donā€™t ratify treaties about, I donā€™t know, defending humans. We conspicuously avoid that we actually have a great track record of advocating for human rights and then denying them when it comes to actually being part of the international community, which is a slightly problematic thing.

But letā€™s get something very clear. When the CDC, in April of 2003 filed the patent on SARS Coronavirus isolated from humans, what did they do? They downloaded a sequence from China, and filed a patent on it in the United States. Any of you familiar with biological and chemical weapons treaties knows thatā€™s a violation. Thatā€™s a crime.

Thatā€™s not an innocent, oops; thatā€™s a crime!

And the United States Patent Office went as far as to reject that patent application on two occasions until the CDC decided to bribe the patent office to override the patent examiner to ultimately issue the patent in 2007 on SARS Coronavirus. But letā€™s not let that get away from us, because it turns out that the RT PCR, which was the test that we allegedly were going to use to identify the risks associated with coronavirus, was actually identified as a bioterrorism threat by me in the European Union sponsored events in 2002 and 2003, 20 years ago that happened here in Brussels and across Europe.

In 2005, this particular pathogen was specifically labelled as a bioterrorism and bioweapon platform technology, described as such.
Thatā€™s not my terminology that Iā€™m applying to it. It was actually described as a bioweapons platform technology in 2005.
And from 2005 onwards, it was actually a bio warfare enabling agent.

Itā€™s official classification from 2005 forward.
I donā€™t know if that sounds like public health to you, does it?
Biological warfare enabling technology that feels like not public health, that feels like not medicine, that feels like a weapon, designed to take out humanity.
Thatā€™s what it feels like, and it feels like that because thatā€™s exactly what it is.
We have been lured into believing that EcoHealth Alliance and DARPA and all of these organizations are what we should be pointing to.
But weā€™ve been specifically requested to ignore the facts that over $10 billion have been funnelled through black operations, through the check of Anthony Fauci and a side-by-side ledger where NIAD has a balance sheet, and next to it is a biodefense balance sheet.
Equivalent dollar for dollar matching that no one in the media talks about, and itā€™s been going on since 2005.
Our gain of function moratorium.
The moratorium that was supposed to freeze any efforts to do gain of function research.
Conveniently, in the fall of 2014, the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill received a letter from NIAD saying that while the gain of function moratorium on coronavirus in vivo should be suspended, because their grants had already been funded, they received an exemption.
Did you hear what I just said?
A biological weapons lab facility at the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill received an exemption from the gain of function moratorium so that by 2016 we could publish the journal article that said SARS Coronavirus is poised for human emergence in 2016 and what, you might ask Dave, was the coronavirus poised for human emergence?

It was WIV ONE.

Wuhan Institute of Virology Virus One.

Poised for human emergence in 2016 at the proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, such that by the time we get to 2017 and 2018, the following phrase entered into common parlance among the community, there is going to be an accidental or intentional release of a respiratory pathogen. The operative word, obviously in that phrase, the word release, does that sound like leak? Does that sound like a bat and a Pangolin went into a bar in the Wuhan market and hung out and had sex?

And, and lo and behold, we got SARS Cov-2. No accidental or intentional release of a respiratory pathogen was the terminology used.

And four times in April of 2019, seven months before the allegation of patient number one, four patent applications of Moderna were modified to include the term accidental or intentional release of a respiratory pathogen as the justification for making a vaccine for a thing that did not exist.

If you have not done so, please make sure that you make reference in every investigation to the premeditation nature of this, because it was in September of 2019 that the world was informed.

That we were going to have an accident or intentional release of a respiratory pathogen so that by September, 2020 there would be a worldwide acceptance of a universal vaccine template.

Thatā€™s their words right in front of you on the screen!

The intent was to get the world to accept a universal vaccine template, and the intent was to use coronavirus to get there.

Letā€™s, letā€™s read this because we have to read this into the record everywhere I go.

ā€œUntil an infectious disease crisis is very real present and at the emergency threshold that is often largely ignored to sustain the funding base beyond the crisis.ā€

He said, ā€œwe need to increase the public understanding for the need for medical countermeasures, such as a pan influenza or pan coronavirus vaccine.ā€

ā€œA key driver is the media and the economics will follow the hype. We need to use that hype to our advantage to get to the real issues. Investors will respond if they see profit at the end of the process.ā€

Sounds like public health. Sounds like the best of humanity.

No!

Ladies and gentlemen, this was premeditated domestic terrorism stated at the proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences in 2015, published in front of them. This is an act of biological and chemical warfare perpetrated on the human race, and it was admitted to in writing that this was a financial heist and a financial fraud.

ā€œInvestors will follow if they see profit at the end of the process.ā€

Let me conclude by making five very brief recommendations.

The last slide, nature was hijacked.

This whole story started in 1965 when we decided to hijack a natural model and decide to start manipulating it.

Science was hijacked when the only questions that could be asked were questions authorized under the patent protection of the CDC, the FDA, the NIH, and their equivalent organizations around the world.

We didnā€™t have independent science. We had hijacked science, and unfortunately there was no moral oversight in violation of all of the codes that we stand for. There was no independent, financially disinterested independent review board ever empanelled around coronavirus.
Not once, not once, not since 1965.

We do not have a single independent IRB ever empanelled, around Coronavirus. So, morality was suspended for medical countermeasures, and ultimately humanity was lost because we decided to allow it to happen. Our job today is to say, no more gain of function research period.
No more weaponization of nature period. And most importantly, no more corporate patronage of science for their own self-interest unless they assume 100% product liability for every injury and every death that they maintain.

Thank you very much.
Dr David E. Martin
Speaker ā€“ Covid Summit ā€“ European Union Parliament ā€“ May 2023

1 Like

Thanks @Evvy_dense Iā€™ve just watched the video and although Iā€™ve seen David Martin before, this was the clearest and best indictment of the GICā€™s I have ever heard.

If any 5f users are on Twitter, please post this there!

Morning Pat,

Something weird seems to have happened to Twitter. For the last few days Iā€™ve been getting a message saying ā€œSomething went wrong. Try reloadingā€ and below that ā€œRetryā€ which does nothing. Some friends are also getting the same thing. Iā€™m not subscribed btw.

Hi Rich. As youā€™ve probably figured out, Twitter now needs a login to browse!
Bit of extra hassleā€¦oh yes and they can see and log what tweets you readā€¦

Yep, the noose gets that little bit tighter every day.

Morning Evvy, Itā€™s started working again today for me and others without logging on.

1 Like

Cheers Rich.

Nothing whatsover to do with this, Iā€™m sure:

Meta looks to target Twitter with a rival app called Threads

Meta is poised to launch a new app that appears to mimic Twitter, marking a direct challenge to the social media platform owned by billionaire Elon Musk