• 瀏覽: 11,593
  • 回覆: 23
  • 追帖: 2
  • 分享: 1
歐洲新冠肺炎峰會視頻 David Martin博士5月3日在歐洲新冠肺炎峰會上揭開了新冠肺炎以及非典的來龍去脈!揭露了美國人制造新冠以及SARS非典病毒的事實!詳細的介紹了冠狀病毒的歷史研究過程以及美國人濫用的過程! 本UP主翻譯校對!
 
 
校對翻譯版: 實錘:新冠SARS非典都是美國人制造的武器! David Martin博士5月3日在歐洲新冠肺炎峰會大揭秘_嗶哩嗶哩_bilibili



引用:
原帖由 ilovenikita 於 2023-5-28 01:31 發表

歐洲新冠肺炎峰會視頻 David Martin博士5月3日在歐洲新冠肺炎峰會上揭開了新冠肺炎以及非典的來龍去脈!揭露了美國人制造新冠以及SARS非典病毒的事實!詳細的介紹了冠狀病毒的歷史研究過程以及美國人濫用的過程! 本UP主翻譯校對!
 
 
校對翻譯版: 實錘:新冠SARS非典都是美國人制造的武器! David Martin博士5月3日在歐洲新冠肺炎峰會大揭秘_嗶哩嗶哩_bilibili
通曬之前我地覺得係陰謀論既事情
專業人員總結
1 上世紀50年代學界發現冠狀病毒是良好的模板病毒,有很強的可塑性。同時期美國軍方已經開始人體實驗。
2 1990年Pfizer 利用冠狀病毒自產自銷申請了疫苗專利,但後續研究發現疫苗失效,並且從1990-2018年之間無數研究證明冠狀病毒由于其超強可塑性獲得了極強的免疫逃逸。
3 2002年美國Carolina的一所大學申請的專利直接指向冠狀病毒的武器化,並且剛好比Sars出現早一年。更諷刺的是2003年美國CDC用于相關專利的申請時用了中國SARS的病毒序列。專利由于違法人道主義被阻撓了4年,之后CDC通過賄賂調離了審查人員並使專利通過。
4 2017至 2019年4月美國科學界多次警告冠狀病毒可能有泄露風險並為疫苗研發提供依據。



提示: 作者被禁止或刪除 內容自動屏蔽
很多人裝作不知道


[隱藏]
老尾又通過撥款喇,惡債仔繼續發債還債,全世界繼續買,繼續AAA,有邊個敢話佢?隊冧你。


老美幾時還畢血債?🤬


呢個博士好快被自殺或者被發生車禍


新冠病毒在自然界找不到,近似的也沒有,反而其中基因與某大藥廠申請專利的病毒十分相近,其研究報告刊登在科學期刊,但西方傳媒沒有怎樣報導,科學界也沒有甚麼討論,綜合各種資料,新冠早於2019年已經出現,在污水樣本,在血液樣本,在身體組織樣本,均有發現,不過沒有人調查跟進,全部不了了之


[隱藏]
引用:
原帖由 starr 於 2023-5-28 08:45 發表

很多人裝作不知道
包括在沙士一役升上神檯的香港磚家教授.



中共一定要向國際討回公道。一直以來全球也認為SARS起源於中國。


引用:
原帖由 SilverHaze 於 2023-5-28 19:44 發表

視頻及演講原文 :
https://rumble.com/v2ncp8w-dr-david-e.-martin-phd-covid-summit-european-union-parliament-may-2023.html
文中提及一個重要人物,但字母串錯了,他是 Ralph Baric,University of North Carolina,美國病毒學家,發表不少有關人工合成病毒論文,早期陰謀論說某大藥廠請他製造病毒來測試新藥(睡得犀葦),不幸地實驗室洩漏出來,成為世紀疫情



引用:
原帖由 ilovenikita 於 2023-5-28 01:31 發表

歐洲新冠肺炎峰會視頻 David Martin博士5月3日在歐洲新冠肺炎峰會上揭開了新冠肺炎以及非典的來龍去脈!揭露了美國人制造新冠以及SARS非典病毒的事實!詳細的介紹了冠狀病毒的歷史研究過程以及美國人濫用的過程! 本UP主翻譯校對!
 
 
校對翻譯版: 實錘:新冠SARS非典都是美國人制造的武器! David Martin博士5月3日在歐洲新冠肺炎峰會大揭秘_嗶哩嗶哩_bilibili
我等了幾個星期,都唔見主流媒體討論。
好明顯有某國做咗嘢。


 
Dr David E. Martin PhD - Covid Summit - European Union Parliament May 2023

https://twitter.com/i/status/1660093879566102528

https://rumble.com/v2ncp8w-dr-david-e.-martin-phd-covid-summit-european-union-parliament-may-2023.html



[ 本帖最後由 貓男 於 2023-5-29 21:41 編輯 ]



TRANSCRIPT Of Dr David E.Martin's Speech At The European Union Parliament MAY 2023
David E.Martin 博士 2023 年 5 月在歐盟議會的演講抄本
It is a, it is a particularly interesting location for B to be sitting today, given that over a decade ago I sat in this very chair right here in the European Union Parliament.
鑑於十多年前我就坐在歐盟議會的這把椅子上,今天 B 坐在這個位置特別有趣。
And at that time I warned the world of what was coming, during that conversation that was hosted at the time by the Green and EFA and a number of the other parties of the European Unions, of various representations.
那時我警告世界即將發生的事情,在當時由綠黨和 EFA 以及歐盟其他一些政黨主持的談話中,有各種代表。
We were having a conversation on whether Europe should adopt the United States policy of allowing for the patents on biologically derived materials.
我們正在討論歐洲是否應該採用美國的政策,允許生物衍生材料獲得專利。
And at the time I urged this body and I urged people around the world that the weaponization of nature against humanity had dire consequences.
當時我敦促這個機構和世界各地的人們,將自然武器化以對抗人類會產生可怕的後果。
Tragically, I sit here today, with that unfortunate line that I don't like to say, which is “I told you so.”
可悲的是,我今天坐在這裡,帶著我不想說的那句不幸的話,那就是“我早就告訴過你了。”
But the fact of the matter is, we're here not for a reprisal on past decisions. We're here to actually, once again, come to the face of the human condition and ask the question, who do we want to be?
但事實是,我們來這裡不是為了報復過去的決定。實際上,我們再次來到這裡,面對人類狀況並提出這個問題,我們想成為誰?
What do we want humanity to look like?
我們希望人類是什麼樣子?
And rather than seeing this as an exercise in futility, which is very easy from time to time when you're in the position I'm in, I actually see this not as an exercise in futility.
而不是將此視為徒勞的練習,當你處於我所處的位置時,這不時很容易,我實際上認為這不是徒勞的練習。
I see this as one of the greatest opportunities that faces us because we now have a public conversation, which is now front and center in people's minds.
我認為這是我們面臨的最大機遇之一,因為我們現在有一個公開對話,現在是人們心目中的前沿和中心。
When this was an esoteric conversation about biological patents, nobody cared.
當這是一場關於生物專利的深奧談話時,沒人在意。
But when that conversation came home, then it became something people can care about.
但是當那次談話回到家時,它就變成了人們可以關心的事情。
So I'm actually quite grateful for this opportunity.
所以我真的很感激這個機會。
I thank the members of Parliament for hosting this.
我感謝國會議員主持這次會議。
I thank all of the translators who I apologize in advance.
我感謝所有的翻譯者,我提前向他們道歉。
I will use terminology that is probably very difficult to translate, so my apologies, and I'd also like to acknowledge the fact that many of you are aware of my involvement with this in large part due to the amazing work of my wonderful wife, Kim Martin, who encouraged me at the very early days of this pandemic to get on front of the camera and talk about all the information that I had been sharing among very small groups around the world.
我將使用可能很難翻譯的術語,所以我很抱歉,我也想承認你們中的許多人都知道我參與這件事,這在很大程度上要歸功於我出色的妻子的出色工作,金·馬丁 (Kim Martin),他在這場大流行病的早期鼓勵我站在鏡頭前,談論我一直在世界各地的非常小的群體中分享的所有信息。
And it was in fact her encouragement that put me in a place where many of you have heard what I have to say.
事實上,正是她的鼓勵讓我來到了一個地方,你們中的許多人都聽到了我要說的話。
Ironically, the world that I came from that used to be very popular, my CNBC and Bloomberg presentations, which were televised on mainstream media around the world, was an audience that I lost.
具有諷刺意味的是,我來自的世界曾經非常受歡迎,我在 CNBC 和彭博社的演講在世界各地的主流媒體上進行了電視轉播,而我卻失去了這些觀眾。
I can confidently say Covid diminished my fame, but I can also confidently say that I'd rather stand among the people with whom I'm standing today than any of the folks that were part of that previous world.
我可以自信地說 Covid 削弱了我的名聲,但我也可以自信地說,我寧願站在今天與我站在一起的人中間,也不願站在以前世界的任何人中間。
So, this is a much better place to be.
所以,這是一個更好的地方。
My role today is to set the stage for this conversation in a historical context, because this did not come in the last three years.
我今天的職責是在歷史背景下為這次對話奠定基礎,因為這在過去三年中並沒有發生。
This did not come in the last five or six years.
這在過去五六年裡沒有出現過。
This actually is an ongoing question that probably began here in Europe in the early stages of the mid 19 hundreds, but certainly by 1913, 1914, this conversation started right here in Central Europe.
這實際上是一個持續存在的問題,可能在 19 世紀中期的早期就在歐洲這裡開始,但肯定到 1913 年、1914 年,這個對話就在中歐這裡開始了。
The pandemic that we alleged to have happen in the last few years also did not happen overnight.
我們聲稱在過去幾年發生的大流行也不是一夜之間發生的。
In fact, the very specific pandemic using coronavirus began in a very different time.
事實上,使用冠狀病毒的非常具體的大流行開始於一個非常不同的時間。
Most of you don't know that Coronavirus as a model of a pathogen was isolated in 1965.
你們大多數人都不知道,作為病原體模型的冠狀病毒是在 1965 年分離出來的。
Coronavirus was identified in 1965 as one of the first infectious, replicatable viral models that could be used to modify a series of other experiences of human condition.
冠狀病毒於 1965 年被確定為首批具有傳染性、可複制的病毒模型之一,可用於修改一系列其他人類狀況體驗。
It was isolated once upon a time associated with the common cold.
曾幾何時,它因普通感冒而被隔離。
But what's particularly interesting about its isolation in 1965 was that it was immediately identified as a pathogen that could be used and modified for a whole host of reasons.
但它在 1965 年被分離出來特別有趣的是,它立即被確定為一種病原體,可以出於多種原因使用和改造。
And you heard me correctly, that was 1965.
你沒有聽錯,那是 1965 年。
And by the way, these slides are public domain.
順便說一下,這些幻燈片是公共領域的。
You're welcome to look at every single reference.
歡迎您查看每一個參考資料。
Every comment that I made is based on published material.
我發表的每一條評論都是基於已發表的材料。
So do make sure that you look at those references.
因此,請務必查看這些參考資料。
But in 1966, the very first COV Coronavirus model was used as a transatlantic biological experiment in human manipulation, and you heard the date 1966.
但是在 1966 年,第一個 COV 冠狀病毒模型被用作人類操縱的跨大西洋生物實驗,你聽說過 1966 年的日期。
I hope you're getting the point of what I'm saying.
我希望你明白我所說的重點。
This is not an overnight thing.
這不是一蹴而就的事情。
This is actually something that's been long in the making.
這實際上是醞釀已久的事情。
A year before I was born, we had the first Trans-Atlantic coronavirus data sharing experiment between the United States and the United Kingdom.
在我出生前一年,我們進行了美國和英國之間的第一個跨大西洋冠狀病毒數據共享實驗。
And in 1967, the year I was born, we did the first human trials on inoculating people with modified coronavirus.
1967 年,也就是我出生的那一年,我們進行了第一次人體試驗,用改良的冠狀病毒接種人體。
Isn't that amazing?
這不是很神奇嗎?
56 years ago, the overnight success of a pathogen that's been 56 years in engineering, and I want that to chill with all of you.
56 年前,一種經過 56 年工程改造的病原體一夜成名,我想讓你們所有人都冷靜下來。
Where were we when we actually allowed in violation of biological and chemical weapons treaties?
當我們實際上允許違反生物和化學武器條約時,我們在哪裡?
Where were we as a human civilization when we thought it was an acceptable thing to do to take a pathogen for the United States and infect the world with it?
當我們認為將病原體帶到美國並用它感染世界是可以接受的事情時,我們作為人類文明在哪裡?
Where was that conversation and what should have been that conversation in 1967?
1967 年那次談話在哪裡?那次談話應該是什麼?
That conversation wasn't had. Ironically, the common cold was turned into a chimera in the 1970s, and in 1975, 1976 and 1977, we started figuring out how to modify coronavirus by putting it into different animals.
那次談話沒有進行。具有諷刺意味的是,普通感冒在 1970 年代變成了嵌合體,而在 1975、1976 和 1977 年,我們開始研究如何通過將冠狀病毒放入不同的動物體內來對其進行修飾。
Pigs and dogs.
豬和狗。
And not surprisingly, by the time we got to 1990, we found out that coronavirus as a infectious agent was an industrial problem for two primary industries, the industries of dogs and pigs.
毫不奇怪,到 1990 年時,我們發現冠狀病毒作為傳染原是兩個主要行業(狗和豬行業)的工業問題。
Dog breeders and pigs found that Coronavirus created gastrointestinal problems, and that became the basis for Pfizer's first spike protein vaccine.
養狗人和養豬人發現冠狀病毒會引起胃腸道問題,這成為輝瑞公司首款刺突蛋白疫苗的基礎。
Patent filed. Are you ready for this In 1990?
申請專利。 1990年你準備好了嗎?
Did you hear what I just said?
你聽到我剛才說的話了嗎?
1990
1990
Operation Warpspeed.
曲速行動。
I'm sorry.
對不起。
Where's the warp and the speed?
經線和速度在哪裡?
Pfizer 1990.
輝瑞 1990 年。
The very first spike protein vaccine for Coronavirus.
第一種針對冠狀病毒的刺突蛋白疫苗。
Isn't that fascinating?
這不是很迷人嗎?
Isn't it fascinating that we were, we were told that, well, the spike protein is a new thing.
我們被告知,刺突蛋白是一種新事物,這難道不令人著迷嗎?
We just found out that that's the problem.
我們剛剛發現這就是問題所在。
No.
不。
As a matter of fact, we didn't just find out it was not just now.
事實上,我們不是現在才發現的。
Now the problem, we found that out in 1990 and filed the first patents on vaccines in 1990 for the spike protein of Coronavirus.
現在的問題是,我們在 1990 年發現了這一點,並於 1990 年為冠狀病毒的刺突蛋白申請了第一個疫苗專利。
And who would've thought Pfizer?
誰會想到輝瑞?
Clearly the innocent organization that does nothing but promote human health.
顯然,這個無辜的組織除了促進人類健康外什麼都不做。
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 wouldn't have had anything to do with this, but oh yes, they did.
顯然,輝瑞公司,這個沒有在這個會議廳,在世界上每個政府的每個會議廳中購買選票的組織,不是那個輝瑞公司,當然他們不會與這件事有任何關係,但是哦,是的,他們做到了。
And in 1990 they found out that there was a problem with vaccines.
1990 年,他們發現疫苗存在問題。
They didn't work.
他們沒有工作。
You know why they didn't work?
你知道他們為什麼不工作嗎?
It turns out that Coronavirus is a very malleable model.
事實證明,冠狀病毒是一種可塑性很強的模型。
It transforms and it changes, and it mutates over time.
它會改變,它會隨著時間的推移而變化。
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.
事實上,從 1990 年到 2018 年,每一份關于冠狀病毒疫苗的出版物,每一份出版物都得出結論,冠狀病毒逃脫了疫苗衝動,因為它修改和變異的速度太快,疫苗無法發揮作用。
And since 1990 to 2018, that is the published science ladies and gentlemen, that's following the science, following the science is their own indictment of their own programs that said, it doesn't work.
從 1990 年到 2018 年,女士們先生們,那是發表的科學,追隨科學,追隨科學是他們自己對自己的計劃的控訴,說它不起作用。
And there are thousands of publications to that effect, not a few hundred. And not paid for by pharmaceutical companies.
這方面的出版物有數千種,而不是幾百種。並且不由製藥公司支付。
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.
這些出版物是獨立的科學研究,明確顯示了北卡羅來納大學教堂山分校的拉爾夫·拜爾 (Ralph Bair) 對嵌合體改造所做的努力。
All of them show vaccines do not work on coronavirus.
所有這些都表明疫苗對冠狀病毒不起作用。
That's the science, and that science has never been disputed.
這就是科學,而這門科學從未有過爭議。

------
to be continue...



[隱藏]
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.
但隨後我們在 2002 年有了一個有趣的發展,這個日期最為重要,因為在 2002 年,北卡羅來納大學教堂山分校申請了專利,我引用了一種冠狀病毒的傳染性複制缺陷克隆。
Listen to those words …
聽那些話……
Infectious replication, defective.
傳染性複制,有缺陷。
What does that phrase actually mean?
這句話究竟是什麼意思?
For those of you not familiar with language, let me unpack it for you.
對於那些不熟悉語言的人,讓我為您解包。
Infectious replication.
傳染性複制。
Defective means a weapon.
有缺陷意味著武器。
It means something meant to target an individual but not have collateral damage to other individuals.
這意味著某些東西旨在針對個人但不會對其他人造成附帶損害。
That's what infectious replication defective means.
這就是傳染性複制缺陷的意思。
And that patent was filed in 2002 on work funded by NIAID'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.
該專利於 2002 年針對 NIAID 的安東尼·福奇 (Anthony Fauci) 在 1999 年至 2002 年間資助的工作申請,而這項在北卡羅來納大學教堂山分校獲得專利的工作神秘地比 SARS 1.0 早了一年。
“Dave, are you suggesting that SARS 1.0 wasn't from a wet market in Wuhan?”
“戴夫,你是說 SARS 1.0 不是來自武漢的一個菜市場嗎?”
“Are you suggesting it might have come from a laboratory in the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill?”
“你是說它可能來自北卡羅來納大學教堂山分校的實驗室嗎?”
No, I'm not suggesting it.
不,我不是在建議它。
I'm telling you that's the facts we engineered SARS.
我告訴你這就是我們設計 SARS 的事實。
SARS is not a naturally occurring phenomenon.
SARS 不是自然發生的現象。
The naturally occurring phenomenon is called the common cold.
這種自然發生的現象稱為普通感冒。
It's called influenza-like illness.
它被稱為流感樣疾病。
It's called gastroenteritis.
這叫做腸胃炎。
That's the naturally occurring coronavirus.
那是自然產生的冠狀病毒。
SARS is the research developed by humans weaponizing a life system model to actually attack human beings, and they patented it in 2002.
SARS是人類將生命系統模型武器化實際攻擊人類的研究,他們在2002年申請了專利。
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 I'm very, very precise on this.
2003 年,令人大吃一驚的是,CDC 申請了從人類分離出的冠狀病毒的專利,這再次違反了我們在美國擁有的生化武器、條約和法律,我對此非常非常準確。
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 don't ratify treaties about, I don't know, defending humans.
美國喜歡談論它的權利和其他一切,法治和我們喜歡談論的所有廢話,但我們不批准關於保護人類的條約,我不知道。
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.
我們明顯避免我們實際上擁有倡導人權的良好記錄,然後在實際成為國際社會的一部分時否認它們,這是一個有點問題的事情。
But let's get something very clear.
但是讓我們弄清楚一些事情。
When the CDC, in April of 2003 filed the patent on SARS Coronavirus isolated from humans, what did they do?
當 CDC 在 2003 年 4 月申請從人類分離出的 SARS 冠狀病毒專利時,他們做了什麼?
They downloaded a sequence from China, and filed a patent on it in the United States.
他們從中國下載了一個序列,並在美國申請了專利。
Any of you familiar with biological and chemical weapons treaties knows that's a violation.
任何熟悉生化武器條約的人都知道這是違反條約的行為。
That's a crime.
那是一種犯罪。
That's not an innocent, oops; that's a crime.
那不是無辜的,哎呀;那是一種犯罪。
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.
美國專利局甚至兩次拒絕該專利申請,直到 CDC 決定賄賂專利局以凌駕於專利審查員之上,最終於 2007 年為 SARS 冠狀病毒頒發專利。
But let'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.
但我們不要忘記這一點,因為事實證明,RT PCR,據稱我們將用來識別與冠狀病毒相關的風險的測試,實際上被我在歐洲認定為生物恐怖主義威脅聯盟在 2002 年和 2003 年贊助了 20 年前在布魯塞爾和整個歐洲舉辦的活動。
In 2005, this particular pathogen was specifically labelled as a bioterrorism and bioweapon platform technology, described as such.
2005 年,這種特殊的病原體被專門標記為生物恐怖主義和生物武器平台技術,如此描述。
That's not my terminology that I'm applying to it.
這不是我要應用的術語。
It was actually described as a bioweapons platform technology in 2005.
它實際上在 2005 年被描述為生物武器平台技術。
And from 2005 onwards, it was actually a bio warfare enabling agent.
從 2005 年開始,它實際上是一種生物戰促成劑。
It's official classification from 2005 forward.
這是從 2005 年開始的官方分類。
I don't know if that sounds like public health to you, does it?
我不知道這對你來說是否聽起來像公共衛生,是嗎?
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.
生物戰使技術感覺不像公共衛生,感覺不像醫學,感覺像武器,旨在消滅人類。
That's what it feels like, and it feels like that because that's exactly what it is.
這就是它的感覺,它就是那樣的感覺,因為它就是這樣。
We have been lured into believing that EcoHealth Alliance and DARPA and all of these organizations are what we should be pointing to.
我們被引誘相信生態健康聯盟和 DARPA 以及所有這些組織都是我們應該指出的。
But we'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 NIAID has a balance sheet, and next to it is a biodefense balance sheet.
但是我們被特別要求忽略這樣一個事實,即超過 100 億美元已經通過黑色行動流入,通過 Anthony Fauci 的支票和 NIAID 有資產負債表的並排分類賬,旁邊是生物防禦系統資產負債表。
Equivalent dollar for dollar matching that no one in the media talks about, and it's been going on since 2005.
媒體中沒有人談論的等值美元對美元匹配,自 2005 年以來一直在進行。
Our gain of function moratorium.
我們暫停獲得功能。
The moratorium that was supposed to freeze any efforts to do gain of function research.
暫停本應凍結任何功能增益研究的努力。
Conveniently, in the fall of 2014, the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill received a letter from NIAID 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.
方便的是,在 2014 年秋天,北卡羅來納大學教堂山分校收到了 NIAID 的一封信,稱雖然應該暫停體內冠狀病毒的功能獲得暫停,但因為他們的資助已經得到資助,他們獲得了豁免。
Did you hear what I just said?
你聽到我剛才說的話了嗎?
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?
北卡羅來納大學教堂山分校的一個生物武器實驗室設施獲得了暫停獲得功能的豁免,因此到 2016 年我們可以發表期刊文章,稱 SARS 冠狀病毒準備在 2016 年出現在人類身上,你可能會問戴夫,冠狀病毒是否準備好出現在人類身上?
It was WIV ONE.
這是 WIV ONE。
Wuhan Institute of Virology Virus One.
武漢病毒研究所病毒一號。
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.
準備在 2016 年在美國國家科學院的會議記錄中出現人類,這樣到 2017 年和 2018 年時,以下短語進入社區的共同說法,將有意或無意地釋放一種呼吸道病原體。
The operative word, obviously in that phrase, the word release, does that sound like leak?
操作詞,顯然在那個短語中,釋放這個詞,聽起來像洩漏嗎?
Does that sound like a bat and a Pangolin went into a bar in the Wuhan market and hung out and had sex?
這聽起來像是一隻蝙蝠和一隻穿山甲進入武漢市場的一家酒吧閒逛並發生性關係嗎?
And, and lo and behold, we got SARS Cov-2.
而且,你看,我們得到了 SARS Cov-2。
No accidental or intentional release of a respiratory pathogen was the terminology used.
使用的術語沒有意外或故意釋放呼吸道病原體。


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.
在 2019 年 4 月,也就是一號患者被指控的七個月前,Moderna 的四項專利申請被修改了四次,將“意外或故意釋放呼吸道病原體”一詞作為製造疫苗的理由存在。
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.
如果你還沒有這樣做,請確保你在每次調查中都提到了這件事的預謀性質,因為世界是在 2019 年 9 月才知道的。
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.
我們將發生意外或故意釋放呼吸道病原體,以便到 2020 年 9 月全球範圍內接受通用疫苗模板。
That's their words right in front of you on the screen.
這就是屏幕上您面前的他們的話。
The intent was to get the world to accept a universal vaccine template, and the intent was to use coronavirus to get there.
目的是讓世界接受通用疫苗模板,目的是使用冠狀病毒到達那裡。
Let's, let's read this because we have to read this into the record everywhere I go.
讓我們,讓我們讀一下這個,因為無論我走到哪裡,我們都必須把它讀到記錄中。
“Until 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.”
“直到傳染病危機非常真實地存在並且處於緊急臨界點之前,為了維持危機過後的資金基礎,這種危機通常在很大程度上被忽視。”
He said, “we need to increase the public understanding for the need for medical countermeasures, such as a pan influenza or pan coronavirus vaccine.”
他說,“我們需要提高公眾對醫療對策必要性的認識,例如泛流感或泛冠狀病毒疫苗。”
“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.”
“一個關鍵的驅動力是媒體,經濟將跟隨炒作。我們需要利用這種炒作來解決真正的問題。如果投資者在流程結束時看到利潤,他們會做出回應。”
Sounds like public health.
聽起來像公共衛生。
Sounds like the best of humanity.
聽起來像是人類最好的。
No.
不。
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.
女士們,先生們,這是在他們面前發表的 2015 年美國國家科學院院刊中陳述的有預謀的國內恐怖主義。
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.
這是對人類實施的生化戰行為,並書面承認這是一起金融搶劫和金融詐騙。
“Investors will follow if they see profit at the end of the process.”
“如果投資者在流程結束時看到利潤,他們就會跟進。”
Let me conclude by making five very brief recommendations.
最後,讓我提出五項非常簡短的建議。
The last slide, nature was hijacked.
最後一張幻燈片,大自然被劫持了。
This whole story started in 1965 when we decided to hijack a natural model and decide to start manipulating it.
整個故事始於 1965 年,當時我們決定劫持一個自然模型並決定開始操縱它。
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.
當唯一可以提出的問題是在 CDC、FDA、NIH 及其在世界各地的同等組織的專利保護下授權的問題時,科學就被劫持了。


We didn't have independent science.
我們沒有獨立的科學。
We had hijacked science, and unfortunately there was no moral oversight in violation of all of the codes that we stand for.
我們劫持了科學,不幸的是,沒有違反我們所代表的所有準則的道德監督。
There was no independent, financially disinterested independent review board ever empanelled around coronavirus.
從來沒有一個獨立的、在財務上不感興趣的獨立審查委員會圍繞冠狀病毒進行選拔。
Not once, not once, not since 1965.
沒有一次,沒有一次,自 1965 年以來就沒有。
We do not have a single independent IRB ever empanelled, around Coronavirus.
圍繞冠狀病毒,我們沒有一個獨立的 IRB。
So, morality was suspended for medical countermeasures, and ultimately humanity was lost because we decided to allow it to happen.
因此,道德被暫停用於醫療對策,最終人性消失了,因為我們決定允許它發生。
Our job today is to say, no more gain of function research period.
我們今天的工作是說,不再獲得功能研究期。
No more weaponization of nature period.
不再有自然時期的武器化。
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.
最重要的是,除非他們對他們維護的每一次傷害和死亡承擔 100% 的產品責任,否則不再有企業出於自身利益贊助科學。
Thank you very much.
非常感謝。
Dr David E. Martin
大衛·E·馬丁博士
Speaker - Covid Summit – European Union Parliament – May 2023
演講者 - Covid 峰會 - 歐盟議會 - 2023 年 5 月


-------
END
 
(謝謝 @kw_lam 更正)

[ 本帖最後由 貓男 於 2023-5-30 04:32 編輯 ]



鍵盤翻頁
左右
[按此隱藏 Google 建議的相符內容]