Did you listen to it? I find the words he used any where he ends curious. To just dismiss it as
"viruses fake" I think is to miss a coded statement.
So just before he puts up his first slide, Dr Martin says,
"the pandemic we alleged to have happened...also did not happen over night. In fact the very specific pandemic using coronavirus began in a very different time". Let's be specific about the words he's using. To allege is
to make a claim or assert something without proof. And pandemic, comes from the Greek word pandēmos, which is pan ‘all’ + dēmos ‘people’. So in that sense,
a pandemic is simply something that affects everyone, and that's why the controllers will not give up that term, because the whole point of what they do is to try to affect 'all people'. There will be another PANDEMIC, guaranteed.
At 4 minutes in, Martin puts up his first slide and begins the presentation proper, he states,
"most of you don't know that coronavirus, as a model of a pathogen, was isolated in 1965". So if we reword that statement using the alternative definitions of the words used. -
In 1965 a template of a system to create misery was singled out with the name coronavirus. Pathogen deriving from pathos...
"a quality that evokes pity or sadness"...tragedy, unhappiness, sorrow, misery, grief. Isolation, to single out. A model, template, dummy, framework, exemplar.
"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 the human condition." ...Again, let's reword that statement;
coronavirus was established as a likely framework to influence people in a rapid manner to change the way they participate in life. No talk of pathogens in that sentence, but exceedingly now sounding like NUDGE THEORY.
He continues,
"it was isolated, once upon a time, associated with the common cold." He chose his words,
'once upon a time...' which is used as a conventional opening of a story. And
'associated' a term that can mean, bound, joined, incorporated. We seemed to be getting into the same terminology realm as legal fictions.
He continues,
"What's particularly interesting about it's isolation in 1965..." I wonder if he uses
'particularly interesting' in the same way I use it?
"...was it was immediately identified as a pathogen that could be used and be modified for a whole host of reasons." - Are we getting what he is actually saying? Well adding it all together, thus far...
In 1965 it was instantly recognised that the framework codenamed 'coronavirus' which uses misery as the basis to change the way people live their lives could be deployed on a worldwide scale, then the story surrounding it manipulated to achieve a whole host of wanted outcomes. This is a rewording of his language with the help of a dictionary to get a better understanding of the sterile terminology employed.
That's enough from this section. He says his slides are public domain, and every comment he made is based on published material...and to note, from this presentation so far, he is very, very, careful about the language he uses.
If we skip to the end, around 19 minutes, Martin absolutely ties this to funding and investment -
"investors will respond if they see profit at the end of the process". So stating this in its simplest terms,
coronavirus is a worldwide framework for profiting from misery. Didn't we know that anyway?
