The Insanity of the PCR Testing Saga

For several months, experts have highlighted the true cause behind the COVID-19 pandemic, namely the incorrect use of PCR tests set at a ridiculously high cycle count (CT), which falsely labels healthy people as “COVID-19 cases.” In reality, the PCR test is not a proper diagnostic test, although it has been promoted as such.

An important question that demands an answer is whether the experts at our federal health agencies and the World Health Organization were really too ignorant to understand the implications of using this test at excessive CT, or whether it was done on purpose to create the illusion of a dangerous, out-of-control pandemic.

Regardless, those in charge need to be held accountable, which is precisely what the German Corona Extra-Parliamentary Inquiry Committee (Außerparlamentarischer Corona Untersuchungsausschuss,1 or ACU),2,3 intends to do.

They’re in the process of launching an international class-action lawsuit against those responsible for using fraudulent testing to engineer the appearance of a dangerous pandemic in order to implement economically devastating lockdowns around the world. I wrote about this in “Coronavirus Fraud Scandal — The Biggest Fight Has Just Begun” and “German Lawyers Initiate Class-Action Coronavirus Litigation.”

FDA Demands Higher False Positives

An interesting case detailed in a January 21, 2021, Buzzfeed article4 that raises those same questions in regard to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration is its recent spat with Curative, a California testing company that got its start in January 2020. It has since risen to become one of the largest COVID-19 test providers in the U.S.

Curative’s most popular PCR test differs from other providers in that it uses spit swabbed from the patient’s tongue, cheek and mouth rather than from the back of the nasal cavity.

In April 2020, the FDA issued an accelerated emergency use authorization5 for the Curative spit test, but only for patients who had been symptomatic within the two weeks prior to taking the test, as the data available at that time showed it failed to catch asymptomatic “cases.”

However, the test was subsequently used off-label on individuals without symptoms anyway, and the company has been urging the FDA to expand its authorization to include asymptomatic individuals based on newer data.

In December 2020, Curative submitted that data,6 showing its oral spit test accurately identified about 90% of positive cases when compared against a nasopharyngeal PCR test set to 35 CT.7

The FDA objected, saying that Curative was comparing its test against a PCR that had a CT that was too low, and would therefore produce too many false negatives.8 According to the FDA, the bar Curative had chosen was “not appropriate and arbitrary,” Buzzfeed reports.9

This is a curious statement coming from the FDA, considering the scientific consensus on PCR tests is that anything over 35 CTs is scientifically unjustifiable.10,11,12

From the start, the FDA and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommended running PCR tests at a CT of 40.13 This was already high enough to produce an inordinate number of false positives, thereby labeling healthy people as “COVID-19 cases,” but when it comes to Curative’s spit test, the FDA is demanding they compare it against PCR processed at a CT of 45, which is even more likely to produce false positives.

The FDA’s concern is that Curative’s test is missing infections and giving infectious people a clean bill of health. However, in reality, it’s far more likely that the test is accurately weeding out people who indeed are not infectious at all and rightly should be given a clean bill of health. It seems the FDA is merely pushing for a process that will ensure a higher “caseload” to keep the illusion of widespread infection going.

When Are You Actually Infectious?

A persistent sticking point with the PCR test is that it picks up dead viral debris, and by excessively magnifying those particles with CTs in the 40s, noninfectious individuals are labeled as infectious and told to self-isolate. In short, media and public health officials have conflated “cases” — positive tests — with the actual illness.

Medically speaking, a “case” refers to a sick person. It never ever referred to someone who had no symptoms of illness. Now all of a sudden, this well-established medical term, “case,” has been arbitrarily redefined to mean someone who tested positive for the presence of noninfectious viral RNA.

The research is unequivocal when it comes to who’s infectious and who’s not. You cannot infect another person unless you carry live virus, and you typically will not develop symptoms unless your viral load is high enough.

As it pertains to PCR testing, when excessively high CTs are used, even a minute viral load that is too low to cause symptoms can register as positive. And, since the test cannot distinguish between live virus and dead viral debris, you may not even be carrying live virus at all.

These significant drawbacks are why PCR testing really only should be done on symptomatic patients, and why a positive test should be weighed as just one factor of diagnosis. Symptoms must also be taken into account. If you have no symptoms, your chances of being infectious and spreading the infection to others is basically nil, as data14 from 9,899,828 individuals have shown.

Of these, not a single person who had been in close contact with an asymptomatic individual ended up testing positive. This study even confirmed that even in cases where asymptomatic individuals had had an active infection, and had been carriers of live virus, the viral load had been too low for transmission. As noted by the authors:15

“Compared with symptomatic patients, asymptomatic infected persons generally have low quantity of viral loads and a short duration of viral shedding, which decrease the transmission risk of SARS-CoV-2.

In the present study, virus culture was carried out on samples from asymptomatic positive cases, and found no viable SARS-CoV-2 virus. All close contacts of the asymptomatic positive cases tested negative, indicating that the asymptomatic positive cases detected in this study were unlikely to be infectious.”

PCR Picks Up Dead Virus for Weeks After Infection Has Cleared

Because the PCR test cannot discern between live virus and dead, noninfectious viral debris, the timing of the test ends up being important. One example of this was presented in a letter to the editor of The New England Journal of Medicine,16 in which the author describes an investigation done on hospitalized COVID-19 patients in Seoul, South Korea.

Whereas the median time from symptom onset to viral clearance confirmed by cultured samples was just seven days, with the longest time frame being 12 days, the PCR test continued to pick up SARS-CoV-2 for a median of 34 days. The shortest time between symptom onset to a negative PCR test was 24 days.

In other words, there was no detectable live virus in patients after about seven days from onset of symptoms (at most 12 days). The PCR test, however, continued to register them as “positive” for SARS-CoV-2 for about 34 days. The reason this matters is because if you have no live virus in your body, you are not infectious and pose no risk to others.

This then means that testing patients beyond, say, Day 12 to be safe, after symptom onset is pointless, as any positive result is likely to be false. But there’s more. As noted in that New England Journal of Medicine article:17

“Viable virus was identified until 3 days after the resolution in fever … Viral culture was positive only in samples with a cycle-threshold value of 28.4 or less. The incidence of culture positivity decreased with an increasing time from symptom onset and with an increasing cycle-threshold value.”

This suggests symptomology is a really important piece of the puzzle. If no viable virus is detectable beyond Day 3 after your fever ends, it’s probably unnecessary to retest beyond that point. A positive result beyond Day 3 after your fever breaks is, again, likely to be a false positive, as you have to have live virus in order to be infectious.

Even more important, these results reconfirm that CTs above 30 are inadvisable as they’re highly likely to be wrong. Here, they found the CT had to be below 28.4 in order for the positive test to correspond with live virus. As noted by the authors:18

“Our findings may be useful in guiding isolation periods for patients with Covid-19 and in estimating the risk of secondary transmission among close contacts in contract tracing.”

Testing for Dead Viruses Will Ensure Everlasting Lockdowns

To circle back to the Curative PCR test, the company argues that the test is accurate when it comes to detecting active infection, and as CEO Fred Turner told Buzzfeed:19

“If you’re screening for a return to work and you’re picking up everyone who had COVID two months ago, no one’s going to return to work. If you want to detect active COVID, what the ‘early’ study shows is that Curative is highly effective at doing that.”

Again, this has to do with the fact that the Curative spit test has a sensitivity resembling that of a nasopharyngeal PCR set at a CT of 30. The lower CT count narrows the pool of positive results to include primarily those with higher viral loads and those who are more likely to actually carry live virus. This is a good thing. What the FDA wants Curative to do is to widen that net so that more noninfectious individuals can be labeled as a “case.”

In an email to Buzzfeed, Dr. Michael Mina, an epidemiologist at Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, stated that using a CT of 45 is “absolutely insane,” because at that magnification, you may be looking at a single RNA molecule, whereas “when people are sick and are contagious, they literally can have 1,000,000,000,000x that number.”20

Mina added that such a sensitive PCR test “would potentially detect someone 35 days post-infection who is fully recovered and cause that person to have to enter isolation. That’s crazy and it’s not science-based, it’s not medicine-based and it’s not public health-oriented.”21

While the FDA has issued a warning not to use the Curative spit test on asymptomatic people, Florida has dismissed the warning and will continue to use the test on symptomatic and asymptomatic individuals alike. Only Miami-Dade County is reconsidering how it is using the test, although a definitive decision has yet to be announced.22

The Lower the CT, the Greater the Accuracy

While the FDA claims high sensitivity (meaning higher CT) is required to ensure we don’t end up with asymptomatic spreaders in our communities, as reviewed above, this risk is exceedingly small. We really need to stop panicking about the possibility of healthy people killing others. It’s not a sane trend, as detailed in “The World Is Suffering from Mass Delusional Psychosis.”

According to an April 2020 study23 in the European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases, to get 100% confirmed real positives, the PCR test must be run at just 17 cycles. Above 17 cycles, accuracy drops dramatically.

By the time you get to 33 cycles, the accuracy rate is a mere 20%, meaning 80% are false positives. Beyond 34 cycles, your chance of a positive PCR test being a true positive shrinks to zero.

Similarly, a December 3, 2020, systematic review24 published in the journal of Clinical Infectious Diseases, which assessed the findings of 29 different studies, found that “CT values were significantly lower … in specimens producing live virus culture.” In other words, the higher the CT, the lower the chance of a positive test actually being due to the presence of live (and infectious) virus.

“Two studies reported the odds of live virus culture reduced by approximately 33% for every one unit increase in CT,” the authors noted. Importantly, five of the studies included were unable to identify any live viruses in cases where a positive PCR test had used a CT above 24.

In cases where a CT above 35 was used, the patient had to be symptomatic in order to obtain a live virus culture. This again confirms that PCR with a CT over 35 really shouldn’t be used on asymptomatic people, as any positive result is likely to be meaningless and simply force them into isolation for no reason.

PCR Testing Based on Erroneous Paper

In closing, the whole premise of PCR testing to diagnose COVID-19 is in serious question, as the practice appears to be based on an erroneous paper that didn’t even undergo peer-review before being implemented worldwide.

November 30, 2020, a team of 22 international scientists published a review25 challenging the scientific paper26 on PCR testing for SARS-CoV-2 written by Christian Drosten, Ph.D., and Victor Corman (the so-called “Corman-Drosten paper”).

According to Reiner Fuellmich,27 founding member of the German Corona Extra-Parliamentary Inquiry Committee mentioned at the beginning of this article, Drosten is a key culprit in the COVID-19 pandemic hoax.

The scientists demand the Corman-Drosten paper be retracted due to “fatal errors,”28 one of which is the fact that it was written, and the test itself developed, before any viral isolate was available. The test is simply based on a partial genetic sequence published online by Chinese scientists in January 2020. In an Undercover DC interview, Kevin Corbett, Ph.D., one of the 22 scientists who are now demanding the paper’s retraction, stated:29

“Every scientific rationale for the development of that test has been totally destroyed by this paper … When Drosten developed the test, China hadn’t given them a viral isolate. They developed the test from a sequence in a gene bank. Do you see? China gave them a genetic sequence with no corresponding viral isolate.

They had a code, but no body for the code. No viral morphology … the bits of the virus sequence that weren’t there they made up. They synthetically created them to fill in the blanks …

There are 10 fatal errors in this Drosten test paper … But here is the bottom line: There was no viral isolate to validate what they were doing. The PCR products of the amplification didn’t correspond to any viral isolate at that time. I call it ‘donut ring science.’ There is nothing at the center of it. It’s all about code, genetics, nothing to do with reality …

There have since been papers saying they’ve produced viral isolates. But there are no controls for them. The CDC produced a paper in July … where they said: ‘Here’s the viral isolate.’ Do you know what they did? They swabbed one person. One person, who’d been to China and had cold symptoms. One person. And they assumed he had [COVID-19] to begin with. So, it’s all full of holes, the whole thing.

The critique against PCR testing is further strengthened by the November 20, 2020, study30 in Nature Communications, which found no viable virus in any PCR-positive cases. I referenced this study earlier, noting that not a single person who had been in close contact with an asymptomatic individual ended up testing positive.

But that’s not all. After evaluating PCR testing data from 9,899,828 people, and conducting additional live cultures to check for active infections in those who tested positive, using a CT of 37 or lower, they were unable to detect live virus in any of them, which is a rather astonishing finding.

On the whole, it seems clear that mass testing using PCR is inappropriate, and does very little if anything to keep the population safe. Its primary result is simply the perpetuation of the false idea that healthy, noninfectious people can pose a mortal threat to others, and that we must avoid social interactions. It’s a delusional idea that is wreaking havoc on the global psyche, and it’s time to put an end to this unhealthy, unscientific way of life.

Ground Zero Infection at the Wuhan Lab

The Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) lab appears to be Ground Zero for infection for SARS-CoV-2, according to a paper trail left by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) itself and explored in the above video. Its author, who lived in China for 10 years and speaks fluent Chinese, said this is not so much a theory as a revelation of publicly available information that he came across.

One of his earliest suspicions arose from a November 18, 2019, job opening posted by WIV, looking for someone to research the relationship between coronavirus and bats and, specifically, how bats can carry coronavirus but still be long lived. Another job opening at WIV, posted December 24, 2019, suggested that they’d discovered a “new and terrible virus” and were recruiting people to come and deal with it.

‘Bat Woman’ Researcher May Have Been Patient Zero

Upon digging into the staff at WIV, the author highlights Shi Zhengli, Ph.D., the director of WIV’s Center for Emerging Infectious Diseases, also known as “bat woman.” She has been studying bat-borne viruses since 2004, including SARS-like coronaviruses.

According to the World Society for Virology, “One of her great contributions is to uncover genetically diverse SARS-like coronaviruses in bats with her international collaborators and provide unequivocal evidence that bats are natural reservoirs of SARS-CoV.”1

In his book “China COVID-19: The Chimera That Changed the World,”2 professor Giuseppe Tritto — president of the World Academy of Biomedical Sciences and Technology, founded under UNESCO, and an internationally recognized expert in bio and nanotechnology — accuses Shi of producing a SARS-like virus with increased pathogenicity by inserting a segment of the HIV virus into a horseshoe bat coronavirus.3

Chinese officials also recently deleted some 300 coronavirus studies, including all of the papers published by Shi. A fact sheet released January 15, 2021, by the U.S. Department of State, but which has since been archived, further questions WIV’s research on bat and other coronaviruses prior to the COVID-19 outbreak:4

“The U.S. government has reason to believe that several researchers inside the WIV became sick in autumn 2019, before the first identified case of the outbreak, with symptoms consistent with both COVID-19 and common seasonal illnesses.

This raises questions about the credibility of WIV senior researcher Shi Zhengli’s public claim that there was ‘zero infection’ among the WIV’s staff and students of SARS-CoV-2 or SARS-related viruses.”

The previously undisclosed information in the fact sheet notes that accidental laboratory infections have caused several previous virus outbreaks and the Chinese government has prevented investigators and journalists from interviewing WIV researchers.

What’s more, WIV researchers have been conducting experiments involving the bat coronavirus RaTG13 — the closest known relative to SARS-CoV-2, with 96.2% similarity — since at least 2016.

2018: Coronaviruses From Bats Likely to Infect People

In October 2015, Shi and her team conducted serological surveillance on people who live in close proximity to caves where bats that carry diverse SARSr-CoVs [severe acute respiratory syndrome coronaviruses] roost.5 They took blood samples from 218 villagers in Jinning County, Yunnan province, China, which revealed that six people were infected.

“Our study provides the first serological evidence of likely human infection by bat SARSr-CoVs or, potentially, related viruses,” they wrote, and, “These results indicate that some SARSr-CoVs may have high potential to infect human cells.”6

Peter Daszak, EcoHealth Alliance president, was also a part of the study, which is notable since he is also part of the World Health Organization team that is investigating the origins of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19.

Daszak works closely with WIV and dozens of others on controversial gain-of-function research, which involves manipulating pathogens, including coronaviruses, to make them more infectious or lethal. He has openly and repeatedly dismissed the possibility of the pandemic being the result of a lab leak,7 and also has close ties to Shi.

If there were any doubt, The Sun,8 a tabloid paper in the U.K., featured a Twitter conversation in which Daszak “appears to say he is looking forward to an alcohol-fueled karaoke party in a bat cave with Shi Zhengli,” GM watch noted.9

Daszak tweets, “Looking forward to that special moment when we hit the baiju and the karaoke with Zhengli & Linfa [likely referring to Wang Linfa, aka ‘batman,’ another bat researcher and WIV’s chairman of scientific advisory10].” He adds, “Right now a party in a bat cave sounds just right to me!!”11

Report: Wuhan Lab Researchers Had Symptoms, Self-Quarantined

The video also mentions Botao Xiao, Ph.D., a professor at Huazhong University of Science and Technology in Wuhan, China, who trained at Northwestern University and Harvard Medical School. In February 2020, he posted a thesis about details he knew but wasn’t supposed to talk about.

He knew, for instance, that researchers at WIV were infected and had already begun to self-quarantine after showing symptoms. He said the majority of the researchers at the lab were suspicious that the virus was from bats, that it’s not a natural infection and that the main source of the virus is from the Wuhan lab, which, by the way, is only 280 meters (306.2 yards) from the seafood market where the virus was “officially” said to have originated.

According to the video, he also indicated that researchers were splashed with urine and blood samples from collected bats, along with a timeline of these events, and he knew how many bats were collected. In an October 19, 2020, report, however, Dr. Peter Breggin revealed the CCP forced them to recant and the paper was withdrawn, “perhaps because it was so cogently written and spot on.”12

Patient Zero Is Missing

Huang Yan Ling was a researcher at WIV who worked closely with Shi. According to the video, many believe Ling is Patient Zero for the COVID-19 pandemic, but she’s now missing. Her profile and biography are missing from WIV’s website, but, after rumors surfaced that she was presumed dead, the Chinese government posted a notice on WIV’s site saying she’s alive and well.

No proof was offered, however, and the author suggests that if CCP wanted to stop the rumors, the first thing they would have done was have her schedule a public appearance. But “no one has seen her.”

A message reportedly appeared on China’s WeChat messaging service claiming to be from Ling and stating, “To my teachers and fellow students, how long no speak. I am Huang Yanling, still alive. If you receive any email [regarding the Covid rumor], please say it’s not true,” but she has since vanished from social media.13 The U.K.’s Mirror further reported in January 2021:14

“The year-long hunt for Huan Yan Ling pushes on amid a suspected ‘state cover-up’ after the scientist disappeared when reports surfaced online last February naming her as ‘Patient Zero’ … State officials and lab agents were quick to rubbish the reports at the time and remove them from the internet.

They claimed Huang was safe and had simply moved jobs, with a Chinese news agency even claiming to have spoken her new employer. But China is yet to produce the scientist physically despite numerous requests from the U.S. State Department to stop hiding information. Their reluctance has fueled the theory she is either dead or being held by the state to cover up the institute’s role in the pandemic …”

SARS-CoV-2 Uniquely Well-Adapted for Human Infection

Daszak told The Associated Press in November 2020 that SARS-CoV-2 could have passed from a wildlife poacher to a trader who brought it to Wuhan,15 and others have also pushed the idea that SARS-CoV-2 arose and evolved naturally, skipping from one animal species to another before ultimately developing the capability of infecting humans.

There’s no direct evidence that the virus arose zoonotically,16 however, while Lawrence Sellin, Ph.D., a former researcher with the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute, has detailed several unique features that make SARS-CoV-2 exceptionally well-adapted for human infection:17

  • A very high infection rate, thanks to it being more selective for the human ACE2 receptor than SARS-Cov-1 (the virus responsible for the 2003 SARS pandemic)18
  • A unique furin cleavage site not found in any closely related bat coronaviruses, which allows the virus to fuse to human cells, thereby enhancing its pathogenicity and transmissibility19,20
  • Certain spike protein structures that are similar to those found in the MERS-CoV virus, which allow the virus to attach using not only the ACE2 receptor but also the DPP4 receptor, like MERS-CoV. This dual receptor strategy might be responsible for its ability to infect a wide range of human tissues21

Jean-Claude Perez, Ph.D., a retired interdisciplinary researcher with the IBM European Research Center on Artificial Intelligence, also claims to provide “formal proof that 2019-nCoV coronavirus is partially a synthetic genome” due to the presence of HIV1 retrovirus fragments.22

Will WHO Team Investigate a Possible Lab Leak?

In an editorial published in the Journal of Human Security, Colin Butler of Australian National University, a former WHO adviser who not only worked in China but also previously worked with Daszak, argued there is “striking” evidence that COVID-19 may have leaked from a lab.23,24

The AP noted, however, “According to WHO’s published agenda25 for its origins research, there are no plans to assess whether there might have been an accidental release of the coronavirus at the Wuhan lab.”26 Taking it a step further, GM Watch reported that Daszak “has already poured cold water on calls for a forensic investigation”:27

“An article in Science28 quotes him as saying, ‘Some of the more anti-China rhetoric that’s out there, about, we need to go into the lab and look at the video cameras, this sort of thing, that’s not realistic, that’s not what happens.’

This prompted Richard Ebright of Rutgers to comment,29 ‘Daszak’s claim that calls for a thorough and credible investigation, as opposed to a cursory and conflict-ridden investigation, are ‘anti-China rhetoric’ is self-serving nonsense.’”

In February 2021, it was reported that the WHO team spent 3.5 hours at WIV, with little actual information released afterward. Daszak vaguely stated on Twitter, “Extremely important meeting today with staff at WIV including Dr. Shi Zhengli. Frank, open discussion. Key questions asked & answered.”30

Yet, given the glaring need for a thorough and independent investigation into a possible laboratory leak, many have called for Daszak to step down from the WHO investigatory team,31 as evidence ramps up that a laboratory leak cannot be ruled out.

53% of US Military Families Say They Don’t Want a Covid Jab, But US Navy Says it Will Be Mandatory for Active Duty Personnel

53% of Military Families Don’t Want COVID-19 Vaccine, Survey Shows By Patricia Kime | 4 February 2021 MILITARY.COM –In a straw poll of 810 active-duty military personnel, spouses and veterans, more than half of active-duty […]

The post 53% of US Military Families Say They Don’t Want a Covid Jab, But US Navy Says it Will Be Mandatory for Active Duty Personnel first appeared on Winter Watch.

Australia — How They Did It, So Far — A Good Example

 By Anna Von Reitz

Please pay very close attention;  this is what THEY did in Australia, meaning the Holy Roman Empire/City of Rome/UN CORP — and their treasonous money-grubbing flunkies: 

In 1960, the Queen personally enacted the Corporate Bodies Contracts Act 1960 [8 & 9 Eliz. 2] [CH. 46].  This act in effect opened up the floodgates of corruption and allowed private individual contracts of BODIES — CORPORATIONS, and especially MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS a.k.a. STRAWMEN— to supersede and overcome the Constitutional contracts owed by the Queen, the Crown and Government to the people of Great Britain. Because of this Act, you could unknowingly sign away your Constitutional Guarantees and effectively “jump ship” to become a UN CITIZEN (and slave), subject to UN CORP “private law”.  

And if you didn’t do this unconsciously for yourself, then it could be done “for” you via the Birth Certification process. 

This allowed the Queen, the Crown, and the Parliament to evade their constitutional obligations, and provided an excuse for the Pope to enforce UN “Law” on the people of Great Britain using the poppets — STRAWMEN — as the new “Subjects” of the UK CORPORATION.  This allowed the imposition of UNIDROIT as the private citizenry of Great Britain were sequentially  “redefined” first as UK Corporations and second as public Municipal properties and UN franchise CORPORATIONS.  

It’s the same scheme that was used in America to evade our Constitutions, just a hundred years later, and I don’t think the timing is an accident.  It’s all fraud, treason and Breach of Trust in both cases and in any event. 

The Queen got her cut and Westminster got their cut, the Pope got his very fat cut, and everyone concerned was completely unaccountable for entrapping, enslaving, and evading.  They set aside their constitutional obligations and roles and whompo-bango, thirteen years later, they sealed the airy deal by enacting the Seas and Submerged Lands Act of 1973, which served to seal off the land and soil jurisdictions and the courts serving those jurisdictions. 

This “Act” which fails to be an Enactment, then allowed the UN CORP to come into the Territorial Jurisdiction of Australia and establish UN-based Exclusive Economic Zones (similar to what was done in America with the establishment of Territorial State of States and then, Municipal STATE OF STATE entities) 

And there they have sat as smug pirates, sheltering behind the storefront of the vacated constitutional government, stealing and plundering and acting as predators upon the people they are supposed to protect. 

It’s the same exact schtick as they used in America, only the names were changed to protect the guilty.  

They excused their own hideous Breach of Trust by pretending that all the sane people of the Australia (and the United Kingdom, too)  went to sea and adopted foreign Persons/PERSONS and voluntarily, privately, subjected themselves to foreign law and foreign governments—- while they failed to disclose any of this to the General Population, and simply left the innocent people — to whom they owed good faith and service and a Christian Monarch — to fall into their trap. 

The obvious game plan in all of this was to overthrow the Constitutional Monarchy and replace it with Corporate Feudalism, with everyone re-made into corporate franchise SUBJECTS of nameless, faceless “governmental services corporations”—-conveniently owned and controlled by the Queen and the Pope.  

We’ve called them out for it—  the Queen and the Roman Pontiff a.k.a. Pope, and all the politicians acting as the Boards of Directors.   

These governmental services corporations exist via the patronage of the Queen and the definitions of the Roman Curia, so there is no doubt whatsoever who is responsible for this Criminal Breach of Trust and the implementation of this criminal genocidal scheme — because make no mistake, they have shanghaied us into the foreign jurisdiction of the sea via false and undisclosed registrations, and they have attempted to “kill” everyone on paper, and so as to reduce us all to the level of Legal Fiction Entities and “decedents” with respect to our natural estates and Public Law. 

They have followed this same pattern in every country we have researched: false registration of babies, which traffics the victim’s name into the international jurisdiction of the sea and creates an unconscionable Territorial citizenship contract, followed by another unlawful conversion of the victim’s name into that of multiple Municipal CITIZENS— which are corporations of various kinds operated under the names of the victims: 

JOHN MARK DOE = Municipal Cestui Que Vie Trust
JOHN M DOE = Public Transmitting Utility
JOHN DOE = Public Charitable Trust 

All this has been going on behind the backs of the honest, earnest, innocent people of the Earth, who have been targeted by these Vermin in High Places. Indeed, we didn’t have a clue.  But now, we do. 

—————————-
See this article and over 3000 others on Anna’s website here: www.annavonreitz.com
To support this work look for the PayPal buttons on this website. 
How do we use your donations?  Find out here. 

Hershey, Nestlé and other chocolate makers sued for child slavery

(Natural News) A human rights group has filed a lawsuit against some of the biggest names in the chocolate industry for allegedly trafficking children across national borders to harvest cocoa. Eight Malian men claim they were victims of this child slave labor scheme, which involved their being recruited under false pretenses, trafficked into Côte d’Ivoire,…

Experimental mRNA vaccines cause 600 new cases of eye disorders and leave 5 people blind, according to UK Government

(Natural News) The government of the United Kingdom has been collecting critical safety data on the Pfizer/BioNTech and Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccines, and the latest report doesn’t paint a pretty picture. The first dose of the experimental Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine has been introduced into the arms of 5.4 million citizens, with 500,000 of these people receiving a second…