Proof That The Swine Flu Epidemic Was Man Made and Intentional

I was going to post this info alongside a recent Toronto Star article exposing how much hype has been thrown at the H1N1 issue, but it struck me that this isn't smoking gun proof at all. This article make a point that seems sound - any 'use thereof' of an engineered virus in a vaccine application would, to be effective, have to anticipate the strain found in the wild. And the StatismWatch.ca archive has, in the past, posted experts questioning whether the Swine Flu could have been a laboratory leak, or a potential laboratory error, given that no pedigree exists for the H1N1 virus. It's completely without precedent. (Unless you count its affinity to the 1918 H1N1 pandemic virus, which is another story) But, and this is a big but, a stumbling block to this argument is if the patent is filed for a process to be performed on a class of similar H1N1 virii, with the release candidate plucked from the wilds when identified. And this seems to be the case, since the patent is for the attenuation of an immune response stimulated by the general H1N1 'NS1' gene and obviously, there is no inconsistency with the official account in that light - this is a patent for a new way to weaken a virus, should there ever be a need to weaken an H1N1 virus The interesting suggestion remains of course that some form of H1N1 outbreak was anticipated, and even planned for, so more research and a survey of how funding in this field of study was managed is called for on that front. But as it stands this patent could be interpreted as ongoing research into the immunology of a wide class of virii, at least from where I stand.

Here's a clause discussing use of the H1N1 virus as a payload delivery system for various agents that might respond to viral therapy. Basically, they can use this viral shell to make you have an immune response to any of the following factors, below. Is this a common use of viruses these days, or some astonishing new breakthrough that requires the H1N1 vehicle itself?

[0181]The present invention also provides methods for preventing, managing, treating, and/or ameliorating diseases and disorders including, but not limited to, swine influenza virus infections, conditions associated with swine influenza virus infection, infections other than swine influenza virus infections, conditions associated with infections other than swine influenza virus infections, IFN-treatable disorders (e.g., cancer) and conditions in which an attenuated swine influenza virus of the invention is used as a vector to induce an immune response to an antigen associated with the condition comprising administering to a subject in need thereof an effective amount of one or more attenuated swine influenza viruses of the present invention and an effective amount of one or more therapies (e.g., prophylactic or therapeutic agents) other than attenuated swine influenza viruses. Therapies include, but are not limited to, small molecules, synthetic drugs, peptides, polypeptides, proteins, nucleic acids (e.g., DNA and RNA nucleotides including, but not limited to, antisense nucleotide sequences, triple helices, RNAi, and nucleotide sequences encoding biologically active proteins, polypeptides or peptides) antibodies, synthetic or natural inorganic molecules, mimetic agents, and synthetic or natural organic molecules.

Let me get this straight... They created a vaccine for a genetically engineered virus that did not exist by "anticipating" its entire D.N.A. code 3 years beforehand, and then it coincidentally appeared out of thin air in the wild as soon as the patent was approved for the vaccine? Sorry, but that's just so stupid I can hardly be tactful about it.

And no, this admittedly was not a virus that was pulled from the wild. Again, this was (and is) their "invention" of a genetically engineered virus.

Let me restate something was was written above:

"If the above patent application did not match the Swine Flu virus that is now being found in humans exactly, then it would be completely useless for creating immunity. Therefore, since the above patent is for a genetically engineered virus, then the virus spreading through the population would also have to be genetically engineered in an identical fashion, and almost certainly would have come from the same laboratory."

I do agree with it being a red flag, and yes, that whole idea of adding a trojanized "payload" to viruses is rather troubling. In this case the "payload" was, in the very least, swine D.N.A. and bird D.N.A..

Isn't it nice being part of their experiments?

If you want to start throwing around terms like 'stupid', you'd be advised to read the patent application first. Nowhere in there does it state anything about matching the entire genotype of the present virus under discussion. It talks about modifying the coding of ONE GENE - that's the NS1 gene, which we're told is common to all H1N1 strains, in order to suppress a certain biological effect (interferon stimulus? haven't looked it up yet) in the creation of swine flu vaccines. That's swine flu vaccines in general. NOT a vaccine for this particular H1N1 strain, which no one has shown uses this patent, and likely doesn't since it's not supposed to be using 'attenuated' virus. Just trying to stick to the facts here...

Okay, then let's talk "facts".

How does the genetically engineered vaccine grant immunity if it is not an identical strain of the same virus? A vaccine miracle? And more importantly, why do they need genetically engineered vaccines for diseases which do not exist (conveniently did not exist until after they created the vaccine and patented it).

Every vaccine is effective for exactly one particular stain (whenever they are effective -- note Gardasil contains multiple vaccines like the MMR), and that's why once the flu (or any other virus) mutates, the vaccine is no longer any good. That is why the flu vaccine is changed every year, but sadly, it is usually for last year's stain, and therefore usually useless.

We won't see this patent "used" until one of the parties feels threatened enough to use it in court, and thus it very well may fall under the category of 'defensive patents'. It is impossible to know, but I am sure an intellectual property attorney could take us in circles on the issues endlessly. Nevertheless, the patent still clearly shows that there was an orchestrated plan to develop a genetically engineered Swine Flu "vaccine", even though Swine Flu did not exist in the wild. Why would you make a vaccine for something that doesn't exist?

As far as this being different to the human virus, then is St. Jude Children's Hospital doing veterinary medicine now?

Thomas, the critical mistake I think you're making is this:

> even though Swine Flu did not exist in the wild

Are you sure about that? There's a reason it's called Swine Flu.

All I'm saying, is that, though I think Sarah is great, you can't necessarily make these extrapolations. It's reasonable to think that a mistake may have been made here. Look:

1) The potential market, the drive to create a new genetic technology to assist in the attenuation of ANY swine flu strain might be reasonably argued to exist because physicians have observed other zoological virii jumping the species barrier. So a counterexample to motive.

2) And sorry to press this point, but it needs pressing - the technology described in the document applies to any swine flu variant with the NS1 gene. So although you are correct in stating that to create a specific vaccine you would need a specific virus, that's not what this patent does or requires. So there's no proof of means or opportunity here (eg; access to the specific H1N1 'pandemic' virus back in 2005)

I'm just offering a critique and crosschecking the ideas presented against my own reading of the patent. This has to be a self-regulating community, right? It's serious, which is why the application of skeptical tests are required, and should be welcomed. I totally get what you're saying about the swine flu in general. Cheers.

"physicians have observed other zoological virii jumping the species barrier"

Did you ever wonder why this "evolution" never happened in history before the advent of genetic engineering? Perhaps the Black Plague would be an exception (and that's very debatable). Don't even go there with A.I.D.S., because its entire history is one huge fraud (which we'll cover later). So why has this sort of thing suddenly become "normal"? Swine Flu in humans? Bird Flu in humans? What's next? Gorilla Indigestion? Always after the vaccines have been developed first, right?

Sure, we can argue that it is all one big coincidence, but sooner or later we have to choose to be a coincidence theorist or a conspiracy theorist. At this point, history and the evidence favors the latter.

Again, one last time, why exactly would you need a genetically engineered vaccine when no genetically engineered viruses exist in the wild, and how exactly would those genetically engineered viruses eventually get out there? I'll tell you one thing: it's not exactly evolution. If this "invention" is not to provide immunity (for something coincidentally appearing afterward in the wild for the first time), then what exactly is this Frankenstein creation for?

"There's no proof of means or opportunity here (eg; access to the specific H1N1 'pandemic' virus back in 2005)"

Actually, they tried to pull exactly the same thing back in 1976, and it was one of my points. I seriously doubt that Mount Sinai School of Medicine, and St. Jude Children's Hospital have converted themselves to veterinary medicine.

Even if this virus/vaccine really were just for pigs, then how did those pigs naturally acquire this genetically engineered virus that the vaccine is for? How is that suddenly humans began catching it too?

It must be evolution, right?

By pooh-poohing interspecies virus contaminations, you're misdirecting from the issue of whether this patent represents the creation of the current H1N1 vaccine. (They test flu on ferrets, y'know.) And you seem to be simply repeating your contention that the vaccine patent is for a genetically engineered virus, when I've shown at least three times that this isn't the case? So one last go round at this:

> Even if this virus/vaccine really were just for pigs, then how did those pigs naturally acquire this genetically engineered virus that the vaccine is for?

It's not claimed that the vaccine is just for pigs, as you know. Nor is it claimed that the vaccine is for a genetically engineered virus. As you know. You can guess and infer that it might be, but it's just not in the text. The patent is explicitly for a modification limited to ONE GENE that would inhibit H1N1 transmissibility in some future vaccine WERE it ever to cross the species barrier, or if the virus were to be pressed into service in genetic therapy. That's it. If we were to look for foreknowledge embedded in this specific patent, we'd have to start by showing that there was no reasonable expectation that H1N1, like H5N1, might go interspecies. I submit all of the breathless 'pandemic preparedness' public service ads from the last five years as counterevidence. I really don't know what else to say on the matter. So I'll stop here. The most fearful thing about this patent is the open question of what happens if scientists slip up which tinkering with viral genetics and possibly make something worse...

Along that line of thinking, here's something that might be more fruitful to pursue...

Scientist Repeats Claim Swine Flu Escaped from Lab in Published Study
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601124&sid=ajw2AS.d1wK8

"Genetically engineered" is actually in the patent title and application, and some of the testing was done in pigs. It is all clearly written in the document.

I'm just going to stop with that. This has obviously become an irrational debate in which the real purpose has become getting 'the last word' in. So go ahead, and post again, to get that 'last word' in. You may claim victory, and we'll part in peace.

I will not be posting again, unless another reader actually has something that inspires a response.

Just saw this last evening

Journalist Files Charges against WHO and UN for Bioterrorism and Intent to Commit Mass Murder
Share
Mon at 7:47pm | Edit Note | Delete
(NaturalNews) As the anticipated July release date for Baxter's A/H1N1 flu pandemic vaccine approaches, an Austrian investigative journalist is warning the world that the greatest crime in the history of humanity is underway. Jane Burgermeister has recently filed criminal charges with the FBI against the World Health Organization (WHO), the United Nations (UN), and several of the highest ranking government and corporate officials concerning bioterrorism and attempts to commit mass murder. She has also prepared an injunction against forced vaccination which is being filed in America. These actions follow her charges filed in April against Baxter AG and Avir Green Hills Biotechnology of Austria for producing contaminated bird flu vaccine, alleging this was a deliberate act to cause and profit from a pandemic.

Summary of claims and allegations filed with FBI in Austria on June 10, 2009

In her charges, Burgermeister presents evidence of acts of bioterrorism that is in violation of U.S. law by a group operating within the U.S. under the direction of international bankers who control the Federal Reserve, as well as WHO, UN and NATO. This bioterrorism is for the purpose of carrying out a mass genocide against the U.S. population by use of a genetically engineered flu pandemic virus with the intent of causing death. This group has annexed high government offices in the U.S.

Specifically, evidence is presented that the defendants, Barack Obama, President of the U.S, David Nabarro, UN System Coordinator for Influenza, Margaret Chan, Director-General of WHO, Kathleen Sibelius, Secretary of Department of Health and Human Services, Janet Napolitano, Secretary of Department of Homeland Security, David de Rotschild, banker, David Rockefeller, banker, George Soros, banker, Werner Faymann, Chancellor of Austria, and Alois Stoger, Austrian Health Minister, among others, are part of this international corporate criminal syndicate which has developed, produced, stockpiled and employed biological weapons to eliminate the population of the U.S. and other countries for financial and political gain.

The charges contend that these defendants conspired with each other and others to devise, fund and participate in the final phase of the implementation of a covert international bioweapons program involving the pharmaceutical companies Baxter and Novartis. They did this by bioengineering and then releasing lethal biological agents, specifically the "bird flu" virus and the "swine flu virus" in order to have a pretext to implement a forced mass vaccination program which would be the means of administering a toxic biological agent to cause death and injury to the people of the U.S. This action is in direct violation of the Biological Weapons Anti-terrorism Act.

Burgermeister's charges include evidence that Baxter AG, Austrian subsidiary of Baxter International, deliberately sent out 72 kilos of live bird flu virus, supplied by the WHO in the winter of 2009 to 16 laboratories in four counties. She claims this evidence offers clear proof that the pharmaceutical companies and international government agencies themselves are actively engaged in producing, developing, manufacturing and distributing biological agents classified as the most deadly bioweapons on earth in order to trigger a pandemic and cause mass death.

In her April charges, she noted that Baxter's lab in Austria, one of the supposedly most secure biosecurity labs in the world, did not adhere to the most basic and essential steps to keep 72 kilos of a pathogen classified as a bioweapon secure and separate from all other substances under stringent biosecurity level regulations, but it allowed it to be mixed with the ordinary human flu virus and sent from its facilities in Orth in the Donau.

In February, when a staff member at BioTest in the Czech Republic tested the material meant for candidate vaccines on ferrets, the ferrets died. This incident was not followed up by any investigation from the WHO, EU, or Austrian health authorities. There was no investigation of the content of the virus material, and there is no data on the genetic sequence of the virus released.

In answer to parliamentary questions on May 20th, the Austrian Health Minister, Alois Stoger, revealed that the incident had been handled not as a biosecurity lapse, as it should have been, but as an offence against the veterinary code. A veterinary doctor was sent to the lab for a brief inspection.

Burgermeister's dossier reveals that the release of the virus was to be an essential step for triggering a pandemic that would allow the WHO to declare a Level 6 Pandemic. She lists the laws and decrees that would allow the UN and WHO to take over the United States in the event of pandemic. In addition, legislation requiring compliance with mandatory vaccinations would be put into force in the U.S. under conditions of pandemic declaration.

She charges that the entire "swine flu" pandemic business is premised on a massive lie that there is no natural virus out there that poses a threat to the population. She presents evidence leading to the belief that the bird flu and swine flu viruses have, in fact, been bioengineered in laboratories using funding supplied by the WHO and other government agencies, among others. This "swine flu" is a hybrid of part swine flu, part human flu and part bird flu, something that can only come from laboratories according to many experts.

WHO's claim that this "swine flu" is spreading and a pandemic must be declared ignores the fundamental causes. The viruses that were released were created and released with the help of WHO, and WHO is overwhelmingly responsible for the pandemic in the first place. In addition, the symptoms of the supposed "swine flu" are indistinguishable from regular flu or from the common cold. The "swine flu" does not cause death anymore often than the regular flu causes death.

Burgermeister notes that the figures for deaths reported for the "swine flu" are inconsistent and there is no clarity as to how the number of "deaths" has been documented.

There is no pandemic potential unless mass vaccinations are carried out to weaponize the flu under the guise of protecting the population. There are reasonable grounds for believing that the mandatory vaccines will be purposely contaminated with diseases that are specifically designed to cause death.

Reference is made to a licensed Novartis bird flu vaccine that killed 21 homeless people in Poland in the summer of 2008 and had as its "primary outcome measure" an "adverse events rate", thereby meeting the U.S. government's own definition of a bioweapon (a biological agent designed to cause an adverse events rate, i.e death or injury) with a delivery system (injection).

She alleges that the same complex of international pharmaceutical companies and international government agencies that have developed and released pandemic material have positioned themselves to profit from triggering the pandemic with contracts to supply vaccines. Media controlled by the group that is engineering the "swine flu" agenda is spreading misinformation to lull the people of the U.S. into taking the dangerous vaccine.

The people of the U.S. will suffer substantial and irreparable harm and injury if they are forced to take this unproven vaccine without their consent in accordance with the Model State Emergency Health Powers Act, National Emergency Act, National Security Presidential Directive/NSPD 51, Homeland Security Presidential Directive/HSPD-20, and the International Partnership on Avian and Pandemic Influenza.

In the U.S. since 2008, Burgermeister charges that those named in her allegations have implemented new and/or ac...

The patent is not for a vaccine FOR a genetically engineered virus, the genetically engineered virus IS the vaccine. The patent describes how you can genetically manipulate an existing virus to make a new attenuated one "capable of generating an immune response and creating immunity but not causing illness or causing fewer and/or less severe symptoms, i.e., the viruses have decreased virulence." [0023]

If the genetically engineered viruses that are described by this patent were "set loose" on the country... nothing would happen. That's because they are weakened and do not proliferate. By design.

That would mean wasting billions of dollars on a vaccine that did nothing, and I'm not buying into that. A vaccine is only useful if it is identical to a virus in the wild. For this vaccine to be useful, the same genetically engineered virus would have to be released.

That whole thing about playing with a virus to somehow miraculously create immunity for viruses which do not exist (or exist yet) is all smoke and mirrors. The immune system does not work that way, and it never has. I know it, they know it, and you ought to know it too.

By its very definition, a virus is something that replicates by design, and if it didn't, then the immune system would likely ignore it. That's why at best, weakened viruses are used in vaccines instead of dead ones. When they say a vaccine virus is "inactivated", it is part of the deceptive marketing games meant to make us feel safe. In fact, all vaccines have the potential to infect a person with the very disease that they are meant to stop. This, of course, means the release of this virus could have been accidental, and we know they were experimenting on pigs, where it supposedly originated. It is the sort of thing that is to be expected when people start playing God.

Sir,

"That whole thing about playing with a virus to somehow miraculously create immunity for viruses which do not exist (or exist yet) is all smoke and mirrors. "

This seems to be the source of your confusion. You think that the patent is somehow for a specific genetically engineered virus that is now - by some incredible coincidence - able to be used to protect against a virus that is prevalent today. Well, if that were the case I could see where your fear would be founded. But you really need to be able to read the patent. It is not referring to genetically engineered viruses that they somehow created and catalogued and were FIXED as of the application in 2005. No, "genetically engineered virus" refers to the product of a PROCESS they describe in the patent, a process that can be applied to any number of eligible viruses that existed at the time or could arise in the future. And yes, that process could potentially be used to create a genetically-attenuated version of 2009 H1N1 suitable for vaccines.

However, you need not worry about that just yet. This is not the method being used in today's H1N1 mist vaccines in any case. Just because someone got a patent on a process doesn't mean anyone has approvale to actually use that process to make vaccines. This is a novel proposal and even if it works (surprisingly, you don't have to prove something works to get a patent) an enormous amount of testing would still need to be conducted before it was implemented in production. Sort of like growing flu viruses in caterpillars instead of eggs. Interesting idea... but not likely to be in production anytime soon.

So call it "playing God" if you like. I, for one, am grateful for the scientists doing research in this area. There will come a day where we will need a very fast way to respond to a very deadly virus, and the existing, painfully slow, methods of creating vaccines will let far too many people die. God bless those who are devising new ways to deal with such a crisis.

The article above is incorrect in so many places, and now that I realize it is ALL over the conspiracy-web, I'll wrap it up with this post. Here are the errors and corrections:

"In other words, the makers of the Swine Flu Vaccine began the lengthy patenting process long before the Swine Flu supposedly existed". The patent applicants and assignees are not the "makers of the vaccine". And the patent has not even been granted yet. January 8, 2009 was the date the application was PUBLISHED, not the date the patent was granted. It still has not been granted.

"prior to any outbreaks in history"?? Huh? Swine flus have been around since 1918. Remember? And maybe the author should do a little reading (try the patent application, perhaps) about how prevalent - and scary - swine flu rightfully is. Such as section [0014].

"After all, Swine Flu, Avian Flu and human flu D.N.A. cannot naturally mix without destroying themselves." Yes, they can, and if the author had actually READ the patent she would know how and why. Hint: PIGS.

"Therefore, since the above patent is for a genetically engineered virus, then the virus spreading through the population would also have to be genetically engineered in an identical fashion." False, as repeatedly explained by various people here.

"This virus became weaker the longer that it was in 'existence' (unleashed). It was initially killing a lot of people in Mexico, but then the virus mutated, and it became much less harmful." Untrue. Genetic typing has shown that the virus has not significantly changed since Mexico.

"Therefore, it is unlikely that the Swine Flu Vaccine will be at all helpful against the current mutated strains." False. The H1N1 vaccine uses A/California/07/2009 (H1N1), which was first collected in California in April. The CDC weekly FluView report tracks the antigenic characterization of viruses collected each week. 99.7% of the viruses collected are still showing as related to A/California/07/2009 (H1N1). The vaccine still protects.

"The only question that remains is, was this bio-weapon attack against the public accidental, or intentional?" No, the only question that remains is, are you - the reader - going to get your information from real sources or from some ridiculous website where someone with too much free time and no sense can write anything they want. Conspiracy theory EQUALS coincidence theory most of the time... and neither one makes ANY sense at all when the alleged coincidences don't even exist.

So, the fact that the patent mentions the swine influenza virus multiple times (including in the title) has no bearing on this patent? Why exactly do you believe that they mention that virus, if they were patenting a method? Why would they mention the swine influenza virus a grand total of 715 times? You must have missed that when reading the patent.

You mention that the virus has not significantly changed since the outbreak in Mexico. Why don't you tell us just how significant the change has to be before exposure to the original virus no longer provides immunity?

Kate, please learn something about how the human immune system works before making a fool of yourself in public, or is it that you work for them? I notice how you label the alternative media and alternative medicine community as kooks to be dismissed and disrespected. So why exactly are you here? Something really does not compute with that. Why did you need to lie? Practically every assertion that you made can be easily disproven with 30 minutes on a search engine (or a basic health book), and I would begin that process if I did not have much more important things to do, and if I thought that most readers did not already see it for themselves. (For instance the 1918 flu was the SPANISH flu, NOT the swine flu ... and etc.) I don't know what brought you here, or what your agenda is, but it was a nice try, and I have much more confidence in the intelligence of our readership than you do. If this is all just crazy conspiracy stuff, then why are you so afraid of it? I have a couple of theories as to why that is. You just go ahead and insult us, call us all crazy, and laugh while you still can. Just remember that our side is beginning to win, and we are gaining strength every day. I know astroturf and damage control when I see it.

Have a nice day.

Maybe the (attenuated) virus is even worse. If the engineered virus causes a smaller response from the body, what's to say it does not simply live in the background (along with whatever else is there) causing slow havoc.

I cannot imagine why a few cases of H1N1 would get top news coverage and front page articles in the news.
Does this mean the Free press is not free any more!

"Therefore, it is unlikely that the Swine Flu Vaccine will be at all helpful against the current mutated strains." False. The H1N1 vaccine uses A/California/07/2009 (H1N1), which was first collected in California in April. The CDC weekly FluView report tracks the antigenic characterization of viruses collected each week. 99.7% of the viruses collected are still showing as related to A/California/07/2009 (H1N1). The vaccine still protects.

Okay Kate. Where did all the other flu go? I think it would be statistically impossible for such a 'dangerous' flu to have spread so rampantly that it now accounts for 99.7% of the reported virus samples collected, yet not cause the outbreak that the highly trained staff of the WHO warned us about. So really, which is it? We all need to be vaccinated to stop the spread of this danger, or we all need to be vaccinated because this danger is already 99.7% around us. Either way, you need to learn to lie better.

It sounds like such an obvious logical thing. Weaken the disease virus or bacteria and inoculate a human with it and his immune system will develop anti bodies for the full strength disease. Great idea, BUT NO ONE HAS PROVEN THAT. Start at the beginning instead of half way through. There are no clinical trial papers where they proved that a weak strain of any disease creates antibodies that will stop the full strength disease. Once more Medical Science fools you. Why don't you check it out?