Court rules: Bill Gates, George Soros Criminally Liable For “Creating” COVID-19

Status
Not open for further replies.
Peruvian Court Rules That Bill Gates, George Soros Criminally Liable For “Creating” COVID-19 Pandemic
https://en-volve.com/2021/02/03/per...inally-liable-for-creating-covid-19-pandemic/

Interesting — but with what verifiable evidence? A bunch of circumstantial bits and pieces don't really make a valid case. If we're going to talk speculation based on circumstantial evidence, it seems to me that the CCP and the Wuhan lab are are more likely suspects. There's been rumblings about Gates and others including Fauci sponsoring research there, but if the CCP had evidence of that, they probably would have exposed it to save themselves from the blame, and there's no reason to think that the CCP wouldn't have such evidence. They were in complete control of the whole thing.

I suppose one could suggest that Gates and his pals setup the CCP to take the fall in order to cover-up their dirty work, but that seems like a stretch. The theory that makes most sense to me is that virologists working for the CCP created SARS-CoV-2 by modifying existing strains found in bat caves in a manner that wouldn't look obviously engineered, e.g. by mutating it in animals at the lab.

Then either by accident or design it was transmitted to several victims who the CCP knew were boarding flights out of Wuhan. Along the way a few people in Wuhan also became infected and it started to spread there. This was all either done on purpose or allowed to happen because it facilitates the CCP's plan to destabilize the West, take back Taiwan, and control the South China Sea.

The next most likely scenario IMO is that it actually is just a zoonotic transmission that somehow made it to the Wuhan market and it all spread from there while the CCP tried to contain it and ultimately failed — but I have a hard time buying that explanation. No zoonotic transmission has been confirmed in tests that have been done on numerous animals.

The whole world depopulation conspiracy theory is too far out there for me to take seriously in terms of purposefully creating SARS-CoV-2 and releasing it around the world. However I wouldn't put it past any of them, including the vaccine companies to exploit the pandemic to the hilt – and beyond, while raking in trillions of dollars. I think they knew it was coming sooner or later and were banking on it with a strategy in place. Whether or not they actually created the virus and set it in motion is actually irrelevant. They're all players regardless.
 
Last edited:
Interesting — but with what verifiable evidence? A bunch of circumstantial bits and pieces don't really make a valid case. If we're going to talk speculation based on circumstantial evidence, it seems to me that the CCP and the Wuhan lab are are more likely suspects. There's been rumblings about Gates and others including Fauci sponsoring research there, but if the CCP had evidence of that, they probably would have exposed it to save themselves from the blame, and there's no reason to think that the CCP wouldn't have such evidence. They were in complete control of the whole thing.

I suppose one could suggest that Gates and his pals setup the CCP to take the fall in order to cover-up their dirty work, but that seems like a stretch. The theory that makes most sense to me is that virologists working for the CCP created SARS-CoV-2 by modifying existing strains found in bat caves in a manner that wouldn't look obviously engineered, e.g. by mutating it in animals at the lab.

Then either by accident or design it was transmitted to several victims who the CCP knew were boarding flights out of Wuhan. Along the way a few people in Wuhan also became infected and it started to spread there. This was all either done on purpose or allowed to happen because it facilitates the CCP's plan to destabilize the West, take back Taiwan, and control the South China Sea.

The next most likely scenario IMO is that it actually is just a zoonotic transmission that somehow made it to the Wuhan market and it all spread from there while the CCP tried to contain it and ultimately failed — but I have a hard time buying that explanation. No zoonotic transmission has been confirmed in tests that have been done on numerous animals.

The whole world depopulation conspiracy theory is too far out there for me to take seriously in terms of purposefully creating SARS-CoV-2 and releasing it around the world. However I wouldn't put it past any of them, including the vaccine companies to exploit the pandemic to the hilt – and beyond, while raking in trillions of dollars. I think they knew it was coming sooner or later and were banking on it with a strategy in place. Whether or not they actually created the virus and set it in motion is actually irrelevant. They're all players regardless.

Population Management is not the main goal of any of these Oligarchs. It's literally just a small component of their vision for the future.

Are you familiar with the Kardashev Scale?
Type 0 - A civilization that harnesses the energy of its home planet, but not to its full potential just yet.
Type 1 - A civilization that is capable of harnessing the total energy of its home planet.
Type 2 - An interstellar civilization, capable of harnessing the total energy output of a star.
And so on..

The Oligarchs somehow came to a conclusion that for humanity to survive into the future, they need to implement some heavy control from the top down. They believe they know better than the rest of humanity and don't need our permission. Therefore, the main focus of any world wide implementation needed to rely almost completely upon convincing a large percent of the world to believe in Oligarchs (regardless of the plan). Hence all the sensationalism.

Back in March/April 2020, I had a 2-3 second mini vision where I waking dreamed of the US military learning of China having a plan to release the virus, but then thwarting it by having an insider in the Wuhan lab trip someone who was carrying a tray of virus (comic image). Well to this day, I can't say that's been ruled out. If the Oligarchs intended on guiding Humanity into the next phase - Automated Human Management - what better way to implement it than via dumping Covid into a bat cave where it would jump to humans and then goto planned rollout?

If the Oligarchs believe that they need to get the population down to 500 million before they can get to "Type 1 Civilization" then the population reduction is just a tiny part of the plan.

I think conspiracy theorists like myself have an acute sense for this, but the problem is we often scream wolf (de-population), when in fact the wolves are just in the process of being bred (New World Order).
 
Last edited:
That's from a more than a year ago,, and that comes from the judge who was retiring and decided to retire with a bang. So, unfortunately,, it's a big nothingburger.
 
[QUOTE="Robbedigital, post: 159980, member: 9737"]I think conspiracy theorists like myself have an acute sense for this, but the problem is we often scream wolf (de-population), when in fact the wolves are just in the process of being bred (New World Order).[/QUOTE]

The ‘like’ was for you openly stating this. ;)

I don’t mind being called one, although I don’t follow or agree with that many CTs. I’m willing to be called one because of the mainstream opposition to that type of thinker, who I think is somehow very important.

Having been effectively banned from PsiQuest, as well as another forum that I once enjoyed, I’m learning that we should be much more open than we are, the universe is much more than we could ever know, and our fellow humans capable of doing things they do not realise they are doing. While people may see my viewpoint as extremely cynical, I tend to see it as simply ‘what is’ - not what I’d like it to be. Imo we have to be able to look at our dark side and come to some sort of peace with it, before we can progress. Even if this place really is ‘just’ a school - it’s not just for shit & giggles.
 
Last edited:
And still the REAL culprits remain free and clear.
We're about to see a massive crash of the economy. It's not Bill Gates. It's not Soros.
It's out of control Corporate Capitalism and the Fed.
GREAT conversation here.
https://player.fm/series/krystal-kyle-friends/episode-55-audio-christopher-leonard

Listening now. about half way thru.
Skipped past the stuff about Candace Owens where Kyle and Krystal were obviously strawmanning.. It's stupidly obvious that the "principle" which causes people to reject the vax program is the program, much more so than the vax itself.

In response to your assertion,
Who specifically do you believe can be trusted with the task of dismantling the failed system and building it back better?
My argument would be that just because someone has accurately identified the problem (and/or the source of the problem) doesn't mean their resolution will automatically be equal or better to the existing system. Not to mention their method of dismantling the existing system.

E/g: An astronomer sees a meteor headed for Earth, doesn't mean he should be the guy charged with the task of figuring out how to eliminate it.

What's the metric for demonstrating their solution won't be worse than the problem?
 
Personally, I tend to skip most of the discussions the hosts have before and after. Sometimes they have something interesting, most of the time its rambling, and I am more interested in the meat. I actually trim that part off before I send it to my parents who find it interesting.
In this case, Candace Owens is pretty much a lying shill if anyone has ever met one. Just see her in any interview and she spouts talking points nothing of values.
The question you ask is baffling to me. "Who specifically do you believe can be trusted with the task..."
No one. I don't trust people to run the world. The very idea has been proven to be false.
A democracy by its very nature means we don't trust people. We entrust them to do their jobs.

And one of the greatest dodges someone can have from making any difference in the world, is the phrase "What are your parameters?"

Effective government is no different than effective masonry, effective woodworking, effective ditch-digging, effective bridge-building, etc...
You get experienced people with effective long and short term plans, the best resources, and you go towards creating something that will be flexible, and effective.

Every American I know goes on ad naseum about how brilliant The Founders were, and frankly, they were pretty astonishingly clever, but not because America was created in a day by one person. It took a number of people arguing, and thinking, and modifying (amendments) and still there were flaws.
But they didn't sit there and go. "Who would we trust to make a new nation?" and stop before they began.

None of the above has anything to do with the actual problems with the Feds grabbing control. The wealthy deciding they were going to control the economy artificially though. So, are you saying, you think the top Billionaires should (by Divine Right of Kings I suppose?) constantly run socialism for the rich and rugged individualism for the poor as they've been doing?
I'm curious as to your answer.
J
 
Personally, I tend to skip most of the discussions the hosts have before and after. Sometimes they have something interesting, most of the time its rambling, and I am more interested in the meat. I actually trim that part off before I send it to my parents who find it interesting.
In this case, Candace Owens is pretty much a lying shill if anyone has ever met one. Just see her in any interview and she spouts talking points nothing of values.
The question you ask is baffling to me. "Who specifically do you believe can be trusted with the task..."
No one. I don't trust people to run the world. The very idea has been proven to be false.
A democracy by its very nature means we don't trust people. We entrust them to do their jobs.

And one of the greatest dodges someone can have from making any difference in the world, is the phrase "What are your parameters?"

Effective government is no different than effective masonry, effective woodworking, effective ditch-digging, effective bridge-building, etc...
You get experienced people with effective long and short term plans, the best resources, and you go towards creating something that will be flexible, and effective.

Every American I know goes on ad naseum about how brilliant The Founders were, and frankly, they were pretty astonishingly clever, but not because America was created in a day by one person. It took a number of people arguing, and thinking, and modifying (amendments) and still there were flaws.
But they didn't sit there and go. "Who would we trust to make a new nation?" and stop before they began.

None of the above has anything to do with the actual problems with the Feds grabbing control. The wealthy deciding they were going to control the economy artificially though. So, are you saying, you think the top Billionaires should (by Divine Right of Kings I suppose?) constantly run socialism for the rich and rugged individualism for the poor as they've been doing?
I'm curious as to your answer.
J
100% agree.
The purpose of my question "who would you trust" was not intended to imply that one person could solve everything, or that you could pick a perfect president. Rather, I'm wondering who you think would be a thought leader in regard to the type of solution you believe is needed?
 
100% agree.
The purpose of my question "who would you trust" was not intended to imply that one person could solve everything, or that you could pick a perfect president. Rather, I'm wondering who you think would be a thought leader in regard to the type of solution you believe is needed?

Gotcha. Sorry if that came out terse. I am pretty baked from my day online working and my Masters.
I have a number of people that I would love to pick their brains.
Thomas Frank is right up there. Historian. Journalist. Author. He has a deep understanding of populism and what's worked. You might be familiar with "What's the Matter with Kansas".
Another great thinker from economist side which is a lateral move from the typical Ayn Rand followers was Karl Polanyi. Fascinating different take on things.
Another place I looked at for different ways to consider a modern world, and I think Alex would be fascinated in this, , as a tech-fan I think he'd appreciate the Venus Project https://www.thevenusproject.com/

We need a series of thinkers who aren't so much married to their own distinct ideologies but rather who can find clever and innovative ways of bringing different ideas to the table.
For example, I often cite social-democracies because there's a good opportunity to look for what works best in a public and private relationship. Some things are much better handled by the free market, other things better handled through government.

Matt Taibbi is one of the best folks who has understood the corruption of Wall Street (and it looks like this author has done a deep dive in that area as well)

David Sirota is another great resource for all things political (he was also an Executive Producer for "Don't looked up" which was Netflix's biggest winner in the history of its ratings.)

Who else? Hell, I'd be interested in what Professor Richard Wollfe for alternative worker-driven legislation, Chris Hedges for international directions for politics, Steven Donzinger could give incredible advice on cleaning up the court system, Jordan Chariton for journalistic ethics and direction of the press, Ken Klippenstein for inside baseball on media and politics, Briahna Joy Gray for how you have strong interviews with people you don't agree with but still build respect and understanding and coalition building, Hell Julian Assange and Ed Snowden for Deep State reform and personal privacy issues. Dan Carlin could certainly bring a historical perspective as well...
I could go on and on. But we'd need a series of groups that would come together, and brainstorm from their particular area of expertise
Then you go about bringing in structural experts and start looking at how you can take a broken system, fix it for now, and find a way to provide a 20-50 year plan to create a system that's much more effective. Doesn't just end up creating Gilded Age 2.0 but rather more like something that had America running as effectively as they did in the 50's where middle class wealth was way up, and that was the engine of the economy and not massive corporations or billionaires.
The more money can be engendered in the hands of Americans, and goods and services are produced in local economies, the better it is for everyone, for the environment, for sustainable small business growth.

The Fed is a monster that has to be slain or brought to bay at one point, and now that process will cause enormous pain to everyone involved, except those at the very top.

So, I guess what I would prefer to "who" is "how".
When we use questions like "how" and "what" we are operating on solutions.
In my opinion at least,
J
P.S. The forum is buggy right now. I click on the link notice I get and it just hangs.
 
Gotcha. Sorry if that came out terse. I am pretty baked from my day online working and my Masters.
I have a number of people that I would love to pick their brains.
Thomas Frank is right up there. Historian. Journalist. Author. He has a deep understanding of populism and what's worked. You might be familiar with "What's the Matter with Kansas".
Another great thinker from economist side which is a lateral move from the typical Ayn Rand followers was Karl Polanyi. Fascinating different take on things.
Another place I looked at for different ways to consider a modern world, and I think Alex would be fascinated in this, , as a tech-fan I think he'd appreciate the Venus Project https://www.thevenusproject.com/

We need a series of thinkers who aren't so much married to their own distinct ideologies but rather who can find clever and innovative ways of bringing different ideas to the table.
For example, I often cite social-democracies because there's a good opportunity to look for what works best in a public and private relationship. Some things are much better handled by the free market, other things better handled through government.

Matt Taibbi is one of the best folks who has understood the corruption of Wall Street (and it looks like this author has done a deep dive in that area as well)

David Sirota is another great resource for all things political (he was also an Executive Producer for "Don't looked up" which was Netflix's biggest winner in the history of its ratings.)

Who else? Hell, I'd be interested in what Professor Richard Wollfe for alternative worker-driven legislation, Chris Hedges for international directions for politics, Steven Donzinger could give incredible advice on cleaning up the court system, Jordan Chariton for journalistic ethics and direction of the press, Ken Klippenstein for inside baseball on media and politics, Briahna Joy Gray for how you have strong interviews with people you don't agree with but still build respect and understanding and coalition building, Hell Julian Assange and Ed Snowden for Deep State reform and personal privacy issues. Dan Carlin could certainly bring a historical perspective as well...
I could go on and on. But we'd need a series of groups that would come together, and brainstorm from their particular area of expertise
Then you go about bringing in structural experts and start looking at how you can take a broken system, fix it for now, and find a way to provide a 20-50 year plan to create a system that's much more effective. Doesn't just end up creating Gilded Age 2.0 but rather more like something that had America running as effectively as they did in the 50's where middle class wealth was way up, and that was the engine of the economy and not massive corporations or billionaires.
The more money can be engendered in the hands of Americans, and goods and services are produced in local economies, the better it is for everyone, for the environment, for sustainable small business growth.

The Fed is a monster that has to be slain or brought to bay at one point, and now that process will cause enormous pain to everyone involved, except those at the very top.

So, I guess what I would prefer to "who" is "how".
When we use questions like "how" and "what" we are operating on solutions.
In my opinion at least,
J
P.S. The forum is buggy right now. I click on the link notice I get and it just hangs.
Beautiful. I'll have to check out a lot of those names.
That said.. I doubt the You who wrote this response would give two seconds time to the You who posts all the quick little jabs at Capitalism and Muh-Climate-Change. All due respect.

I believe Joe Rogan and the IDW fellows have been (For years now) setting the ground work for the type of platform that will bring those type of conversations to the masses. If we've learned anything from Capitalism/US Constitution it would be the benefits of populism.
It they're allowed to bypass the populous component and force a "special club" rule, I call it a failure and would expect we find ourselves 20 years later right back where we started. I think what Joe Rogan the the IDW types are doing is crucial. But the MSM is going to paint it like murder, cuz, it is murder of the MSM.

I had a thought experiment this weekend about the "pandemic". The idea was that the greatest voices we have (Not minds necessarily) to share a stage with a moderator. Very much like a mock presidential preliminary debate, except not politicians. With a stated goal of brandishing ideas, and placing them infront of their opponents for dissection.

Cheers
 
Beautiful. I'll have to check out a lot of those names.
That said.. I doubt the You who wrote this response would give two seconds time to the You who posts all the quick little jabs at Capitalism and Muh-Climate-Change. All due respect.

I believe Joe Rogan and the IDW fellows have been (For years now) setting the ground work for the type of platform that will bring those type of conversations to the masses. If we've learned anything from Capitalism/US Constitution it would be the benefits of populism.
It they're allowed to bypass the populous component and force a "special club" rule, I call it a failure and would expect we find ourselves 20 years later right back where we started. I think what Joe Rogan the the IDW types are doing is crucial. But the MSM is going to paint it like murder, cuz, it is murder of the MSM.

I had a thought experiment this weekend about the "pandemic". The idea was that the greatest voices we have (Not minds necessarily) to share a stage with a moderator. Very much like a mock presidential preliminary debate, except not politicians. With a stated goal of brandishing ideas, and placing them infront of their opponents for dissection.

Cheers

That's probably fair. I spend less time typing out the long-form of my thoughts here because I don't normally have the time.
I think Joe Rogan actually represents some of the best aspects of the way Progressivism was for me growing up. Free speech. Free exchange
of ideas, and a consistent challenging of what I think to be stayed and true. Rogan would have even voted for Bernie too.

I think about the pandemic and what it has an hasn't achieved. It has achieved highlighting the deep divisions between the American political binary solutions. It hasn't achieved the "Great Reset" everyone claims it would have.
It has achieved a miracle of vaccination development timeframes. It hasn't achieved the great mass deaths many claimed it would.
It has succeeded in making the wealthy wealthier and the poor poorer, identifying more cracks in the way capitalism is done in America, but it hasn't encouraged anyone to break America apart and make it some great communist country. People want good jobs. They want houses. They want education. And they want their cell phones and streaming services.

In short, I was thinking that if the "Globalists" were attempting to kill off those who oppose them and have those who would agree with them stick around so they could manipulate them, they did the wrong thing. It would be smarter to have the vaccine effective, and manipulate those who would trust them into taking it, and have those who would never do so, die.

That would be the most effective. Kill off the people who are going to defy you.
Why doesn't anyone think of that?
J
 
I was thinking that if the "Globalists" were attempting to kill off those who oppose them and have those who would agree with them stick around so they could manipulate them, they did the wrong thing. It would be smarter to have the vaccine effective, and manipulate those who would trust them into taking it, and have those who would never do so, die.

That would be the most effective. Kill off the people who are going to defy you.
Why doesn't anyone think of that?
J

This "kill-shot" idea spawned from the connection between the Oligarchs and the Georgia Guidestones recommended ideal Earth Pop of 500,000,000. This number is recommended if society ever "accidentally" breaks down and has to be built back better.
Realistically this would be part of the purpose of the MRNA tech - to heal all diseases and ultimately get a handle of the rate of population and ahve the ability to steer it toward that ideal 500mil.
So the CT people get confused by the force which has accompanied the vax rollout and auto-extrapolated to assume it must be a direct goal to use the vax to achieve 500mil immediately. Anyone who has given due thought to it would realize that the Oligarch have no benefit in a crash that would kill 7billion in 1 year, just based on the nuclear fallout alone.

But to circle back, yes, their later goal would be to kill off the people who are going to defy them by means of shutting off their access to goods and services, not by the shot, but for not taking the shot.
 
But legally they can't shut them off from access to goods and services, only the amenities.
Hell, the Mennonites have done just fine without 'em!
J
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top