In the @COVIDSelect document released last week there were embedded images containing previously unreleased emails.
One of them blows this whole thing open, and it's from #BatBumEddie Holmes.
"Pressure from on high".
WHO THE HELL IS THAT?
@COVIDSelect It's not possible that Eddie Holmes (affiliated with EcoHealth, Fudan university and the CCP) could have anybody "on high" outside of this group.
They were literally the high priests of virology.
Fauci, Rambaut, Andersen, Bedford, Farrar.
@COVIDSelect @AGHuff It doesn't matter of course. This single email tells you why @edwardcholmes refused multiple FOI requests to the University of Sydney and why he was instructed to retain his emails. He is the person running the show, on behalf of the "on high" priest.
Or priestess.
@COVIDSelect @AGHuff @edwardcholmes And when #BatBumEddie's cover story failed, his buddy #WuhanDom was brought in to continue the lie.
@COVIDSelect @AGHuff @edwardcholmes Whoever on the @COVIDSelect it was that made the PDF forgot that Acrobat only performs a virtual crop of embedded images.
So the full images remained in the document.
In the following tweets I will be posting all the uncovered images.
@CharlesRixey @COVIDSelect Not only did Holmes and Lipkin know that GOF research was going on, but they knew #ProximalOrigins was a lie to cover it up.
"We should add [Ian] as an author. Safety in numbers... he is involved in the GOF"
What @TheBurninBeard is saying here is that the clinical samples that had "COVID" also had gene signatures of Mycoplasma fermentans, a US military pathogen that can be used as a vector to carry viral clones.
@SabinehazanMD found it too.
🧵
#spraygate @BrokenTruthTV
Can you see that Norman Pieniazek, who headed up the CDC's research division at the time that the @CDCgov sent biological weapons to Iraq to start a war, took himself out of this thread?
Every vaccine scientist will try to convince you that the drop in u25 cancers was due to the vaccine when it was merely due to the change in screening.
But check out the HUGE RISE in 25+ cancers. This pattern is repeated in Scotland and Australia where similar changes to the screening age were made a few years after the introduction of coerced vaccination, obfuscating the figures to hide a scandalous rise in 25-29 age cervical cancers after the vaccine rollout.
For clarity most cancers in this age group are early and detected on screening before they become advanced. Moving the screening age meant that they were diagnosed later and therefore in an older age bracket.
The big red arrow is pointing to the preinvasive diagnoses which tend to mirror the actual cancers - the upper chart was too busy.
Here is the same from the OP with arrows showing both cancer (above) and precancer (below) which both rose significantly after the vaccine rollout
And here is the same data from Cancer Research UK (smoothed) showing a doubling of cancer rates in the over 25s for at least 5 years after the vaccine rollout. cancerresearchuk.org/health-profess…