Recent reports claiming that testimony at an Italy COVID Inquiry confirmed the "Trucks of Bergamo" carried 1 coffin each were not correct.
@jengleruk & I spoke w/the man whose testimony was misconstrued - and dug further into the event.
Here's what ppl should know..
1/🧵
First, a good translation of what Antonio Porto of Osa Polizia was saying on 19 November 2024 (h/t @T_Zanini) makes clear that Mr. Porto was reacting to information from elsewhere - not confirming numbers per se.
2/
Speaking to Mr. Porto w/the assistance of a translator (h/t @T_Zanini), we learned our inference was correct:
Porto was recalling what he & others had heard in a chat group from an officer in The Carabinieri who claimed to have been in Bergamo when the truck parade occurred.
3/
So Porto’s comments to the Italian COVID Commission were hearsay -
He was not presenting what he had heard as evidence of the trucks’ cargo and has no way to confirm if what the Carabinieri officer told the chat group nearly five years ago was true.
4/
During our conversation w/him last month, Antonio Porto called the Bergamo truck processional a “mediatico” (media spectacle) and said the formation of one truck following another slowly could not have been a mistake.
“A parade comes from an order,” he told us, “and the only ones who can know the truth about the number of trucks and number of bodies are in the military.”
5/
No matter how many coffins or bodies the trucks were or weren’t carrying, Porto said the purpose of the parade was pure spectacle.
“If they [the government] didn't want to get to be seen, and they didn't want to create fear in a population, they would just go one by one.”
(We agree.)
6/
You might be thinking, "Does it even matter who or what was inside the trucks of Bergamo?"
In some ways, no.
Their purpose as propaganda was served.
Even if the vehicles were empty, it doesn’t change the effect. The damage was done. #missionaccomplished
Many people who reacted to “one coffin per truck” on social media (e.g., Robin Monotti) were quick to grasp the “psy-op” side of the processional, are not quite grasping what relatively empty vehicles imply about the total deaths that allegedly occurred.
1-6 bodies in 10-12 trucks like these ⬇️ is not enough to substantiate the scale & timing of purported death event.
8/
We are talking about almost a month of deaths in the triple digits.
Official data show 265 deaths occurring on 18 March 2020, the day of the parade - and excess of 2,000+ deaths to that point.
Many more trucks should have been needed, if this event occurred as shown.
9/
Where is all the footage from smartphones - and week after week of photos - showing this kind of death disaster?
With a 600%+ increase in one month, what would we expect in terms of documentation?
(More than what exists, that's for sure...)
10/
On 27 March 2020, the NYT (and other outlets) reported the Bergamo area had "officially" seen 1,969 deaths.
No cause(s) named and no statistical context was given
Bergamo officials were saying at the time the actual toll could be four times higher. 🙄
11/
Real-time death reporting is impossible, of course; there are always delays.
So authorities noting that the actual number could be higher is expected & reasonable.
A toll four times as high, however, is unreasonable and not well-corroborated by eyewitness accounts then or since.
12/
~2,000 deaths in less than a month was more than 150% above normal.
Yet officials were saying the toll was closer to 8,000
...as though 10x the normal rate could have happened without thousands of Bergamo province residents speaking to media about what was happening...
...and/or self-recording testimonies and videos of scenes far more consistent with a war-like mass casualty event?
13/
However disturbing to contemplate, it seems possible the military coming in and taking away bodies for cremation could be part of a well-crafted cover story —
...one that helps hide the fact that nowhere near as much excess death occurred on the ground in March and April 2020 as spreadsheets claim.
14/
Before speaking to us, Antonio Porto hadn't considered whether the Bergamo curve could be fraudulent and "could have been all a setup."
He agreed death records substantiating the event should be made public.
15/
Full article on our conversation with Antonio Porto about the Bergamo trucks and death toll here:
To be clear, we are NOT saying there was no "excess" death in Bergamo province during March/April 2020.
(Indeed, I've said there was straight-up Democide)
We are saying there is very little chance it was to the tune 6,200 extra deaths in less than 2 months.
Q: How do you stage an attack by a sudden-spreading novel virus?
It cannot be done using care homes alone. You need hospitals.
Here's the basic formula... 🧵
Step 1: PCR-test patients who are already in the hospital for a newly-named, co-opted ‘virus’ or fragment of something that has been detectable in humans/living things for a while.*
*Use the highest possible cycle thresholds, ignore the lack of specificity, and promote the ‘positive’ result as binary & diagnostic.
Step 2: Announce the positive tests as “cases” of a new disease with no known treatments.
"Where it comes to acute respiratory illnesses, the published clinical efforts intended to demonstrate that transmission of the symptoms of illness from a sick person can occur to a well person have all failed, from 1918 to 2024."
🧵
"These illnesses are not contagious.
Influenza of course exists. However, it’s not contagious nor is it infectious (the latter follows from the former)."
✅
2/
"'Flu vaccines' are a multi decade fraud. They don’t help, because these illnesses aren’t caused by airborne, submicroscopic, infectious particles termed 'viruses'.
In this sense, there’s no scientific evidence for their existence. Every “pillar” that is claimed to show that they do exist is also fraud."
Q: What did the CIA formally say yesterday about the 'origins of SARS-CoV-2'?
A: Absolutely nothing.
🧵
The agency's statement was apparently sent by an unnamed spokesperson to reporters via email, per the LA Times.
2/
The most complete version of quoted material I can cobble together is this:
“CIA assesses with low confidence that a research-related origin of the COVID-19 pandemic is more likely than a natural origin based on the available body of reporting."
“CIA continues to assess that both research-related and natural origin scenarios of the COVID-19 pandemic remain plausible.”
[CIA has] low confidence in this judgement” and will evaluate “any available credible new intelligence reporting or open-source information that could change CIA’s assessment.”