The COVID-19 Chronicles: Part 2 – The Suppression of Treatments and the Push for a Vaccine

Welcome to part two of this COVID-19 series, colloquially known as Part 2: HCQ Boogaloo.

What is HCQ you ask?

HCQ is hydroxychloroquine, a malaria drug currently being used by many frontline doctors to treat COVID-19, and as you might have guessed from the title, is currently under attack from the Legacy Media (Outdated Corporate Media) and Medical Mafia, despite the positive results it has been showing.

Not only has HCQ been in the main stream media’s (MSM) crosshairs, but a variety of other treatments also, such as Chlorine Dioxide, a lesser known COVID-19 treatment which has been showing great results in countries trialing it.

In fact, if it isn’t a fast tracked COVID-19 vaccine or an expensive new drug, the MSM either don’t want to know about it or are trying to vilify it.

This article, like Part 1, will chronologically step through recent events to highlight the fallacies being propagated by these institutions, and show, without a doubt, that a COVID-19 vaccine is the only treatment they want rolled out, despite the many red flags that come from fast tracking a vaccine process that should take 15-20 years. We will also touch on various aspects of the Medical Mafia which will lead into part three of this article series.

Before we move on, I recommended that you check out Part 1 of this series. In it, we established the following:

  1. The artificial inflation of COVID-19 deaths
  2. The use of blatant propaganda from the MSM regarding COVID-19
  3. And the Censorship of dissenting voices by Big Tech

This article will continue to build on these points and is segmented into the following:

  1. The Suppression of Potential COVID-19 Treatments
    • Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ)
    • Chlorine Dioxide (Miracle Mineral Solution)
    • UV Light Therapy
    • Intravenous Vitamin C
  2. The Rush for a COVID-19 Vaccine

Like my previous articles, links to content sources will be embedded in images. For any YouTube videos I embed I will try to provide links to their BitChute counterparts. This is due to YouTube’s egregious censorship of COVID-19 information (and many other subjects that go against their ever growing and very vague “polices”).

The Suppression of Potential COVID-19 Treatments

Just as a note before we jump in, I am using the term ‘suppression’ in a very generalised way. The first two treatments in this section I would argue are actively being suppressed, while the latter two, simply ignored.

Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ)

On March 19, 2020, President Trump directed the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to explore a malarial drug known as hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) to potentially combat COVID-19:

This decision came after other countries were reportedly having success using HCQ.

Not long after this suggestion, the Legacy Media was in attack mode.

On April 8, 2020, NBC News was discussing the potential deadly side effects of HCQ:

Many other news outlets at this time were also parroting the potential heart risks of HCQ. This was due to the fact that HCQ can increase a heart’s QT interval.

A QT interval is essentially the ‘wavelength’ of a heartbeat measured on an electrocardiogram:

A prolonged QT interval as discussed by the American Council on Science and Health (ACSH), can sometimes cause a condition called torsades de pointes (TdP) which can occasionally lead to cardiac death. However, an increased QT is not a new phenomenon with HCQ, as it has been on the market for well over 40 years to treat malaria.

So why is it such a big deal now? This is old science and old news.

Well, as pointed out by the ACSH, azithromycin, which is an antibacterial medication often used in conjunction with HCQ (and Zinc), can also cause a prolonged QT interval.

So it was this combination of HCQ + azithromycin that led to concerns of a higher risk of an increased QT interval and potentially heart problems.

However, as we will get to later, this was a lot of hype and fear-mongering.

On April 21, 2020, one month after President Trump suggested using HCQ, the Legacy Media continued their attack, pointing to the dangers of this drug:

“More deaths, no benefit”.

Isn’t it interesting how all these reporters came to the same conclusion, used the same keywords in their headlines, point to the same study and published their articles all within a few hours of one other… It’s almost as if they are coordinating to ‘flood the zone’ with a particular narrative…

The study they all point to was published on April 21, 2020:

The conclusion from the study:

“In this study, we found no evidence that use of hydroxychloroquine, either with or without azithromycin, reduced the risk of mechanical ventilation in patients hospitalized with Covid-19. An association of increased overall mortality was identified in patients treated with hydroxychloroquine alone. These findings highlight the importance of awaiting the results of ongoing prospective, randomized, controlled studies before widespread adoption of these drugs.”

From this conclusion, it seems pretty clear cut what the results are; HCQ is not effective and very dangerous.

Why would Trump suggest such a dangerous drug?

Well, first of all, there was a report published all the way back in 2005, through the National Institute of health (NIH) that shows Choroquine’s potential:

Important to note its use as both a prophylactic (preventative) and therapeutic.

And second of all, there were reports from other countries showing it’s effectiveness.

On April 27, 2020, One News Now published an article discussing the flaws in the April 21, 2020, study:

From the article (emphasis mine):

“Dr. Didier Raoult, the Anthony Fauci of France, had such spectacular success using HCQ to treat victims of SARS-CoV-2 that he said way back on February 25 that “it’s game over” for coronavirus.

He and a team of researchers reported that the use of HCQ administered with both azithromycin and zinc cured 79 of 80 patients with only “rare and minor” adverse events. “In conclusion,” these researchers write, “we confirm the efficacy of hydroxychloroquine associated with azithromycin in the treatment of COVID-19 and its potential effectiveness in the early impairment of contagiousness.”

The highly-publicized VA study that purported to show HCQ was ineffective showed nothing of the sort. HCQ wasn’t administered until the patients were virtually on their deathbeds when research indicates it should be prescribed as soon as symptoms are apparent. Plus, HCQ was administered without azithromycin and zinc, which form the cocktail that makes it supremely effective. At-risk individuals need to receive the HCQ cocktail at the first sign of symptoms.”

So we can see some cracks starting to emerge in the study frantically pointed to by the MSM. It seems that HCQ was given to patients that were virtually on their deathbed, when HCQ is more effective when administered at early stages (during viral replication). Not only this, but France was having success with HCQ as early as February, 2020.

Let’s go back to the MSM articles touting “No Benefit, More Deaths” for a minute, and take a look at what they were saying about the study:

From The Associated Press (emphasis mine):

“The nationwide study was not a rigorous experiment. But with 368 patients, it’s the largest look so far of hydroxychloroquine with or without the antibiotic azithromycin for COVID-19, which has killed more than 171,000 people as of Tuesday.

The study was posted on an online site for researchers and has not been reviewed by other scientists. Grants from the National Institutes of Health and the University of Virginia paid for the work.”

From Fox News (emphasis mine):

“The research, which was published in the medRxiv online depository, evaluated data from 368 COVID-19 patients. The study, which was paid for by grants from the National Institutes of Health and the University of Virginia, has not been peer-reviewed.”

OK, so it wasn’t rigorous, hadn’t been peer reviewed and was funded by the NIH.

Actually, the peer review thing doesn’t bother me, generally because your peers go through the same corrupt system as you, end up in the same established line of thought as you and are scared to lose their license just like you (for saying something that goes against established line of thinking).

On April 28, 2020, the Queensland Government in Australia banned taking HCQ as a preventative for COVID-19:


On April 29, 2020, a study was published investigating QT intervals with respect to COVID-19 patients using HCQ and Azithromycin:

It concludes:

“In the largest reported cohort of COVID-19 patients to date treated with chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine {plus minus} azithromycin, no instances of TdP or arrhythmogenic death were reported. Although use of these medications resulted in QT prolongation, clinicians seldomly needed to discontinue therapy. Further study of the need for QT interval monitoring is needed before final recommendations can be made.”

So, in this largest reported group of COVID-19 patients being treated with HCQ and azithromycin, no instances of TdP or arrhythmogenic death were reported.

Seems like the Legacy Media were up to their usual ‘fear and hype’ tricks.

On May 3, 2020, The Disruptive Physician says he has been having success with HCQ:

On May 10, 2020, it was reported that the number of HCQ prescriptions had exploded in France:

On May 15, 2020, @VincentCrypt46 shared a Fox News segment discussing how HCQ is a cheap and effective treatment:

Since this post was removed by Twitter, here is the interview:

While I am not necessarily a huge fan of pharmaceuticals, I think there is a lot of validity in this treatment. Particularly because it has been on the market for over 40 years, is cheap, and can be rolled out immediately.

Which makes you wonder why the Legacy Media would carpet bomb this potential treatment with charged language:

“More Deaths, No benefit”

Which clearly isn’t the case.

This is classic propaganda, and here is why:

  1. ‘Flooding the space’ (with a narrative) helps manufacture consensus (See Asch Conformity Experiments)
  2. Repetition helps create new neural pathways (See Neuroscience)
  3. Catering to human instincts, more specifically the fear of death, makes people more suggestible to solutions that will ‘save them’

“The most brilliant propagandist technique will yield no success unless one fundamental principle is borne in mind constantly – it must confine itself to a few points and repeat them over and over.”

― Joseph Goebbels (Nazi politician and Reich Minister of Propaganda)

From the very get go, as soon as President Trump mentioned this treatment, it’s like they were waiting for something ‘solid’ to counter the suggestion, and then boom, a month later there is this suspicious looking study that they all point to.

On May 20, 2020, President Trump announced that he himself, had been taking HCQ:

Leading by example, perhaps? A way to directly contradict the Legacy Media’s propaganda?

On the same day, Q points out that Costa Rica is using HCQ successfully and that it was used in Shanghai as the first line of treatment:

On May 22, 2020, the Lancet published a study that links HCQ to an increased risk of death in COVID-19 patients:

On the same day, Q linked us to a tweet indicating HCQ is to be given proactively to more than 40,000 healthcare workers in the UK:

Since @TruthHammer888’s account was suspended after Twitter’s Qanon censorship rampage, here is a bit more info:

But I thought there was “No Benefit, More Deaths” using HCQ?

On May 28, 2020, @Wyn1745 shared a portion of a Fleccas Talk Interview with Dr. Simone Gold, where she discusses how the California State Medical Board was putting pressure on physicians not to prescribe HCQ:

Since @Wyn1745 was suspended by Twitter, you can watch the short clip via the web archive here.

So why would the California State Medical Board essentially strong-arm doctors to not prescribe HCQ? Why would they (and the MSM) try to block it so ruthlessly when there is plenty of evidence showing its effectiveness and safety? As Q keeps pointing out, there is something else going on, a reason why this is trying to be blocked, which we will get to in a later article.

On June 4, 2020, The Guardian reported that the COVID-19 data provided by the US healthcare analytics company Surgisphere, was flawed. This was the same data used in the May 22, 2020, Lancet study (discussed earlier) that caused the WHO and governments to halt HCQ trials:

From the article:

The World Health Organization and a number of national governments have changed their Covid-19 policies and treatments on the basis of flawed data from a little-known US healthcare analytics company, also calling into question the integrity of key studies published in some of the world’s most prestigious medical journals. …

Data it claims to have legitimately obtained from more than a thousand hospitals worldwide formed the basis of scientific articles that have led to changes in Covid-19 treatment policies in Latin American countries. It was also behind a decision by the WHO and research institutes around the world to halt trials of the controversial drug hydroxychloroquine. On Wednesday, the WHO announced those trials would now resume.

The Guardian’s investigation has found:

A search of publicly available material suggests several of Surgisphere’s employees have little or no data or scientific background. An employee listed as a science editor appears to be a science fiction author and fantasy artist whose professional profile suggests writing is her fulltime job. Another employee listed as a marketing executive is an adult model and events hostess, who also acts in videos for organisations.

The company’s LinkedIn page has fewer than 100 followers and last week listed just six employees. This was changed to three employees as of Wednesday.

While Surgisphere claims to run one of the largest and fastest hospital databases in the world, it has almost no online presence. Its Twitter handle has fewer than 170 followers, with no posts between October 2017 and March 2020.

Until Monday, the get in touch” link on Surgisphere’s homepage redirected to a WordPress template for a cryptocurrency website, raising questions about how hospitals could easily contact the company to join its database.

Desai has been named in three medical malpractice suits, unrelated to the Surgisphere database. In an interview with the Scientist, Desai previously described the allegations as “unfounded”.

In 2008, Desai launched a crowdfunding campaign on the website Indiegogo promoting a wearable “next generation human augmentation device that can help you achieve what you never thought was possible”. The device never came to fruition.

Desai’s Wikipedia page has been deleted following questions about Surgisphere and his history, first raised in 2010.

How the heck can these scientists be so negligent!?

Was this another attempt to block HCQ?

In my opinion, yes, absolutely it was.

On June 5, 2020, Q points out that the HCQ study published in the Lancet, that caused the WHO to stop HCQ trials, was retracted:


On June 16, 2020, the FDA revoked the emergency approval of HCQ for COVID-19:

As you can see, they REALLY didn’t (don’t) want it being used.

On June 18, 2020, Dr. Simone Gold and Dr. Dan Wohlgelernter go onto Fleccas Talks to discuss COVID-19 and the demonisation of HCQ:

If you recall, we discussed the inflated statistics in Part 1 of this article series and saw that NYC had the highest mortality rate per million. In this interview Dr. Gold mentions that NYC deaths were the highest due to Governor Andrew Cuomo pushing COVID-19 patients into nursing homes, leading to outbreaks and deaths among the elderly. This move was undertaken despite having plenty of other options for COVID-19 patient relocation.

On July 4, 2020, the WHO discontinued HCQ treatment arms for COVID-19:

It’s pretty funny, because this seems to be the sequence of events so far:

  1. Trump: You should look into HCQ, I heard it’s effective against coronavirus.
  2. MSM: REEEE! HCQ is dangerous, risk of heart attacks!
  3. *No instances of TdP or arrhythmogenic death were reported in the largest group of COVID-19 patients being treated with HCQ and azithromycin*
  4. MSM: *silent*
  5. MSM: Look at this NIH funded HCQ study! More Deaths, No Benefits!
  6. *Study is not rigorous with HCQ given to patients on their deathbed*
  7. MSM: *silent*
  8. Trump: But seriously guys, I am taking HCQ, it’s safe.
  9. MSM: REEEE! HCQ is dangerous, look at this other study from the Lancet!
  10. WHO and Governments: Woah, let’s stop HCQ clinical trials.
  11. California State Medical Board: *Threatens doctors not to use HCQ*
  12. *Data provided for study in Lancet is flawed*
  13. Lancet: *Shamefully retracts study*
  14. MSM: *Blames Lancet*
  15. WHO and Governments: Continue HCQ clinical trials.
  16. FDA: Revokes emergency approval of HCQ
  17. WHO: Discontinues HCQ trials

What a roller-coaster ride, huh? All for a drug that has been on the market for 40+ years.

While all this was happening, regular physicians were having success using HCQ + azithromycin + zinc.

On July 27, 2020, a group called America’s Frontline Doctors held a press conference in Washington D.C. discussing a broad range of misinformation surrounding COVID-19, including HCQ:

During the conference, Dr. Stella Immanuel, a front line doctor from Texas, discusses how she has had a 100% success rate using HCQ to treat COVID-19 and has treated over 350 patients. Among these patients, many were elderly or had a pre-existing condition. All of them recovered; no-one died.

It is no surprise that this conference was quickly pulled down by YouTube, Facebook, Google and Twitter, and had “Fact checkers” such as Politifact working overtime trying to do damage control.

Not only this, but Dr. Simone Gold was fired from her hospital after participating in this press conference:

Dr. Mobeen Syed, from America’s Frontline Doctors Summit, gives a very informative overview on how HCQ actually works to treat COVID-19. I suggest checking it out:

While I could go on about HCQ, I think I have made my point clear. This cheap and effective drug, when used with azithromycin and zinc, shows great success in treating COVID-19. Which raises the question of why it is being so tenaciously blocked at every turn?

Chlorine Dioxide (Miracle Mineral Solution)

On April 24, 2020, President Trump suggested using an internal disinfectant or UV therapy to treat COVID-19:

I am sure many of you saw the MSM meltdown after this statement, and the barrage of memes that followed it:

While President Trump shrugged this off as trolling the MSM (something he does very well), I have come to think that there was some truth in this statement.

I believe (and many other anons also) that he was referring to Chlorine Dioxide (Cl02), or as it is colloquially known, MMS (Miracle Mineral Solution), a substance used to kill pathogens in a variety of industries. I strongly suggest reading Jordan Sather’s write up on this subject:

From the article:

“However, ClO2 isn’t just used as an industrial cleaner, a stabilized version is commonly used by hikers and campers to kill waterborne pathogens for clean drinking water. These potable water drops and tablets have chlorine dioxide listed as the main ingredient and can be easily purchased at any camping supply store such as REI or online shopping websites like Amazon.”

Jordan Sather is a strong voice in the truth community, particularly when it comes to health, and has had many of his YouTube videos removed for simply mentioning this subject. Countless hit-pieces have been written about him, claiming he is encouraging people to drink bleach. Nothing could be further from the truth.

And wouldn’t you know it, Chlorine Dioxide just so happens to be effective against SARS-CoV (severe acute respiratory syndrome-associated coronavirus):

From the abstract (emphasis mine):

“Free residue chlorine over 0.5 mg/L for chlorine or 2.19 mg/L for chlorine dioxide in wastewater ensures complete inactivation of SARS-CoV while it does not inactivate completely E. coli and f2 phage.”

Well, how about that?

Chlorine dioxide is effective against SARS-CoV and is already used as the main ingredient in some forms of water purification…

On May 18, 2020, Natural News reported that intravenous Chlorine Dioxide as a COVID-19 treatment has been successful in Ecuador:

From the article:

“Covid-19 isn’t an Acute Respiratory Disease (ARD), it turns out. Rather, it often presents as an inflammation and blood clotting condition (see The Lancet research, below) which causes the blood to be unable to carry oxygen, resulting in patient hypoxia and eventual asphyxiation.

This is why intravenous chlorine dioxide — which immediately delivers a high dose of oxygen to blood cells — is believed to work so effectively against covid-19. It reportedly restores the oxygen-carrying capacity of hemoglobin and clears the clotting in the lungs, all while destroying pathogens”

So it looks like the statement made by Trump about injecting disinfectant wasn’t a crazy suggestion after all.

It’s almost as if these reporters have zero critical thinking skills and are simply mouth pieces for propaganda…

Wait, that is exactly how it is.

This article was actually brought to my attention through a post on Jordan Sather’s Instagram account, which (surprise surprise) was removed for ‘harmful false information’:

On July 17, 2020, Bolivia’s senate approved MMS to treat COVID-19:

There it is again, the “toxic bleach” line.

UV Light Therapy

In the same presser, President Trump also mentioned the potential use of ultraviolet light to help mitigate the disease, which is not a new concept. From February, 2018:

You can watch a short compilation of various news networks discussing this technology here.

However, Trump specifically mentioned using UV light within the body…

On June 3, 2020, Newsweek reported that Russia is actually in the process of developing this very treatment:

Again, we see that there was legitimacy to Trump’s claims.

Intravenous Vitamin C

On March 3, 2020, Global Research reported that China approved three research studies using intravenous Vitamin C to treat and prevent COVID-19 cases:

From the article, Dr. Richard Cheng says:

“Early and sufficiently large doses of intravenous vitamin C are critical. Vitamin C is not only a prototypical antioxidant, but also involved in virus killing and prevention of viral replication. The significance of large dose intravenous vitamin C is not just at antiviral level. It is acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) that kills most people from coronaviral pandemics (SARS, MERS and now NCP). ARDS is a common final pathway leading to death. We therefore call for a worldwide discussion and debate on this topic.”

On March 5, Dr. Richard Cheng discusses in more detail the potential use of intravenous Vitamin C as a COVID-19 treatment:

On March 24, 2020, it is reported that New York hospitals are using intravenous Vitamin C to treat COVID-19 patients based on promising reports from China:

Remember how we can’t talk about Vitamin C on YouTube (see Part 1) to help treat COVID-19, weird huh?

While the MSM have been busy obfuscating information on HCQ, and working with big tech to censor counter-information, they have been actively pushing another solution put forth by various multilateral health organisations, and that is a COVID-19 vaccine.

The Rush for a COVID-19 Vaccine

So now that we have covered some of the cost effective and existing treatments for this disease (without even touching on nutrition and exercise), lets look at this push to develop a vaccine.

As vaccine development has been a talking point since the initial outbreak (and has been discussed non-stop by the MSM), lets start at the top: The World Health Organisation (WHO).

Without getting into the the gory details, the WHO is determined to accelerate a COVID-19 vaccine with over 120 COVID-19 candidate vaccines already proposed (as of writing this).

They have developed a 65 page R&D road map:


From the document it explains that a lot of time, money and stakeholder coordination is involved in this R&D process (for therapeutics and vaccines):

“A myriad of stakeholders play important roles in research and innovation during outbreaks. Those include but are not limited to: communities affected by the outbreak; national and international researchers and research institutions; Member State governments; multilateral agencies including WHO, humanitarian organizations; charitable foundations; developers and manufacturers from public and private sectors; multilateral organizations; and numerous collaborative research networks. Each stakeholder brings with it different and, at times, conflicting values, perspectives and priorities, adding yet a further layer of complexity. Tensions can arise out of the need to balance high costs associated with research and innovation, the need for resources to respond to the outbreak, and the concern that these innovations are affordable and accessible to those at highest risk. It is both a crucial and a rather complex task to differentiate between those interventions that are purely research and those that are response.”

From the same document, it specifies that Global Research Collaboration For Infectious Disease Preparedness (GLOPID-R) are managing funding operations:

“GLOPID-R is coordinating funders to optimize resources, avoid duplication, cover priorities listed in the R&D Blueprint research roadmap and, contribute to the Global Coordination Mechanism (GCM).”

The GCM is mechanism within the WHO.

The following is from the same road-map and outlines the role of each organisation and their requested financial commitment:

  • BMGF = Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation
  • CEPI = Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations
  • NIH = National Institute of Health

So interestingly, CEPI is unknown and the NIH has no set ceiling.

Lets explore some of this vaccine development funding and piece together a timeline of critical events.

March 11, 2020, STAT reported that researchers will be skipping animal trials for COVID-19 vaccine:

From the article (emphasis mine):

“I don’t think proving this in an animal model is on the critical path to getting this to a clinical trial,” said Tal Zaks, chief medical officer at Moderna, a Cambridge, Mass.-based biotech that has produced a Covid-19 vaccine candidate at record speed. He told STAT that scientists at the National Institutes of Health are “working on nonclinical research in parallel.” Meanwhile, the clinical trial started recruiting healthy participants in the first week of March.

That isn’t how vaccine testing normally happens. Regulators require that a manufacturer show a product is safe before it goes into people, and while it isn’t enshrined in law, researchers almost always check that a new concoction is effective in lab animals before putting human volunteers at potential risk. …

… “The traditional vaccine timeline is 15 to 20 years. That would not be acceptable here,” said Mark Feinberg, president and CEO of the International AIDS Vaccine Initiative, whose work as chief public health and science officer at Merck Vaccines was instrumental in the development of the immunization against Ebola. “When you hear predictions about it taking at best a year or a year and a half to have a vaccine available … there’s no way to come close to those timelines unless we take new approaches.””

So already we have two Red Flags:

  1. Skipping animal testing
  2. And fast tracking a process that should take 15-20 years

As a side note, the International AIDS Vaccine Initiative (IAVI) has received over $125 million in grants from the BMGF since 2001. This is interesting because IAVI and Merck are collaborating to develop an investigational vaccine against COVID-19.

On March 14, 2020, CEPI put out a call for $2 billion in funding to develop a COVID-19 vaccine:

For those who don’t know, the BMGF co-founded CEPI along with the Wellcome Trust, the Biotechnology Innovation Organization and a handful of countries. Even more interesting though, is that CEPI was also co-founded (funded) by some of the largest pharmaceutical companies in the world:

  • GlaxoSmithKline (GSK)
  • Merck
  • Johnson & Johnson
  • Pfizer
  • Sanofi
  • Takeda

Now CEPI is asking for money to help pharmaceutical companies develop a vaccine that will potentially generate large profits for them.

It is also interesting to note that since the US has pulled all funding and cut ties to the WHO, the BMGF have become the WHO’s largest donor.

The same WHO that designated the BMGF to accelerate vaccine development:

The BMGF are also a member of GloPID-R, the network coordinating COVID-19 funding.

Funding that will go into the pockets of vaccine manufacturers.

This one foundation seems to have a lot of clout when it comes to dictating global health policy.

So far we can see that the BMGF has ties to many of the big players involved in the COVID-19 pandemic response, either directly or indirectly:

  • WHO: leading and coordinating the worldwide COVID-19 pandemic response (largest donor)
  • CEPI: financing development of COVID-19 vaccines (co-founder)
  • GLOPID-R: network coordinating COVID-19 funding (member)
  • IAVI: collaborating with Merck to develop an investigational vaccine against COVID-19 (Multiple grants)

() Parentheses indicate how the BMGF are connected to said organisation.

On March 16, 2020, the NIH began investigational COVID-19 vaccine trials:

From the article (emphasis mine):

“The study is evaluating different doses of the experimental vaccine for safety and its ability to induce an immune response in participants. This is the first of multiple steps in the clinical trial process for evaluating the potential benefit of the vaccine.

The vaccine is called mRNA-1273 and was developed by NIAID scientists and their collaborators at the biotechnology company Moderna, Inc., based in Cambridge, Massachusetts. The Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) supported the manufacturing of the vaccine candidate for the Phase 1 clinical trial.

“Finding a safe and effective vaccine to prevent infection with SARS-CoV-2 is an urgent public health priority,” said NIAID Director Anthony S. Fauci, M.D. “This Phase 1 study, launched in record speed, is an important first step toward achieving that goal.””

There are currently no RNA vaccines approved for human use… And this COVID-19 vaccine is going to be fast tracked.

Big red flag right here.

I wonder if the BMGF have any significant ties to the NIH and its subsidiary the NIAD (National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases)?

Well on October 23, 2019, the BMGF pledged to donate $100 million to the NIH to help develop gene-based cures for sickle cell disease and HIV. Late last year on December 9, 2019, the Gates Foundation also Consulted with the NIH on Global Health at the NIH 6th annual consultative workshop.

The NIAD received a $482,884 grant from the BMGF in 2017 for a “Prime boost approach for universal influenza vaccine development”.

Let’s update that BMGF connection list:

  • WHO: leading and coordinating the worldwide COVID-19 pandemic response (largest donor)
  • CEPI: financing development of COVID-19 vaccines (co-founder)
  • GLOPID-R: network coordinating COVID-19 funding (member)
  • IAVI: collaborating with Merck to develop an investigational vaccine against COVID-19 (Multiple grants)
  • NIH: working on COVID-19 vaccine / therapeutic solution (donor and consultant)
  • NIAID: developed mRNA-1273 vaccine with Moderna (provided grant)

On March 17, 2020, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) issued a Declaration, stating (emphasis mine):

“The Secretary is issuing this Declaration pursuant to section 319F–3 of the Public Health Service Act to provide liability immunity for activities related to medical countermeasures against COVID–19.”

Basically, if a treatment for COVID-19 has adverse effects (dating back to February 4, 2020), the medical body/professional who prescribed the treatment is not liable (is my understanding). If we look back to the testimony regarding gross negligence in Part 1 of this series, could this declaration add another layer of protection for these NYC hospitals?

This is very big red flag.

On April 5, 2020, the BMGF pledged to make billions of dollars available for COVID-19 vaccine development and manufacturing:

On April 8, 2020, Bill Gates said he would build factories for seven leading COVID-19 vaccines to accelerate development:

On April 9, 2020, Bill Gates is interviewed by CNBC and outlines how indemnification is needed for governments and manufacturers before a COVID-19 vaccine can be rolled out (due to the rapid development process):

He even discusses this need for indemnification back in 2018:

From the article (emphasis mine):

“We need a reserve corps of trained personnel and volunteers, ready to go at a moment’s notice. And we need manufacturing and indemnification agreements in place with pharmaceutical companies –with expedited review processes for government approval of new treatments.”

Basically what he is saying is, if damages occur due to this rushed vaccine (or therapeutic), you cannot sue the government or manufacturer:

Bill Gates continued his Public Relations campaign on various talk shows and news outlets parroting the same narrative: that life cannot go back to normal until we have an amazing new vaccine or therapeutic. This is despite the fact that Japan ended its emergency status back in April 25, 2020, with only 850 deaths.

Again, this should be raising red flags for everyone.

On April 15, 2020, Forbes gives a breakdown of all the billionaires donating to the COVID-19 pandemic relief:

I wonder what the “other causes” Jack Dorsey and George Soros are funneling money into?

(We will cover contact tracing in a later article.)

On April 17, 2020, Bloomberg reports that Moderna shares skyrocket after the U.S. government agreed to pay as much as $483 million for the company to develop and test its COVID-19 vaccine:

This financing was provided by the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA), which is part of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). The very same HHS that declared “liability immunity for activities related to medical countermeasures against COVID–19“. BARDA also provided $500 million to Johnson & Johnson for their separate vaccine efforts.

It may not come as surprise that Moderna has also had previous dealings with the BMGF.

In 2016, Moderna entered into a global health project framework agreement with the BMGF to advance mRNA-based development projects.

Wait, the same mRNA (vaccine) that is being trialed as a potential COVID-19 vaccine?

On April 29, 2020, the NIH was granted $1.5 billion from federal stimulus funding and $30 Million from the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act, 2020):

From the article, it is unclear on how much will go to therapeutic and vaccine development:

“The stimulus investment supercharges NIH’s strong research efforts already underway focused on prevention and treatment of COVID-19, including the recently announced planned Accelerating COVID-19 Therapeutic Interventions and Vaccines public-private partnership to coordinate the international research response to the pandemic.”  

On April 30, 2020, GatesNotes discussed how vaccine developers are compressing the development time from a 5 year process to just 18 months:

You can also see how the BMGF want to deliver the vaccine to over 7 billion people. This is no secret when you see Bill Gates being interviewed.

On May 4, 2020, the European Commission (EC) raised €7.4 billion ($8.07 billion) for COVID-19 vaccine development:

This fundraising event was organized after a call to action from the WHO, the World Bank and other philanthropic organisations, such as the BMGF. Leaders said that money raised would be channeled through organisations such as CEPI, GAVI (The Vaccine Alliance), The Global Fund and Unitaid, all of whom have ties to the BMGF (which we will get into more in the next article).

Over the last few years the BMGF has worked with and provided multiple grants to the EC, including a $45 million grant to the European Fund for Sustainable Development Guarantee.

But what does the EC do exactly? From their wikipedia (emphasis mine):

“The European Commission (EC) is the executive branch of the European Union, responsible for proposing legislation, implementing decisions, upholding the EU treaties and managing the day-to-day business of the EU”

Interesting… Proposing legislation and implementing decisions…

OK, so lets stop and take stock for a minute. We have around $8 billion raised by the European Commission (EC) and $2 billion (assuming they hit their target) raised by CEPI, giving $8-10 billion (depending on how much was donated by the EC to CEPI) for this COVID-19 vaccine solution thus far. And this doesn’t include NIH and other funding sources.

Big pharma seems to be quite a lucrative business right now.

No wonder they don’t want a cheap existing solution such as HCQ or MMS.

On May 5, 2020, the Daily Mail reports that one-third of Americans won’t get vaccinated against the coronavirus:

This is very clever narrative framing right here. They are essentially seeding the idea that people who refuse to get this rushed vaccine are a danger to everyone else. From the article:

Surprised that half the participants said they would respect other people’s right to choose?! In a good way or a bad way I wonder?

On May 11, 2020, Novavax was awarded a $384 million grant (on top of $4 million grant in March) from CEPI for vaccine development:

It will also come as no surprise that Novavax received a grant from the BMGF in 2015 to develop a vaccine for certain low and middle income countries. This $88 million dollar grant was also to be used to support regulatory licensing efforts and provide a path to WHO prequalification.

Wait, the same WHO that the BMGF have a cozy relationship with?

Better update that BMGF connection list:

  • WHO: leading and coordinating the worldwide COVID-19 pandemic response (largest donor)
  • CEPI: financing development of COVID-19 vaccines (co-founder)
  • GLOPID-R: network coordinating COVID-19 funding (member)
  • IAVI: collaborating with Merck to develop an investigational vaccine against COVID-19 (Multiple grants)
  • NIH: working on COVID-19 vaccine / therapeutic solution (donor and consultant)
  • NIAID: developed mRNA-1273 vaccine with Moderna (provided grant)
  • Moderna: COVID-19 vaccine (mRNA-1273) development (provided grant)
  • EC: Proposing legislation and implementing decisions (multiple grants)
  • Novavax: COVID-19 vaccine development (provided grant)

On May 13, 2020, the New York Times tells everyone to get ready for a Vaccine Information War:

Basically the article goes on to blast people on social media for having the audacity to ask questions. They, like many other Legacy Media outlets, are essentially in support of censorship to stop “misinformation”.

On May 15, 2020, President Trump formally announces Operation Warp Speed. Five days later, CNBC discusses this ambitious task:

“Operation Warp Speed will advance manufacturing capacity for chosen vaccine candidates “while they are still in development” rather than “after approval or authorization,” as is traditional, according to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

There is also the use of new science.

For instance, the founders of Cambridge, Massachusetts-based biotechnology firm Helix Nanotechnologies, which is working on a messenger RNA Covid-19 vaccine, say “modern biotechnology” can help.”

This firm, Helix Nanotechnologies, proposed a modern-day Manhattan Project, that is, to develop a vaccine within six months.

On May 20, 2020, The Hill posed the question of mandatory COVID-19 vaccinations:

While President Trump said this vaccine was optional, there still seems to be a push for mandatory vaccinations.

On May 21, 2020, AstraZeneca receives $1 billion funding from BARDA to develop a COVID-19 vaccine:

On May 26, STAT reported that one of the healthy subjects for the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine study had “Grade 3” adverse effects after his second (higher dose) shot:

Out of the 45 candidates, 4 people suffered Grade 3 adverse effects from Moderna’s COVID-19 vaccine. That is close to 9% of candidates.

More red flags.

Something else I should mention is that Moderna has never brought a vaccine to the market. This COVID-19 vaccine, if it gets approved, will be their first.

On May 25, 2020, Novavax began its COVID-19 vaccine clinical trails:

On May 27, 2020, Dr. Fauci says that a vaccine may be ready by November-December:

From the article:

“Fauci explained that the vaccine trials with Niaid are proceeding “at risk,” meaning researchers are taking “the next steps before the results of the previous step,” which can shorten the development process by months.

The FDA has fast-tracked vaccine trials and the Department of Health and Human Services has already signed contracts ordering $100 million worth of needles and syringes for a “Covid-19 mass vaccination campaign.” “

Speeding up the development of a vaccine that should theoretically have a 5 year minimum development process, to a development process of less than 1 year…

What could possibly go wrong?

It is interesting how the Legacy Media seems to be towing the line for a vaccine solution pushed out by various multilateral organisations, considering:

  • How long it will take, even on a compressed time schedule, compared to readily available safe treatments
  • The risks involved with an extremely rushed development timeline (1 year instead of a standard 15-20 years)
  • The potential risks of using a fast tracked RNA/mRNA vaccine that has never been on the market
  • That Moderna has previously never brought a vaccine to the market
  • How much it will cost to develop compared to existing treatments (a chunk being taxpayer dollars)
  • The very concerning legal immunity being discussed for governments and manufacturers
  • That HCQ acts as a prophylactic and is readily available, cheap and safe

Do the media not have anything critical to say about this course of action? They seem to criticise other treatments relentlessly but very little on this front?

On June 5, 2020, GAVI and CEPI donated $750 million to AstraZeneca for COVID-19 vaccine production:

Add this $750 million deal to the $1 billion already provided through BARDA and we have $1.75 billion dollars going into this pharma giant. More importantly the two charities providing this $750 million are CEPI and GAVI, two organisations closely tied to the BMGF.

The BMGF is a founding member of CEPI and a member of GAVI!

We can update our BMGF connection list:

  • WHO: leading and coordinating the worldwide COVID-19 pandemic response (largest donor)
  • CEPI: financing development of AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine (co-founder)
  • GAVI: financing development of AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine (founding partner & member)
  • GLOPID-R: network coordinating COVID-19 funding (member)
  • IAVI: collaborating with Merck to develop an investigational vaccine against COVID-19 (Multiple grants)
  • NIH: working on COVID-19 vaccine / therapeutic solution (donor and consultant)
  • NIAID: developed mRNA-1273 vaccine with Moderna (provided grant)
  • Moderna: COVID-19 vaccine (mRNA-1273) development (provided grant)
  • EC: proposing legislation and implementing decisions (multiple grants)
  • Novavax: COVID-19 vaccine development (provided grant)
  • AstraZeneca: COVID-19 vaccine development (provided funding through GAVI and CEPI)

On July 24, 2020, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. (RFK) and Alan Dershowitz had a historic debate regarding mandatory vaccinations for Americans:

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has been trying to have a vaccine debate for around 15 years. Up until now no-one has accepted the challenge.

While this was an amicable debate, Kennedy absolutely destroyed Dershowitz, hands down. And yes, this is the same Alan Dershowitz that was Jeffery Epstein’s defense lawyer, who flew on Epstein’s private jet the Lolita Express multiple times, and allegedly raped Virginia Roberts when she was only 15 years old.

Some important points RFK Jr. made:

  • In 1986, congress granted liability immunity to vaccine manufacturers for damages arising from a vaccine-related injury or death. This led to an explosion of vaccines entering the market around 1989.
  • Vaccines are the only medical product that do not need to be safety tested against a placebo. This is an exemption which very few know about and is an artifact of the CDC’s legacy as a quasi-military agency (and is why there are military ranks in the CDC, such as Surgeon General).
  • RFK Jr. sued the HHS in 2016, demanding to see a single vaccine-placebo study (I assume this was inert placebo). In the end he won because the HHS could not provide anything.
  • The huge reduction of infectious diseases during the first half of the 20th century had virtually nothing to do with vaccines as concluded by a study published in the Journal of Pediatrics in 2000. This was due to a variety of changes in lifestyle and hygiene.
  • Dr. Edward Cass, who was the head of Harvard Medical school, gave a very famous speech in which he warned how these vaccine manufacturers and other leading medicine manufacturers would try to take credit for the huge reduction in deaths from infectious diseases during the early 20th century. He warned that these companies would try to monetise this phenomenon.
  • You can go to any vaccine manufacturer’s insert and check the time period it was safety tested for. Most of these are between 2-5 days, which fails to encapsulate other adverse effects that occur after this time period, such as autoimmune diseases or autism (which is diagnosed at 4 years of age). Since there are no placebo tests in place and no long term safety monitoring, nobody knows the risk profile for any vaccine that is on the schedule.
  • The four companies that produce the 72 vaccines currently on the US vaccine schedule are all convicted serial felons, and in the last decade alone, have paid out $35 billion dollars for lying to doctors, for defrauding and falsifying science and for killing hundreds of Americans, knowingly.
  • The Moderna COVID-19 vaccine study, which had a large percentage of adverse reactions, was undertaken on very healthy individuals. To get into these trials you needed to have an immaculate health record. So if we are seeing such a large percentage of adverse reactions among very healthy people, how will it impact a majority of society who may have pre-existing conditions?
  • Despite the adverse reactions from Moderna’s COVID-19 vaccine, they are pushing forward because “it is too big to fail”, i.e. they (Anthony Fauci) have pumped $483 million taxpayer dollars into Moderna for this COVID-19 vaccine, so there is no turning back.
  • Anthony Fauci owns half of the COVID-19 Moderna vaccine patent. And he has five people working for him that are entitled to collect royalties from it. (Not sure on this, but the NIH certainly has a stake in the IP)
  • The CDC actually owns many vaccine patents and are actually cashing in despite being a “regulatory body”.

There is a lot more so I suggest watching the debate yourself.

It is also good to hear that ICAN has submitted a formal petition to the FDA to include a placebo control group in the COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials and that shortly after, the FDA issued guidance which conformed to key portions of those demands.

On August 2, 2020, the Federal Government and Yale held clinical trials to decide the best way to convince Americans to get the COVID-19 vaccine:

From the article:

“The options they are studying include shame and anger techniques:

Other: Control message
Other: Baseline message
Other: Personal freedom message
Other: Economic freedom message
Other: Self-interest message
Other: Community interest message
Other: Economic benefit message
Other: Guilt message
Other: Embarrassment message
Other: Anger message
Other: Trust in science message
Other: Not bravery message”

Looks like the same old tactics are being employed.

Don’t think, just trust.

I personally look forward to hearing the classic line, “The science is settled”, being regurgitated by NPCs.

They were probably using this line all the way back when blood-letting was being used to treat disease.

On August 6, 2020, Moderna CMO reportedly sold most of his shares:

Not a lot of confidence in this product it seems.

On the same day, August 6, 2020, an opinion piece was published by USA Today pushing for mandatory vaccination:

Looks like Dr. Michael Lederman was taking notes of the clinical trials held by the Federal Government and Yale to convince Americans to get the COVID-19 vaccine:

  • Guilt message
  • Embarrassment message
  • Anger message
  • Trust in science message

He goes on to push all the typical draconian talking points such as no religious exemptions and immunization certificates. Bill Gates has also been pushing the need for these certificates, which we will get to in a later article.


On September 1, 2020, World Health Organization Regional Director for Europe Hans Kluge said COVID-19 Vaccine won’t be end of pandemic:

Kluge states:

“The vaccine is not going to be the end of the pandemic. The end of the pandemic will be when we the people learn to live with the pandemic”

Ummmm… Come again?!

Learn to live with the pandemic?!

Either he is saying the vaccine isn’t going to be effective or that the draconian medical lockdowns, masks and social distancing are going to need to extend on indefinitely…

Which is basically what he goes on to say.

He then clarifies by saying a vaccine isn’t a “one solution fits all” cure due to vaccine hesitancy and that people should essentially acquiesce to government medical measures because who knows what new deadly virus is around the corner.

He also emphasises the need for humanity to head into a “New Reality”, that “Digital Health” will be key and that we cannot “Leave Anyone Behind”, that is to say, we cannot leave anyone behind who is “Digitally Poor”.

If we read between the lines here, he is saying everyone needs to be digitised to be part of this “New Reality” in which humanity will fall into the hands of Technocratic Globalists. (i.e. Digital Health Certificates to travel etc.). This is something we will get into more in the next few articles.

He also admits that COVID-19 isn’t as infectious as they thought and not as lethal as Ebola.

Not only this but he skirts the question on natural herd immunity…

On October 8, 2020, the Australian government gave the suppliers of two COVID-19 vaccines indemnity against liability for inevitable side effects:

The article goes on to say if the Oxford University and the University of Queensland vaccines are successful, the suppliers will have indemnification.

Reminder: AstraZeneca is the sponsor and supplier for the Oxford University COVID-19 vaccine.

On October 22, 2020, a volunteer in the AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine trial died:

The article goes on to say the 28 year old Brazilian man died from COVID-19 complications and actually received the placebo…

Yeah… Right…

Here is the kicker, the “placebo” was actually a meningitis vaccine and not an inert control placebo.

On the November 16, 2020, the head of the WHO, Tedros Adhanom, says that a vaccine will not end the pandemic:

Wait, I thought Bill Gates said life could go back to normal after a COVID-19 vaccine was rolled out? Isn’t gates one of the largest funders of the WHO and a huge investor into all things vaccine related?

It feels like the WHO really wants to maintain surveillance, tracing, quarantines and social distancing indefinitely.

It’s almost as if they are using this pandemic, or the facade of a pandemic, for another agenda…


Like Part 1 of this series I could go on and on, but need to wrap it up somewhere.

So lets do a quick recap of what we have discussed so far:

And now lets recap everything we have discussed from the very start of this series.

We already know how the CDC and AMA, back in the early 2000s, used the media to boost flu shot sales through misleading CDC influenza death statistics (see Part 1).

The question to ask then, is history repeating itself for this COVID-19 pandemic?

So far we have:

  1. The artificial inflation of COVID-19 deaths (see Part 1)
  2. The use of blatant propaganda from the MSM (see Part 1)
  3. Censorship of dissenting voices by Big Tech (see Part 1)
  4. The vilification and suppression of cost effective, safe and easily dispersed treatments
  5. Talk of fast tracking a vaccine from multilateral organisations with indemnification for manufacturers and governments
  6. WHO officials essentially saying their will be no end to the pandemic even with a vaccine

All signs seem to be pointing to history repeating itself… But with a dystopian twist, particularly if these vaccines are made mandatory.

We have also seen that the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF) seem to be playing a significant role in this COVID-19 vaccination push.

Some of Bill Gates thoughts on this pandemic so far are:

  • Life cannot return to normal until we have an amazing vaccine
  • The vaccine needs to be fast tracked
  • 7 billion people should receive this inoculation
  • Indemnification is needed for governments and vaccine manufacturers

We briefly looked at how the BMGF are connected to many organisations surrounding this pandemic, presenting potential conflicts of interest. The connections we have discussed so far include:

  • WHO: leading and coordinating the worldwide COVID-19 pandemic response (largest donor)
  • CEPI: financing development of AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine (co-founder)
  • GAVI: financing development of AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine (founding partner & member)
  • GLOPID-R: network coordinating COVID-19 funding (member)
  • IAVI: collaborating with Merck to develop an investigational vaccine against COVID-19 (Multiple grants)
  • NIH: working on COVID-19 vaccine / therapeutic solution (donor and consultant)
  • NIAID: developed mRNA-1273 vaccine with Moderna (provided grant)
  • Moderna: COVID-19 vaccine (mRNA-1273) development (provided grant)
  • EC: proposing legislation and implementing decisions (multiple grants)
  • Novavax: COVID-19 vaccine development (provided grant)
  • AstraZeneca: COVID-19 vaccine development (provided funding through GAVI and CEPI)

And this is only the tip of the iceberg…

In the next part of this series we will be delving into the Medical Mafia and exploring some of their tentacles. We will also start touching on the Technocratic Orwellian Nightmare these people want, and have begun to roll out, for humanity.

Stay tuned for Part Three!


God Bless.

4 thoughts on “The COVID-19 Chronicles: Part 2 – The Suppression of Treatments and the Push for a Vaccine”

  1. Concerned Citizen NNSW

    This article is a must read. It demonstrates that there are effective treatments for Covid-19 using longstanding proven practices, with doctors espousing these treatments being silenced or ignored by mainstream media. The rush for a vaccine is a concern, particularly the lack of adequate testing time and proponents seeking indemnification against any harmful effects a Covid-19 vaccine could cause. It’s time for each of us to know the facts so that we can advocate the best treatment for our personal health!

  2. Having used hydroxychloroquine extensively on myself in the past, I have to say my gut feeling says that even if it was effective against covid, it wouldn’t be nearly effective enough. HCQ might slow it down a bit, but this shit so illin it’ll will tear through you like a crackhead goin’ through the Fremantle 7/11 sidewalk sign.

    If you want something to combine with a -romyacin class drug for an effective combination with sone ‘rona stopping power, I reckon Nitazoxinide would be a waaaaay better candidate (Possibly with Roxithromyacin rather than Azith-, but dealers choice on the myacins). It’s a potent broad-spectrum antiviral with about 50 years of use history, and known action against coronavirus-class diseases. Only downside is that it turns your jizz a bright fluorescent yellow color, but better than dying of the ‘rona.

    My pick however would be tincture of Houttuynia Cordata (Sometimes known as fish mint). Ridiculously potent antiviral solution. You don’t even need a prescription to get it since it’s a ‘herbal’ remedy but even half a drop will fuck up just about any virus like just about nothing else. Makes you feel like shit because of the herx, and it tastes pretty how ya going (Kinda fishy, kinda minty), but still better than choking to death.

    Frankly I don’t think a -romycin and HCQ alone is going to do just about fuck all towards curing most virusses. Might slow em down, and may reduce other shit the immune system has to fight at the same time, but if you want to fuck a virus up, use an antiviral as your first preference over an antibiotic.

    If however you wanted to fight COVID with HCQ, (with or without a -romycin drug) my pick for combo would most likely be atovaquone and proguanil, a combination known as Malarone. Really favourable side effect profile as anti-malarials go, but the shit is expensive as if you’re paying full price.

    Problem is that some drugs, such as the Malarone combo work orders of magnitude more potently when you combine them, and modern medicine doesn’t like you fast tracking testing even one thing, let alone a combination of five or six things at once. Frankly if you take Malarone, fish mint, HCQ, a -romycin of choice and Nitazoxanide all at once; I don’t doubt that virus is fucking dead in a week. but the herx reaction of not ramping those all gradually will make you feel shitter than you’ve ever felt in your life. You’d need IV nutrients and possibly even dialysis to prevent sheer toxic shock, and it would not be cheap, but any virus that gets hit with that combo will be thinking long and hard about it’s life choices.

    1. I am not a fan of pharmaceuticals in general and will avoid them unless absolutely necessary. The point I was trying to make is that they don’t care about treatments such as HCQ, MMS, Vitamin C etc. because their agenda is a profitable vaccine.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *