Why is the “new” SARS-CoV-2 Virus not so new after all?

Since 1999, at least 4,000 coronavirus-related patents have been filed, including patents detailing key features of the so-called “novel” SARS-CoV-2 virus. In 2002, Ralph Baric, Ph.D. and colleagues at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, filed a patent on recombinant coronavirus and, within a year, we had the world’s first SARS outbreak.

It is by no means a new Virus

In this interview, we talk to David Martin, Ph.D., who has done a phenomenal job in uncovering the paper trail behind the virus now known as SARS-CoV-2.

It turns out that this is by no means a new virus, with patents and government grants describing key features of the virus dating back two decades. Martin completed his doctorate at the University of Virginia in 1995 and was then recruited to pursue medical studies in radiology and orthopedic surgery.

In 2006, he founded the first medical device clinical trial organization for the University of Virginia, a company called IDEAmed, which conducted clinical trials of medical devices for submission to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). (FDA). He therefore has extensive experience with FDA clinical trials.

Biological Weapons Violation Surveillance

In 1998, he founded another company called M-CAM International, which focuses on finding ways to bring intellectual property into the mainstream financial world. At the request of the U.S. Congress, M-CAM also began auditing the U.S. patent system.

In the early 2000s, M-CAM worked with the Senate Banking Committee and was a contractor to the U.S. Treasury Department in uncovering white-collar crimes related to intellectual property and tax fraud. In that work, Martin also discovered something else.

“Shockingly, we found a large number of patents describing chemical and biological weapons violations,” Martin says. “That was not what we were looking for. I let people know that we are not out to find that. This is something that fell into our laps.

“I developed a technology a decade earlier called linguistic genomics. It’s a technique for looking at unstructured text data and finding the metaphorical meaning of what’s being said.

“You can imagine that people who are up to something evil often hide what they are doing but use unconventional language,” he said.

“So, for example, if you find a patent on an explosive-resistant pathogen from a bazooka, did you hear what I just said? “‘An explosive-resistant pathogen from a bazooka.’ Does that sound like a common way to inoculate a population, or does that sound like [a biological weapon]?

“So when we found different patents for biological weapons, we started looking at some very serious things. Once a year, I published the literal global phone book of all biological and chemical weapons violations committed anywhere in the world.

“You find out who, where, who funded it, and what the addresses are. It was … used by U.S. law enforcement, intelligence agencies, and in other parts of the world to prosecute things that were improper. And it was in 1999 that we found that there seemed to be an alarming event related to the coronavirus, which we will get to.

Coronavirus identified as potential Vaccine Vector

As Martin explained, the National Institutes of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), led by Dr. Anthony Fauci, identified coronavirus as a potential vaccine vector in 1999.

At that time, an attempt was made to develop an HIV vaccine, and to that end, Fauci funded research in 1999 to create an “infectious recombinant coronavirus with replication defect.”

In 2002, Dr. Ralph Baric and his colleagues at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, filed a patent on the recombinant coronavirus, and within a year, the world’s first outbreak of SARS occurred.

The real Anthony Fauci

“Anyone interested in learning more about Fauci should definitely read the book “The Real Anthony Fauci” by Robert F. Kennedy Jr. which details how Fauci’s promotion of AZT led to the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people in the 1980s. And the pattern we’re seeing with coronavirus is basically a repeat of past behavior. says Martin:

“It’s important to realize that at that time [1984, when Fauci became director of NIAID], we were starting from an STD environment where syphilis and gonorrhea and those types of STDs were the things we were concerned about …

“HIV became a political and social hot potato because it was associated in many ways with lifestyle branding, so it became a political issue to essentially identify a population that could serve as the basis for reckless research.

“Fauci held that people with HIV had already made choices that in some ways entitled them to less humanity. As a result, clinical trials to develop management techniques and potential treatments … conducted in a very unwise manner. Numerous people died in [these] clinical trials, and they are still, by the way …

“He was obsessed with the HIV situation as a platform to use people, whom he sees as some kind of subhuman, for clinical trials. It’s a terrible stain on the medical establishment in the U.S. that we’ve allowed this in the name of science, in the name of promoting health, since 1984 without any significant interruption or oversight.”

The first Outbreak of SARS

The first outbreak of SARS occurred in late 2002 and began in China in 2003. Interestingly, no one had heard of SARS until Baric’s team invented and patented a recombinant infectious coronavirus with a replication defect.

“I’m not inferring a causal relationship,” Martin says. “I’m noting that humans and so-called coronaviruses seem to have coexisted on Earth for hundreds of thousands of years.

“And then we engineered the [virus] in 1999. We started using it in different animals and different models of human cell lines, and then, in 2003, we got SARS. Like many other things, this is a remarkable observation.

“Of course, what makes the observation even more problematic is the fact that this happened during the unfortunate aftermath of the 2001 anthrax attack, which, as you know, came out of federal laboratories….

“It was very clear that this was not due to a bad actor. This was medical and defense science research that went wrong, went public, and cost lives. But the real benefit of the anthrax attack, so to speak, was the passage of the PREP Act.”

The Anthrax Attack Brought About the Desired Elimination of Liability

Under the PREP Act, we now have carte blanche to remove liability for medical countermeasure manufacturers. As Martin noted, the PREP Act “has given pharmaceutical companies the ability to terrify the public, force them to take an unproven action, and do so with absolute impunity.”

Interestingly, while Martin’s annual report on bioweapons patents was, with few exceptions, appreciated and used by agencies around the world, as far as the information he collected on the coronavirus was concerned, no agency in the world was willing to look into it.

“No one… seems to be willing to address the fact that as of 2016, very alarming language was used, namely ‘coronavirus ready for human emergency.’ This was in patents, but also in scientific publications. And when you start referring to a coronavirus supposedly being ready for a human emergency after the World Health Organization declared SARS eradicated, something is very wrong with that picture.”

Organized Crime

The biggest alarm was sounded on Feb. 12, 2016, by EcoHealth Alliance President Peter Daszak, who Martin said was “the money launderer” for gain-of-function coronavirus research after the U.S. placed a moratorium on it in 2014. Instead of shutting it down, that research was simply moved to China. In 2015, Daszak stated:

“To sustain the funding base beyond the crisis, we need to increase public understanding of the need for medical countermeasures, such as an influenza or coronavirus vaccine.

“A key driver is the media, and the business community will follow the hype. We need to use that hype to our advantage to get to the real issues. Investors will respond when they see gains at the end of the process.”

Daszak made the statement in 2015, and it was released in the spring of 2016.

The statement “set alarm bells ringing in my organization,” Martin says, “because when you have someone promoting functional profit research and clearly blurring the line of what is even legal … saying we need ‘funds to create hype’ … and ‘investors will follow when they see profits’ … that doesn’t sound like public health.

“To me, that sounds like organized crime. It sounds like organized crime, and we need to address that issue.

What the Coronavirus Patents Show

In total, about 4,000 patents have been filed on the coronavirus genome, vaccines and detection since 2002. According to Martin, this is alarming “because you don’t file patents on something you don’t intend to commercialize.”

Evidence of intentional commercialization can also be found by looking at the dates of certain patents held by certain companies.

On April 28, 2003, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention filed a patent on the genome of the SARS coronavirus. Five days later, Sequoia Pharmaceuticals received a $935,000 grant and filed U.S. Patent 7151163 for a treatment against the same virus.

How can you file a patent for a treatment for a virus that was discovered only five days earlier?

“It sounds like an inside job,” Martin says. “Because you can’t identify and cure a pathogen within five days if all the information was in the hands of the public, because when the CDC filed its patent on the coronavirus genome, it paid to keep that patent secret.

“So somebody knows that this would be a revenue stream …. The proliferation of patented controls around the SARS coronavirus probably exceeds most other pathogens by at least two or three times….

“Dana Farber had a patent system for monoclonal antibodies that came out of three NIH grants. His patent 7750123 on the monoclonal antibody for the treatment of SARS-Cov dates back to 2003.”

So even though we have been told that SARS-CoV-2 is something we have never seen before, there are 4,000 patents and patent applications that say otherwise. The same is true for COVID testing and injections. For example, Pfizer filed the first patent for an S1 spike protein vaccine against coronavirus in 1990, 30 years ago.

“Regardless of which side of the story we look at, patent records are littered with thousands of patents where commercial interests funded by NIAID and the National Institutes of Health have built the economic clique around coronavirus. This is not new. This is nothing new.

“And unfortunately, we keep being told that this experience is new one way or another, even though everything we’re being told has been proven with PCR…the injections, every one of these things has been known and isolated for over 30 years.

How did we get here?

How did taxpayers come to fund research into pathogens designed to make us sick and kill us, only to make profits for the pharmaceutical industry and all those patent holders, including the government itself?

In large part, this goes back to the implementation of the Bayh-Dole Act of 1980, which allows recipients of federal grants to apply for patents on work that comes from federally funded research. The idea was that the economy would benefit if scientists were first and foremost entrepreneurs, not just publishers of their research findings.

This legislation has undermined health care by turning the Patent Office, the FDA, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) into an unholy trinity that serves and promotes private pharmaceutical companies. So we’re dealing with an insidious funding cycle here. Martin explains:

“Corporations and pharmaceutical companies lobby to get people elected. Once elected, lobbyists pour enormous sums into the various NIH programs. In the case of NIAID, it’s lost $191 billion since Fauci took office [in 1984]. Now is that because he has been successful?

“No, under his leadership, allergies and infectious diseases have increased more than 60-fold, and yet he’s still the head of a failed [agency] that has received $191 billion to solve a problem that gets worse every year,” he said.

“If he were a corporation, we would have fired him. The problem is that it is not a business. It is a money laundering operation. Public money is funneled through a federal agency to research labs that end up doing research that is then licensed to the benefactors, which are the pharmaceutical companies that paid for people to get into office in the first place.

“So it’s a revolving door problem, and the Bayh-Dole Act created an insidious incentive that said the only research that was going to be done was going to be the research that would ultimately flow back to the pharmaceutical industry and create monsters,” with the risk of the research and development being borne by the public and the benefits of that research and development being borne by the private sector. That’s a terrible thing, and it’s exactly what Fauci cited.

Why did Fauci choose Moderna as a Vaccine Pioneer?

Martin also points out that Fauci also lied to Congress about NIAID’s financial interests in drugs. During this pandemic, Congress and the Congressional Budget Office requested an accounting of patents held by NIH in which they had a potential commercial interest in manufactured drugs.

Fauci did not disclose any of them. Instead, he lied and said there were none.

“The evidence stacks up a mile high,” Martin says. “Moderna is the only recipient of NIAID funds that does not comply with the law and does not disclose the federal government’s interest in its intellectual property.

“Even though everyone knows Moderna did not disclose the federal government’s interest in its research, Fauci selected Moderna to pioneer an unproven, commercially unsuccessful, and completely unproven mRNA vaccine technology in the spring of 2020.

“There was no rational justification for this, and there would have been even less rational justification given that Moderna had violated federal law, the Bayh-Dole Act, 141 times at the time the winner was selected,” he said.

“This is a known fact, but it has been completely overlooked, and not a single law enforcement official in the United States has decided that it is a bad idea for a criminal organization to supply a product.”

Violations of the Law everywhere

Since this pandemic began, numerous rules, laws and regulations have been violated in the name of public health that take one’s breath away.

Even laws that are absolutely clear and not ambiguous in any way are being broken. For example, under the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 21, Section 50, no one can be forced or coerced to participate in a clinical trial of an experimental medical product, even if it is a pandemic control measure.

“It’s in black and white, and this clinical trial doesn’t end until 2023 in the best case scenario, so there is no approved or even authorized use of a [‘vaccine’ from COVID] that could be forced on the public,” Martin says.

And yet people everywhere are being bribed, threatened and coerced. The pharmaceutical companies have also violated basic principles by removing all controls and administering the test vaccine to all study participants, leaving us with no way to compare side effects.

They also do not have an independent research review committee or the protocol approval procedures required by law.

The companies themselves have decided to change their protocols in the middle of the process, which is just not standard practice. Essentially, we don’t have a true clinical trial of these COVID injections because many of the basic principles of clinical medical research have been violated.

The Breakdown of the Legal System has put the Pharmaceutical Companies on the Hook.

The federal government is also violating the False Claims Act when it tells you that COVID injections are safe and effective, even though the studies are years away from completion and have been undermined in all the ways just mentioned.

“We’re dealing with a situation where deaths are considered acceptable,” Martin says. “I don’t know what world you have to come from to even be remotely familiar with that term. I think it’s a terrible phrase to say … We are deliberately killing people, and we are doing it with impunity in the name of what we call a love affair with science.

“The only problem is that in the process we have desecrated science, because when I did randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials, you knew what I had to do? I had to keep the populations blind. I had to maintain placebo control throughout the clinical trial. And the reason I had to do that is because the law requires it.

“This whole trial was a deliberate act of harm to humanity. And the only hope that we have is a very small footnote in the Department of Justice opinion that was issued under the Trump administration that says that if this were based on criminal acts, the entire emergency authorization and all of its benefits would collapse.

“In other words, if we can prove that a crime has occurred – extortion, lying to Congress, public coercion … [and] in Fauci’s record I describe dozens of crimes – [this] would bring everything to its knees, because the moment the protection of the PREP Act is withdrawn from Pfizer, Moderna, Johnson & Johnson, AstraZeneca and others, I can guarantee you that [Fauci] will not be promoting a vaccine. (See Attachment at the End)

“If they are responsible for even one injury or death, they will shut down what they know is unsafe. To do that, the police have to do their job. And there has to be a prosecutor somewhere who is willing to do his job … Right now, I really don’t think we have three levels of government. I don’t think there is a Ministry of Justice.

“If we allow the judiciary to be an arm of the executive branch, then we have lost the three-tier structure of government. As a result, the system breaks down. The judiciary was the only thing that was explicitly independent. We do not allow judges to be patronized in campaign finance. In our country, judges cannot be elected.

“We appoint them, we go through an approval process. We do everything possible to make sure the judiciary is independent. So the only risk to the pharmaceutical industry, the only risk to an out-of-control executive branch, was the judiciary.

“By collapsing the judicial system in the United States, we have made the government a servant to its benefactors, and that is the pharmaceutical industry.

How will it end?

Given the near total collapse of the legal system, we seem to be on a direct path to a global tyranny from which there is no escape. Martin believes, however, that there may be a way out, but it will require action on the part of reasonable people blessed with foresight. He explains:

“You have to have money to buy politicians. In 2008, when we had the global financial crisis, … we instituted policies that in 2028 [or 2033] will functionally [ruin] our benefit programs (Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid) …

“The best calculations we have say that the pension and retirement programs in the United States will deplete their trust fund in 2028. What does that mean? Well, one of the things that people overlook is that there is an unholy alliance between insurance companies and what we call health care.

“Insurance companies are long-term asset owners. These are the people who need to have money today to cover problems in the future. That’s what makes a long-term asset holder. The problem is that the Federal Reserve, the European Central Bank and other central banks have depressed the value of fund returns, so funds are running out of money faster than expected….

“You know as well as anyone that for a politician to stand up and say, ‘I’m going to eliminate or significantly change Social Security,’ is the death knell for any political ambition. It’s a little bit of a problem. But whether they say it or not, the trust fund runs out of money in 2028.

“The catch is that so does the pharmaceutical industry, because it turns out that the money going into this system is actually paying for the drug addiction of this country,” he said.

“And if you go back to 1604, to the founding of the British East India Company and the founding of the Virginia Company, you realize that the 400-plus-year tradition in which we built nation-states on the basis of the drug trade is coming to an end,” he said.

“The good news for all of us is that it’s going to end around 2028 because we have a convergence that they didn’t know how to cover up. The convergence is that the people with the money, the big pharmaceutical companies, are the beneficiaries of a system that will be destroyed by their actions.

“This is the brontosaurus that ate too much because it was the biggest dinosaur. And the good news is they have a pea-sized brain, like the brontosaurus. They’re not intelligent. And the best thing about us furry humans is that we’re actually agile.

“Does that mean we’re not going to be in a little pain in the process? Absolutely not. In 2026, 2027 and 2028, we’re going to see social dislocation that we can’t even imagine, because 86 million people are going to lose what they thought was their retirement savings.

“If we see that number go up to 100 million people now, and those 100 million people are sicker because of what we’ve inculcated in ourselves today…then those people who need more health care are going to be faced with a bankrupt system that’s not going to be able to provide for their lives and their livelihoods. And that’s the death blow to this story.

“The best news is that we have time when people of good conscience come together and say, ‘We’re not going to let the apocalypse come because we have time to build communities that really care about each other.’ We have time to start building structures of accountability.

“We have time to do things that hold our social fabric together so that when that system collapses, we can return to a rational view of what life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness means, because until we regain sovereignty over our health, we can’t celebrate sovereignty over our lives.”

What about the 2030 Agenda?

By now, you’ve probably heard about the World Economic Forum’s Great Reset Agenda, which calls for a transition to a digital central bank currency. This will allow them to do away with the dollar and “reset” the entire global economy, which is now on its last legs. But again, there may be problems in the plan that can save us.

“Like a good [James] Bond villain, he ignores history,” Martin says. The reason Martin remains optimistic that the Great Reset has no chance of success is that there’s no way the global public will embrace an all-digital system that can be wiped out by an electromagnetic pulse or disturbance.

“This year alone, we have seen Internet outages, power outages, and attacks on digital finance that would leave people destitute if they relied on an all-digital financial system,” he said.

“The digital currency illusion is the most bizarre and pathetic Dr. Evil scheme ever invented,” Martin says. “The point is that the enthusiasm for digital currencies is one of those fantastic illusions that is unfortunately flawed in a single respect.

“We live in a world where actors with anarchist intentions and very, very laudable pirates and privateers are more than happy to ensure that digital currencies never see the light of day because they will indeed hack, break and disrupt every system out there.

“And so I see the whole Great Reset as a big theater…. But the whole illusion is being played because they’ve run out of ideas. And … when the establishment politicians have bad ideas, they’re desperately trying to force you to behave in ways that you wouldn’t otherwise accept. All you have to do is say no. Just don’t play along.

The Financial Incentive for Depopulation

Is it possible that COVID hits can cause premature death and be an intentional form of depopulation? Well, since we follow the money, there is certainly a financial incentive for such a scenario. As Martin said, the fewer financial promises you make to people nearing retirement, the better.

“The financial interest in depopulation is an absolutely compelling argument,” Martin said. He laid out that argument in a recent talk at Good News Church in Yuba City, which you can see above.

In short, if people live long enough to claim their Social Security benefits and reach the full term of their life insurance policies, that’s problematic in terms of the threat of financial collapse.

Given these financial realities, which are certainly not publicly disclosed or discussed, there is clearly an economic incentive to reduce the population and get rid of as many people as possible before 2028. Unfortunately, based on previous experiments with lipid nanoparticles and mRNA, the likelihood of a mass attack is high.

“There’s no question that they skipped the animal testing for a very important reason,” Martin says. “We were told we were saving time, but that wasn’t the case.

“The point was to introduce this particular pathogen into humanity so that a lot of people would suffer and eventually die from the consequences that we would have seen if we had done it the conventional way, which was to do safety studies for seven to eight years before we decided to put it into the arms of humans.

“We didn’t do that. And when we look at the safety data from the animal studies on mRNA and lipid nanoparticles, there is no question that mortality is increased by these…. is increased.

“But the concern that I have that is perhaps more egregious than death … is the fake morbidity, the people who have to have around-the-clock medical care, will take such a toll on our economy that we may not recover.

“Because if we have people who have to stay home to take care of sick children, if we have people who have to take care of sick elderly parents, if we have people who have to take care of a sick spouse or relative, that means we don’t have the opportunity to enjoy life and liberty. And I think that morbidity is going to be higher than mortality.

As if all that weren’t enough, Martin has also discovered CRISPR patents that describe how they can “trim” the effects of mRNA/DNA-based vaccines on humans. He believes they may develop a series of pathogens that are then introduced into the population, only to introduce more expensive technology that can fix what was broken.

Unfortunately, this could mean that survival depends on their ability to pay.

Was there an Excess of Deaths due to COVID-19?

To look back for a moment, although we were told that COVID-19 was causing too many deaths in 2020, you can verify this by looking at the number of life insurance policies paid out. And in 2020, fewer life insurance policies were paid out than usual, Martin said.

“Whose numbers are you going to believe? Are you going to believe the CDC, which is trying to pump up and dump this terror campaign about people dying, and therefore you have to put on the mask, you have to socially distance yourself, you have to get vaccinated?” he asked.

“Or do you believe the numbers of those who actually pay claims when a real human life ends? If you look at the audited financial statements of the largest life insurance companies in the world, you will find no evidence of excessive deaths. Is COVID so smart that it only kills the uninsured? Is that what we are supposed to believe?


The Fauci/COVID-19 Dossier