➡ Professor Shozovsky claims that the Covid-19 pandemic was a fabrication as there was no new virus. He argues that what was being labelled as a new virus was, in fact, a previously existing severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) from 2002, being used as a proxy due to the absence of any isolate of a new virus. He calls the subsequent lockdowns and vaccine rollout repercussion of this fabrication, further alleging that the vaccine is a bio-weapon, impacting the human genome rather than acting as a traditional vaccine.
➡ The text discusses concerns about the safety and impacts of the Covid-19 vaccine, referencing specific data on excess mortality rates in different countries and adverse events reported by the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System. It suggests that vaccines could be directly linked to excess mortality and other health issues such as cancer increases. The speaker believes this information is not adequately disclosed by governments and argues that the global economic and social structures have been destabilized due to the pandemic response, including lockdowns and a fear campaign.
➡ We warmly invite everyone to explore and share the new academic insights provided and extend gratitude for supporting GlobalResearch CA and Luxmedia info.

Hello, everyone, and welcome to political landscape of this Friday, 24 November 2023. Today, Professor Shozovsky would like to bring some new elements that are really important. He is even talking about explosive study. Monjo. Professor, hello. Yes, good afternoon. This pertains to the so called Covid-19 pandemic on which I’ve been doing research in the course of the last more than three years. This might shock people, but I think I have to explain it in very careful, very carefully.

There never was a pandemic. That is absolutely clear. And why was there never a pandemic? And when I say there’s never a pandemic, that means there’s a whole sequence of events that come subsequently. The lockdowns, the vaccine, the impoverishment, the entire population of planet earth. But when I say there never was a pandemic, is that there was never a new virus. Now, let me explain. The official narrative, which started already in December of 219 points to an emerging new virus in Wuhan Hubei province in China.

That was in December. And this virus was initially named. It was initially named 219 ncov, 219 ncov, which essentially stands for 2019 new coronavirus. Now, I guess perhaps people don’t ask the question, what on earth am I being vaccinated for? They will say, oh, you’re being vaccinated for Covid-19 Covid-19 is not the virus. It’s the illness associated with the virus. And what happened is that in February, in fact, it was the twelveth of February, the name of the virus was changed from 2019 ncov to SAS cov two.

Not many people take the trouble to verify that they’re being vaccinated for SARS Cov two. Now, Sarcov two stands for it’s a respiratory syndrome. It stands for severe acute respiratory syndrome. And then it says, coronavirus two. Now, where on earth does this two come from? What is the meaning of two? Well, I’ll tell you what the meaning of two is, is that there never was an isolate of a patient which allowed the WHO to identify the new virus, which was called, initially, 219 ncov.

So they said we didn’t have a sample. In other words, we had to resolve a problem. In other words, the who did not have an isolate or purified sample of the new virus. So in other words, if they didn’t have a sample of the new virus, they weren’t in a position to say that it was a new virus. Okay, that seems pretty obvious. And then they said, well, that new virus, 219 new coronavirus, is similar to a virus which we had about 20 years ago, which was called the 2003 SaaS.

It was called 2003 SARS, severe acute respiratory syndrome. And it was actually cataloged as 2003, and it resulted in the infection of something like 45,000 people within China. It was certainly not a dramatic impact at the time. But what happened, and this is confirmed even in the media, experts who were contracted by Bill Gates, not from the Wuhan Virology Institute, which is always part of the narrative, they’re the bad guys.

No, this was the Berlin Virology Institute, which was contracted by the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation for the modest sum, if I recall correctly, something of the order of $249,000 to examine, to develop a solution. Because we don’t have the isolate, we can’t identify the virus. And they hired a team there at the Berlin Virology Institute, which is a very important institution, and they said, well, never mind, we have this virus, 2002.

It’s very similar to the new virus. Now, how can they say it’s similar if they haven’t identified the new virus, it said, has similar genetic sequences. It’s like saying they’re wearing the same coat, the different similar clothes, but the body inside theirs is the same. But there’s absolutely, first of all, the PCR test doesn’t detect the virus, neither the 2002 virus nor the so called new virus, 219 Cov.

But what was proposed to the World Health Organization was to take the SaaS one virus, 2002, as a proxy and say, well, we’ll simply rename it. And they renamed it in the month of February, as I mentioned. And they called it SaaS Cov two. SaaS Cov two, because, and I’m quoting from the british media, they said, well, it was similar to. We might as well just take it because it was similar to the other illness that hit China in 2002.

That was absolute nonsense. And nobody was actually told that they were being vaccinated for something which happened 20 years ago for a virus. And anybody who has a minimal understanding of concepts and it follows the news and then dwelled into the Omicron and the delta and the subvariants of this, that and other, they were told, in fact, we were told, that these were subvariants and variants of the new virus.

No, they weren’t, because the new virus doesn’t exist. They didn’t actually identify it. My question to you will be, would you step back on this crisis? Do you think that they use it to legitimate a bioweapon that is called the vaccine? Precisely. Well, there are two follow ups on this fake virus, a nonexistent virus. First of all, and I’ll look at it in stages, first of all, we had March 13, 2020, where a pandemic is actually announced by the director general of the World Health Organization based on 44,279 PCR positive cases, cumulative, mind you, since January, for population outside China of 6.

4 billion. There was absolutely, even if this was a dangerous virus, the incidence at the level of the entire planet was minimal. And incidentally, I looked into, I cataloged and I looked on March 9, two days before they made the announcement for Canada, there were 125 cases. That’s not cumulative. That’s a one day observation of the number of positive cases using the PCR test. And all the positive PCR tests were, in effect, were indicated as COVID positive, when in fact they could have been a common cold or seasonal influenza or anything else.

Now, the scientists know this, but what we had initially in March was a process of confining the labor force. It’s a lockdown. You confine people in their homes and you freeze the workplace. Now, I’m an economist, and I can say if I ask my students, what happens if you confine the labor force of the entire planet because it was 190 countries, they all followed instructions and they confined their labor force and they froze the workplace.

Well, there were certain sectors which remained open, but it created absolute economic and social chaos at the level both nationally and internationally. We’ve lived through that. And that was, from my standpoint as an economist, it was the most serious economic and social crisis in world history. Why? Because previous crises, first of all, did not order the closing down of real economic activity. There were movements on the stock markets and so on.

And the depression of 1929 was certainly not comparable to what happened in the wake of March 11. And then it continued. There were several slides in stock markets. We’ve discussed that in previous sessions. But what happened in March of 2020? Everybody lived through it. You’re isolated, you’re in your home, you can’t go out, you can’t talk to your neighbors. You’re going to be infected by people in schools and universities and museums and fort events.

That was all fake. Well, it was real for us, but it was based on a big lie. And the big lie is that the virus was that there was a dangerous virus out there. There was a fear campaign, and, ah, and that gave them the pretext and the justification to close down real economic activity. By that I mean small and medium sized enterprises, farms, industry distribution, and not to mention transportation, air travel.

And this was all justified by the fact that if you leave your home you’re going to infect somebody, so you have to stay at home and so on and so forth, when in fact that virus is nonexistent. And I insist it’s clearly documented. They didn’t have an isolate of the virus. And then they said, oh, never mind, we’ll take the 2003 SaaS virus as a proxy and that you can verify it because the name of the virus changed from 219 ncov.

It didn’t have even an n attached to it. It had a two SaaS CoV two. It wasn’t a new virus at all. It was a 20 year old virus that they were. And you will find it in all the literature that when you go to get vaccinated, you’re being vaccinated for SAR Cov two, which is similar to the one of 2002. And there also must have been an issue of property rights, intellectual property rights in making that choice, and patents.

But I won’t get into that and it has to be verified. But there we are, we have a pandemic based on a nonexistent virus. And then we have a vaccine which was launched in November of 2020 and it started, the rollout came out in the middle of December 2020. And that, as you pointed out, is a biological weapon because first of all, it is not a vaccine. It’s an mrna substance which affects the human genome.

It’s a product which leads to genetic modification of people’s body and it certainly doesn’t develop your immune system. Now, in regards to evaluating this so called vaccine, it’s a deadly substance. First of all, we have a report, and I won’t get into it again because we’ve talked about it in previous programs. There’s the report of Pfizer, which is confidential and which was released under freedom of information back in October of it was October 2021.

They didn’t want anybody to see this, of course. The main authorities in the United States had access to it, whether it’s the CDC or the FDA, they had access to it. But essentially what is in that report confirms that it’s a killer vaccine. They had something like 45,000, a sample of 45,000. They come up with a pattern of mortality and morbidity. It’s absolutely corroborated by them, not by some peer reviewed report or anything else who say that this vaccine is dangerous.

It is their report, is their data. And they chose in early March, I’m sorry, of 2021. In early March of 2021 they took the decision. They could have said, well, this is dangerous. We should take the responsibility of withdrawing this substance, this vaccine, which they didn’t do. They didn’t do it knowing that it was a killer vaccine. And I consider that as a transition from homicide to murder.

From a legal standpoint, if they decided to go ahead with a worldwide distribution of this vaccine, of this mrna vaccine, this is an act of murder directed against a population of 8 billion people worldwide. Now, I think what we want to today is to look at some other reflections on this vaccine, and based on different concepts, but essentially focusing on what we call excess mortality. Now, excess mortality is usually easy to collect, because all governments tabulate mortality on an annual basis.

And then it’s the question of analyzing the chronology from 2020 to 2022. But before that, I’d like to refer to a study which was done well, this is not a study which is limited to the Florida Department of Health, but I’ve got the data that they brought out and the Florida Department of Health, in fact, in contrast with almost every single government on the planet who failed to inform people on the dangers of Covid-19, at least here, they have acknowledged in this report the adverse events related to Covid-19.

And these include coagulation, cardiac injuries, encephalitis, cardiac arrests and so on and so forth, cardiovascular diseases. They have cataloged that. But the table that you’re seeing in front of you now is essentially, it really is data which is part of the vaccine adverse events reporting system. It’s called VAS. And VAS stands for vaccine adverse event reporting system. And it’s data which is actually collected on behalf of, tabulated, on behalf of patients who say, well, I had a problem with the vaccine, and they go back to the hospital and they have to file a case.

And that case then enters into the data bank. Now, if you look at that table, in fact, from 2006 until 2020, the levels of complaints in the state of Florida were minimal. Those are for all vaccines combined in the course of more than certainly, well, it’s in the course of approximately 15 years there, 2006 to 2020. Now, this data is available. And then you see, all of a sudden you have, it goes fly high up to 41,473.

Now, mind you, even that data, 41,473, doesn’t necessarily reflect the impacts of the vaccine booklet, because very few people actually take the trouble with hospital bureaucracy to say, well, I’m sick, and this, that and other, and register their adverse events or mortality of a patient who passes away as a result of the vaccine. So essentially what we have to look at is, and we’ll go to looking at Germany.

I’ve got a few countries here. Germany now is very interesting because they tabulate the data. And this is on the screen now, here you have three countries, I’m sorry, you’ve got three years, 2021 and 2022. And this, again, it’s based on a yearly excess mortality. The figures that you have on these three years are in relation to a trend, and then you have also the mortality by age group.

Now, what we can say about 2020 is that 2020 was pretty much a normal year. In fact, excess mortality is negative. It’s negative in relation to all previous years, and that’s the yearly excess mortality. It was negative, and as you see, it was depending on the age group, but by and large, it’s negative. And then you move on to 2021 and the only group, age group which is not really affected is zero to 14, when in fact, they weren’t vaccinating.

Zero to 14 at the beginning. But again, it’s a big jump, absolutely big jump in the data going up to more than, for some categories, going up to more than 8%. And then again, if you look at 2022, you have a massive increase in excess mortality. All in all, for 2022, it’s in excess of 6%. Now, let me go to another country. The tabulation is not as sophisticated as for Germany.

This is excess deaths. In Australia, it starts on in. It starts in 2020, and then it starts in 2021, and then it goes up to week 30 of 2022, and there you have excess mortality. Now, this is excess mortality. Again, it goes from something of the order of 1300 in 2020, which is minimal in relation to the tendency over a longer period of time. It’s more or less zero one three, and then it goes up to 11,000 in 2021, and then it goes up to 18,973 in 2022 over.

And that’s not the whole year, that’s from week one to week 30. So in fact, it’s a bit more than half a year. They’re 52 weeks in the year. Now, that, again, these are just examples, but excess mortality is directly. Is triggered by the vaccine. Well, they’ll probably say, where’s the proof? It may be triggered by something else, or they’ll say it’s the virus. Well, the virus doesn’t exist, but there you are, you’ve got.

And if it were the virus, then it would have started in 2020, because the so called new virus started in December of 2019. But then we’ve shown that that virus doesn’t exist, and that is very crucial. Now, then I’m going to get to another very interesting recent report by a prominent group of british scientists, and it pertains to England and Wales. Now, this report for England and Wales, and we must include Wales.

I was born in Wales, incidentally, even though my name is Chotsadovsky, but England and Wales, in fact, the first vaccines were started in Wales. They started also in December of 2020. It was a little bit before the United States. And this particular analysis of excess mortality pertains to cancer and different categories of cancer. And there we are. We’ve got breast cancer, brain cancer, cologne cancer and skin cancer, which are categorized.

If you look at the first year, 2020, it’s negative, with only the malignant neoplasma, without specification of site. Well, that’s slightly positive, but all the other ones are negative, which means that in 2020, the excess mortality was negative in regards to cancer, to mortality linked to cancer. And then what we have is that it goes fly high. It increases in 2021, and then in 2022, it goes fly high with malignant melanoma of the skin going up to 74%.

But all of that, 27, 23, 49, et cetera, it indicates a very significant increase in mortality pertaining to cancer. And I think that, and also for age groups, for younger age groups. And this is what is happening worldwide. Those scientists that have established, well, they’ll look also at cardiac. At myocarditis, cardiac arrest and so on, many, many different things which are associated with the vaccine and which have gone fly high since the introduction of the vaccine, essentially in early 2021.

Cardiac arrests, acute cardiac disorders. And all of this is also confirmed by the numerous cases of people in all walks of life, pilots, health workers, school teachers, and young and pregnant women. That is what is happening to our population. And as you mentioned, quite this is a biological weapon. It’s a biological weapon. And our governments know what I’ve just presented, because they have access to all the official data, some of which they might reveal, but mostly certainly in Canada, they don’t reveal anything.

And there we are. We have our politicians, which are pressured to conform or they are bribed, but they are not acting on behalf of the people who actually elected them. They should have. And the whole welfare state is collapsing. And I should mention there’s a fourth stage, which is now unfolding all over the world, is the debt crisis, is the levels of debt at all, the levels of debt, of public debt, fiscal cris of the state, but also personal debts and people who lose their jobs, small companies that go bankrupt, big companies that also go bankrupt, including the airlines, and this is the consequence of the earlier period of the lockdown.

But successive lockdowns coupled with the fear campaign, it destabilizes the global economy and global social structures in a way which is unprecedented in world history. Thank you very much for this week and we would like to invite everybody who are listening to to share this new element that the professor brought, and we would like to thank you to support GlobalResearch CA and also Luxmedia info. Thank you. .