Wednesday 15 December 2021

Going Viral: Dr. Peter McCullough Joins Joe Rogan – Says Medical Elites “Purposely Suppressed Treatments” in Order to Force Mass Vaccinations


On Monday, Dr. Peter McCullough sat down for a lengthy discussion about Covid-19 on Joe Rogan’s extremely popular podcast, The Joe Rogan Experience.

Just like he did last week when he appeared on Brett Weinstein’s DarkHorse Podcast, McCullough took aim directly at the federal government and the medical elites for their massive role in the manufactured Covid-19 pandemic.

During the conversation with Rogan, the world-renowned cardiologist dropped yet another bombshell claim, which he says is thoroughly backed up by the evidence.

According to McCullough, the Covid-19 pandemic was premeditated by public health officials working in tandem with medical elites, and the evidence for this had been made clear well before the first reports of a Covid outbreak in late 2019.

In order to promote mass adoption of the experimental vaccine, McCullough says health officials purposefully suppressed treatments and refrained from compiling a treatment protocol to combat the virus, in hopes that people would be so afraid that they would just take the jab.

It’s not just my idea, no. It’s completely laid out by the book by Dr. Pam Popper [and] another book recently published by Peter Breggen, “Covid-19 and the Global Predators: We are the Prey.” These books are basically non-fiction, [there are] a thousand citations in the Breggen book showing how it was coordinated and planned. Now Bobby Kennedy has his book out – “The Real Anthony Fauci” – I am the most mentioned physician in that book.

I can tell you that if you want to find the evidence that Moderna was working on the vaccine before the virus ever emanated out of the [Wuhan] lab – If you want to find the collisions and the operations between The Gates Foundation, and GAVI, and CEPI, and Pfizer, and Moderna, and the vaccine manufacturers, and the Wuhan lab, and the National Institutes of Health, and Ralph Baric, and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hilland how this was all organized [the information is avilible].

In addition to citing several source texts that have compiled a timeline of the events that led to the Wu-flu outbreak, McCullough also spoke about a pandemic planning seminar that was held at Johns Hopkins University in 2017. The group of public health researchers looked at a ‘hypothetical’ virus outbreak that was named SPARS, which was also supposed to be a coronavirus that is related to SARS and MERS (just like Covid-19 is).


In this dystopian “future scenario,” not only did researchers ‘predict’ that this virus would come to the US and shut down major cities with mass delusional panic, but they also wrote in their conclusion that there would be confusion over treatments to the virus (a la’ Ivermectin) which public health officials could take advantage of in order to compel the masses to take the experimental jab. 

McCullough continued:

“If you want to see the Johns Hopkins planning seminar, called the SPARS pandemic, in 2017 where they had a symposium and people showed up [you can].

They wrote up the symposium’s findings and they published them. [the document] says it’s going to be a coronavirus – it’s going to be related to MERS and SARS – it’s going to come over here to the united states – it’s going to shut down cities and frighten people there’s going to be confusion regarding a drug (Hydroxychloriquin, Ivermectin) – and we are going to utilize all that in order to railroad the population into mass vaccination.

It’s [all] laid out in the Johns Hopkins SPARS pandemic training seminar.

The only thing they got wrong was the year, they said it was going to be 2025 – instead, it landed a few years early.”

Watch the clip where Dr. McCullough discusses the pre-planned Covid pandemic here:

In case you were wondering about the Johns Hopkins report that McCullough cites…

From the 2017 SPARS “future scenario” pandemic paper:

“Misinformation is proving especially challenging in connection with vaccines where social media users encounter disproportionate negative reporting and images, are more swayed by personal narratives about vaccination’s adverse effects than the science, and tend to judge disparate ideas about vaccines as equally valid, regardless of expertise

After much consideration of possible emergency situations that would require MCM (medical countermeasures) use, the project team decided on setting the storyline around a novel coronavirus that caused a mild, flu-like disease in most instances, but pneumonia and/or hypoxia requiring hospitalization and extensive medical treatment in a small minority of cases.

The project team named this fictional pathogen the St. Paul Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus, or SPARS for short, because in the scenario it is first identified in St. Paul, Minnesota.

Two features of this disease are important to note because they impact how the storyline of the scenario plays out, as well as some of the communication dilemmas that occur. First, the project team decided to make SPARS have an extended incubation period (7 to 10 days) but a short latent period (4 to 5 days).

This complicates the scenario because infected persons in the story are capable of spreading the virus for up to 6 days before showing symptoms of the disease themselves.

This feature of SPARS makes isolation procedures in the scenario, like urging people to stay home if they think they might be sick, less effective than what is typically expected for airborne pathogens and thus introduces novel dilemmas in the storyline.”

The Johns Hopkins researchers followed up their report with a series of dystopian questions about how to combat potential issues surrounding their public health response plan that could arise during a coronavirus outbreak. One question asks why communicating the facts alone might not be enough to compel people to take recommended drugs, and that public health officials should instead turn to “empathy” as a means of convincing individuals to comply.

Why might communicating the science around MCM adverse effects alone not be enough to address people’s fears and concerns about an MCM like Kalocivir (a hypothetical treatment for SPARS)? Why is it also important to communicate with compassion, concern, and empathy?”

Another question just plainly asks why health officials should “still communicate with compassion and genuine sympathy” if they were questioned or confronted by someone who had taken a vaccine and had experienced a serious adverse reaction.

“Despite the uncertain science about the link between Coravax and the reported neurological symptoms, why should health officials still communicate with compassion and genuine sympathy toward those in the vaccinated population who experience medical issues subsequent to being vaccinated?”

Day after day, the evidence just keeps mounting that some sort of Nuremberg-style accountability must be had here.

If the claims by Dr. McCullough and others are true, and they seem to be providing the evidence and credentials to back their claims, then this pandemic will end up going down as one of the worst atrocities in human history.

Post a Comment

Start typing and press Enter to search