The most viewed and banned documentary of all time, PLANDEMIC INDOCTORNATION tracks a three decade-long money trail that leads directly to the key players behind the COVID 19 pandemic. It connects the dots between all forms of media, the medical industry, politics and the financial industry to unmask the major conflicts of interests with the decision makers that are currently managing this crisis.


Back in 1999 patents on corona virus started showing up. In 2003 the Center for Disease Control saw the possibility of a gold strike, and that was the corona virus outbreak that happened in Asia. They saw that a virus they knew could be easily manipulated, something that was very valuable, and in 2003 they sought to patent it, and they made sure that they controlled the proprietary rights to the disease, to the virus, it's detection, and all of the measurement of it.

We know that Anthony Fauci, Ralph Baer, the center for disease control, and the laundry list of people who wanted to take credit for inventing corona virus, were at the hub of this story, from 2003 to 2018 they controlled 100 percent of the cash flow that built the empire around the industrial complex of corona virus.

In 2002 there was a recognition that the corona virus was seen as an exploitable mechanism for both good and ill. On 4/25/2003 the US center for disease control filed a patent on the corona virus transmitted to humans.

They actually filed patents on not only the virus but they also filed patents on its detection, and a kit to measure it. Because of that CDC patent, they had the ability to control who is authorized in who was not authorized to make independent inquiries into corona virus. You cannot look at the virus, you cannot measure it, you cannot develop a test kit for it. And by alternately receiving the patents that constrained anyone from using, they had the means, they had the motive, and most of all they had the monetary gain from turning corona virus from a pathogen to profit. Developing and owning the corona virus vaccine has become a bio tech arms race with political overtones.

And so somewhere between 2012 in 2013 something happened. The federal funding for research suddenly became impaired by something that happened at the NIH, where the NIH got this little tiny moment of clarity instead: "We think something we're doing is wrong", and in 2013 the NIH said: gain of function research on corona virus should be suspended. The national institutes of health had a moral, and social, and potentially legal reason to object to research. But the letters that were sent to the researchers essentially said: you are receiving notice that we're telling you to stop. And now on the bottom of the page we're gonna clarify what stop means: Keep going. But, when the heat gets hot in 2014 and 15 what do you do? You offshore the research, you fund the Wuhan institute of virology to do this stuff it sounds like it's getting a little edgy with respect to its morality and legality, but do you do it straight away, now you run the money through a series of cover organizations to make it look like you're finding a U. S. operation which then subcontracted the Wuhan institute of virology, the US could say China did it, China could say the U. S. did it, and the cool thing is both of them are almost telling the truth...

There have been hundreds and hundreds of leaks from high containment laboratories that do research on pathogenic corona viruses and other potentially lethal organisms. I was particularly interested in a paper that came out in "nature medicine" by 5 scientists, claiming that it was definitely a natural occurrence rather than a lab construct, but the arguments they use did not hold water, they didn't really make a lot of scientific sense, and yet all kinds of very important people started parroting what this paper said, and so that got me scratching my head questioning why are these people risking their reputation when it's obviously illogical, you know it doesn't hold water, somebody must've made them publish this, and somebody was to tell these other people that they have to say it's a great piece of science.

The pace of our modern world makes it nearly impossible for working people to research the events and policies that shape their lives. When seeking answers to life's most pressing questions when we go first? Google! Enter the subject it go. And there it is. Only what they want us to see. In today's culture of copy and paste journalism it's common for hundreds of unrelated outlets to feature the exact same report, this is not the result of laziness this is by design. When we see identical headlines across seemingly unrelated platforms the logical mind concludes: well then it must be true. The illusion that numerous new sources have arrived at the same conclusion gives us confidence to share the chosen narrative. And just like that would become the unwitting pushers of propaganda. Search engines are the holy grail for those seeking to control the narrative. Google is already more powerful in terms of its control over people's lives than almost every government on the planet. As the most influential search engine in the world, through its ubiquitous reach Google has more power to influence U. S. elections than any other foreign nation.

The blacklists is something that Google said: didn't exist, and they testified that under oath. Now me as an engineer I just did a search on Google's internal search engine and guess what I found, it had blacklisted search terms like "cancer cures". Why is Google deciding what people can and cannot search for? What was once an efficient tool for navigating the world of information is now a network for global surveillance, data collection and social engineering.

Facebook's fact checking arm politicized is owned by the Poynter institute, which has received substantial funding from big pharma allies such as Google and the Bill & Melinda Gates foundation.

Wikipedia supported by the Wikimedia foundation - a nonprofit parent organization with a long history of politically tight funders, many named, many anonymous. What exactly does a Wikipedia donor received in exchange for the generosity? What began as an unbiased open source platform is now weaponized to undermine the work and reputation of anyone deemed a threat to its stakeholders, and once this near you, they lock you out from making corrections to your own bio. In summary, most independent fact checkers are neither independent nor factual. Simply put, they're political spin machines.

If you can keep people from assembling, guess what they're not talking about, they're not talking about the issues of the campaign. If you can keep people in their homes, the only source of information that they can have is what you carry it for them. Now you know how to target by election. They're in the only place you allow them to be, being fed the only message you're allowing them to, through a media that you control.

It was the telecommunications act of 1996 that opened the door for predatory corporations to monopolize the industry of print and broadcast. Today a handful of corporate empires own and control the vast majority of everything you read, hear and watch, from the biggest movie studios, television and radio networks, newspapers and magazines, to the vast universe of internet news and entertainment science.

News personalities are not the only high paid actors to serve the propaganda machine. Most late night talk shows are owned by the same corporate overlords and that's followed by the same script, only laced with a laugh.

In 1979 the world decided that we needed to reform our patent system and one of the modifications was - we allowed recipients of federal funding to patent and retain economic interest in the research that the public paid for, you get a $5000000 grant from the taxpayer and then you get to charge the taxpayer a premium for the technology they paid to develop. Should the pharmaceutical companies profit off vaccine research the taxpayers have helped fund?

Now there is an organization called "the global monitoring preparedness board". This organization is a part of the World Health Organization come out with a recommendation that by September 2020 a global pandemic preparedness exercises have to be completed, and one of them has to be done on the release of a respiratory pathogen.

We are living in a time where leadership unfortunately is compromised, and by that I mean that individuals are placed in power for their ability to be influenced, not their merits of leadership.

Nothing could be clearer than the leadership of the World Health Organization. The World Health Organization is the institution granted exclusive power to guide and protect the health and wellness of humanity. WHO is sustained by private donations the bulk of which are made by pharmaceutical and biotech corporations who have a vast financial interest in the organization support. In 2017 the Associated Press reported that WHO routinely spends about $200000000 a year on travel expenses, more than what it spends to fight some of the biggest problems in public health, including aids, tuberculosis, and malaria, combined. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus is the world health organization's first director general, that isn't even a medical doctor.

This isn't a vaccine story. This is a population management story. If your goal is to make this beautiful earth that we live on an exclusive playground for the entitled, then populations that get in the way are a problem, and there is the empirical impulses of individuals who have decided, that by out ranking the rest of humanity they can dictate upon humanity the conditions of their existence.

When human societies lose their freedom, it's not usually because tyrants have taken it away, it's usually because people willingly surrender their freedom in return for protection against some external threat. That's what we are seeing now. We are being conditioned to have the excuse for unbelievable acts of tyranny which will be justified by remember 2020. And this is also a test of humanity to see how much of our liberty we will let go, before we finally draw the line under enough.

More content @ Interview with Judy Anne Mikovits
More content @ Second Interview with Judy Anne Mikovits
More content @ Bill Gates Agenda