![\"\"](\"http:\/\/stateofthenation.co\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/03\/dr-david-martin-777x437-1.jpg\")
YouTube<\/p><\/div>\n
Posted By: Hilda Labrada Gore with Dr. David Martin<\/p>\n
Dr. David Martin is an outspoken critic of medical tyranny and those who promote it. This interview exposes some of his thinking and plans to counter the prevailing false narratives. He is a medical doctor, formerly on faculty with the Univ. of Virginia Medical School. \u2043 TN Editor<\/h3>\n
Welcome to the show,\u00a0<\/strong>David<\/strong><\/a>.<\/strong><\/p>\n Thank you so much. It\u2019s great to be here<\/p>\n You\u2019re not a health guy, you\u2019re a legal guy, right?<\/strong><\/p>\n No, my training was in medicine. I was on the faculty of the University of Virginia Medical School, Radiology Orthopedic Surgery. I ran the FDA clinical trials program for the medical devices for UVA for a decade. I have a lot of backgrounds but I have a legal background as well, but my professor position was in the medical school at the University of Virginia.<\/p>\n What\u2019s your take on what\u2019s happening with the virus right now?<\/strong><\/p>\n Let\u2019s start with I don\u2019t think something\u2019s happening with the virus right now. I think this is a very significant criminal operation, which is an act of terrorism. I think that\u2019s what this is. The reason why I think that is because I\u2019ve been monitoring since 1999. In 1999, we noticed that for the first time, the United States officially started funding work to what effectively was amplified biological toxins. They used the Coronavirus model as a way to do that. From 1999 to 2002, there was an explicit program to figure out how to get the coronavirus, which historically has been a nuisance to humans but not a big problem. It\u2019s been a big problem to animals.<\/p>\n In fact, the fundamental research for a decade before the \u201890s was in cardiac myopathy in rabbits, not in people. The guy who was leading this program under the funding of NIAID with Anthony Fauci had gotten money to amplify the pathogenicity of a part of Coronavirus. He made it more toxic. Not surprisingly, the places where he was researching and the places where he was collaborating are where the Coronavirus outbreak allegedly started with the SARS outbreak in 2002 going into 2003. I have always said, I find it interesting that the official story we\u2019re supposed to believe is that somehow or another, this mysteriously came out of the blue and it happened to come out of the blue where biological weapons labs were also happening.<\/p>\n It\u2019s amazing how nature backed into the, \u201cThere\u2019s a weapons lab. Why don\u2019t we go ahead and have an outbreak there?\u201d The fact of the matter is we, as humans, manipulated Coronavirus and then we had SARS. Here\u2019s the funny thing. After 2003, the problem was Coronavirus resolved itself. It went through the population, had an effect and it resolved itself. Rather than celebrating, \u201cWe survived this thing,\u201d some people got sick, some people died, that\u2019s a tragedy but it was not the pandemic everybody thought it was going to be.<\/p>\n We survived it without a vaccine.<\/strong><\/p>\n No vaccine, no intervention at all and they seriously publicly lamented the fact that it wasn\u2019t virulent enough. Starting in 2005, there was an active program with the DARPA and with NIAID to begin work on figuring out ways to amplify the pathogenicity of this biological substance. They specifically focused on two pieces. One was the S1 spike protein and one was the ACE2 receptor. The ACE2 receptor is important because it\u2019s the thing that makes lung tissue sensitive to this. That was the mysterious piece because it didn\u2019t used to be a lung problem. It used to be a vascular problem but they amplified the ACE2 receptor component and they amplified the S1 spike protein, which is a very toxic component.<\/p>\n Those two amplifications started being amplified and funded through NIAID in 2005. In 2012 going into 2013, when we had the MERS outbreak in the Middle East, the National Science Foundation, National Academy of Science, NIAID and others started going, \u201cMaybe we\u2019re doing something we shouldn\u2019t be doing.\u201d There was a question of the ethics and the morals of doing this Gain-of-Function research leading to the 2013, 2014 decision to stop Gain-of-Function research is what the public was told. What the public wasn\u2019t told was the people who were involved in the BSL-4 defense labs were allowed to keep amplifying this viral pathogen.<\/p>\n Let me interrupt you to ask a question. What was the justification they were giving for amplifying this virus?<\/strong><\/p>\n The cover story is this. Biological weapons could be developed by some rogue nation or by some bad actors. If that happened, we should be prepared to develop vaccines. That\u2019s what we were told. As early as March of 2005, I wrote in a public briefing to law enforcement intelligence agencies that this was not a just in case problem. It was, in fact, a program that included the dispersion of explosive biological material, such that you could put toxins into rocket-propelled grenades. I don\u2019t know about you, but when I hear that, it doesn\u2019t sound like a public health program to me. I published this book in March of 2005.<\/p>\n It doesn\u2019t sound defensive. It sounds offensive.<\/strong><\/p>\n When people tell me, \u201cIt\u2019s all in the interest of public health. It was all about making sure we were safe from potentially rogue actor states.\u201d I\u2019m sitting there going, \u201cThat smells like BS,\u201d because it is. We have the evidence that in fact these programs were dual-use programs. These were programs that in fact did have a public health vaccine development treatment program. That\u2019s true but they also had an offensive military application as well. We\u2019re tracking all this stuff and we\u2019ve been tracking it since 1999. Lo and behold, we started looking at the fact that coming into the spring of 2019.<\/p>\n This is nine months before they\u2019re supposed to be a thing, we start seeing a lot of documents start showing up with the language about an accidental or intentional release of a respiratory pathogen. If that came out in one document and we go, \u201cSomebody was concerned about that,\u201d when it starts showing up in a bunch of documents, it shows up in March 2019, it shows up again in May 2019, it shows up again in September 2019 in the World Health Organization Global Preparedness Monitoring Board Program, you start going, \u201cHold on a minute, we\u2019re being told something\u2019s happening.\u201d<\/p>\n It\u2019s like they were hinting somehow.<\/strong><\/p>\n Except they are not very much hinting. They are going, \u201cYou keep saying an accidental or intentional release of respiratory pathogen.\u201d We were not surprised when we expected to see something happen in Wuhan or in Italy or in North Carolina or in any of the places where we know the BSL labs were manipulating the Coronavirus. For me, the whole idea that this was somehow an accidental thing fails on its face because you can\u2019t get an accident with premeditated planning and then have nature come along and go, \u201cBy the way, humans are talking about doing something. Why don\u2019t I fly a bat over a wet food market in Wuhan and somehow make this mysteriously happen?\u201d The amount of improbabilities to land an accident of nature in a place where you also have a biological weapons lab is zero.<\/p>\n What are the implications of something being done deliberately?<\/strong><\/p>\n This is an act of war is what it is. It\u2019s war in the new way we\u2019re doing war because the new way we\u2019re doing more is with financial, biologic, health and living standards and everything else. War in the old lineup the muskets and shoot people, it\u2019s not how we\u2019re doing war anymore. We\u2019re doing war by depriving people of their liberty, of their livelihoods, of their access to medicine, the access to health, to life and to whatever they\u2019re doing. That\u2019s the new war.<\/p>\n Who is coming to war against us?<\/strong><\/p>\n This is a massive transition between what used to be what I refer to as the Westphalian Nation-State Model, where it used to be you took the map and you drew lines on the map and you said, \u201cThat\u2019s France. That\u2019s Britain.\u201d That era has come to an end quite a long time ago, probably around the time that Nixon took us off the gold standard. What\u2019s happened is slowly corporations and corporate interests and financial interests have moved in as the thing that makes the difference. This is a war against the Westphalian Nation-State Model. It\u2019s a coup of that model where corporations and financial interests have said, \u201cWe\u2019re the ones that call the shots.\u201d<\/p>\n Now we know that there are hosts of individuals who manipulate elections, who buy politicians and who buy everybody. We know that those organizations don\u2019t officially have nation-states standing. When you know that a person like Bill Gates or Jeff Bezos or Anthony Fauci, never elected, never appointed, never anything that has a legal democratic process around it. When you have those people who show up on every head of state stage, whispering in the ear of every head of state and saying, \u201cThis is how you\u2019re going to act,\u201d that\u2019s not they\u2019re advising and giving their best input. They\u2019re running the show.<\/p>\n What we\u2019re experiencing right now is the most insidious form of what is effectively a civil war where the democratic nation-states are being erased by corporate interests and financial interests who have decided they are going to be taking the position that they\u2019ve already paid for. They bought Congress and legislatures. They bought Governor\u2019s offices all over the country. They\u2019ve bought heads of state around the world and now they\u2019re moving in and taking what they bought.<\/p>\n It\u2019s not the sickness that\u2019s the element of war as much as also the collapse of the economy and fear that is running rampant. I see these as tools as well.<\/strong><\/p>\n This is more a financial crisis than a health crisis. Now we could both agree that our definition of health has been corrupted a long time ago. Health as a construct probably was hijacked somewhere around the 1770s when we started manipulating and this is Thomas Jefferson and others started manipulating pathogens to try to figure out how to control the epidemic-type and plague-type experiences. Whether it\u2019s the poxes that came over from Europe, whether it\u2019s the animal to human transfers that were a concern at the end of the 18th century, what happened was we decided that somehow or another chemistry was the basis of health. We stopped looking at the vitality like we\u2019re standing out in the cold.<\/p>\n Our bodies have adapted for the cold. What has happened? Our blood supply is out of our faces. It\u2019s going into our core because that\u2019s how bodies were designed to deal with cold. That\u2019s not a bad thing. That\u2019s health. In fact, we would be unhealthy if that didn\u2019t happen but that\u2019s not a chemistry thing. That\u2019s neurologic. That\u2019s physiologic. That\u2019s all kinds of systems engaged. The problem is you can\u2019t meter those systems. You can\u2019t dose those systems, which means you can\u2019t monetize them. What happened was we started saying health was about things you could monetize because if I can dose you something, then I can charge you something. If your body is working, my body\u2019s working, then nobody can make any money off it.<\/p>\n