[Jeff Gerber]

If I’m not mistaken, he is talking about the ability to deploy and change genes in people. He is saying that this is of interest to DARPA as a way to respond to threats. What part of this is “informed consent”?

[Jeff Gerber]

Here’s the full discourse:

“I’m Dan Wattendorf from the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency. I’m in the biological technologies office and I thank you for inviting me here to speak to you here today. DARPA is particularly interested in this area because we feel like there are two aspects of this technology that are critically important to both deliberate on the capabilities and the security surrounding them. One is what is exceptional abo gene drives which is the ability for a genetic element particularly when it is synthetic or designed by an individual versus natural to propagate and change a population and the ability to do that could have security ramifications for the United States and the globe. Secondly, which is as Phil mentioned is the facility to perform these types of experiments and create these capabilities faster than whatever has been occurred before because the emergent technology of genome editing techniques.

Because of those two reasons, DARPA is looking at this technology as something that is capable for great benefit and is also potentially something that could be a security threat. Particularly at ecosystems and population levels for organisms that reproduce quickly such as agricultural or animal or plant. So, I think these circumstances are our key for us to be able to understand the deliberation of the community that is looking at the best way to inform the process of how to investigate these capabilities most effectively.

However, DARPA has a very specific role in the community to not admire the problem and be able to look at all the potential ramifications and even for both capability in good and in bad but also to be used as a tool to create technology that could either mitigate the threat or ensure that its success works in a safe way. So it is certainly within possibility that DARPA would take on efforts to invest in gene drive-based technologies in ways that would either provide it to be a safe tool or safe technology and ways that would be able to mitigate threats when used by our adversaries or by others who are malinformed or by doing it potentially with malfeasance in mind.

So, it is very helpful for us to not only understand the deliberations of this community, what you decide to do as you move forward, but also to be able to understand how you could point to what are technologies that you need to do to either make it safer or make it able for us to mitigate the threat.

So, we are particularly looking at not only the outcome of this group but potentially even specific recommendations to be able to understand where you see that those technologies being able to be helpful. Because we may be required to actually invest in technologies to improve this capability during the process of elaborating the challenges and benefits of it. Because we do not, we may not have the time in this case to actually wait for and make calls for certain scientific actions and communities to deliberate, we actually may need to be working on technology solutions right now; and the alacrity of our institution to be able to do that is that it can; and that’s where, why we are here today. To be able to follow that, thank you.”

Dan was the project manager for DARPA’s ADEPT mRNA pandemic solution; and here, he is talking about DARPA needing to weigh in on the new gene drive technology that these folks are congregating on. Clearly, DARPA sees this as a threat in the same way it sees a pandemic as a threat, and they want to get a handle on it and find solutions. In the manner he is speaking, to me it sounds like they already have ideas of what they want to do.

This is meddling with mother nature, God’s own design. “GMO” is being taken to a whole new level (species extinction can be a result) and the justifications of this collaboration, or the sales point, sounded like it is for the sake of solving malaria deaths in Africa. But the Colonel is pointing out it can also be for nefarious purposes and DARPA wants to be ready.

I don’t know if I’m more frightened by this group (NIH, FNIH, DARPA, and Gates Foundation) or by DARPA alone given the outcome and solutions used for the COVID pandemic. These scientists seem to feel entitled to play with mother nature and at the same time are admitting it is extremely dangerous.

The whole thing reminds me of a Jurassic Park movie on steroids…. toying with nature. “Gene drives can unintentionally spread beyond intended regions or species.”

The book The Coming Wave by Mustafa Suleyman addresses this topic of genetic engineering and I had to set the book down and stop reading it.

I hope I’ve called attention to this because I think the public needs to be able to weigh in on this. We already have GMO that somehow went without public opinion and oversight. Now this.

[IMA-GregT]

I don’t know what you’re worried about. We should just trust them. They’re the experts after all!

It’s just unbelievably frightening. Thanks so much for this jgerber. Great information.

How does everyone else feel about this completely undiscussed, unagreed insanity?

[Jeff Gerber]

I see now. Gene Drives in that video were given as a solution to malaria: “…develop gene drive mechanisms to suppress anopheles gambiae populations in Africa to levels that are incapable of sustaining malaria transmission as you know malaria was responsible for more than 400,000 child deaths in Africa last year…”

But if you know anything about Jim Humble and Chlorine Dioxide, you know that a cure for malaria is Chlorine Dioxide and the Red Cross used it with great success: https://odysee.com/@mmstestimonials:e/LEAKED-ProofTheRedCrossCured154MalariaCasesWithMMS:0?&sunset=lbrytv .

So, on one hand you have a cure, and on the other you have the same people that brought us mRNA “vaccines” (Daniel Wattendorf) trying to pedal a solution (Gene Drives) which is quite literally a bioweapon by all definitions.

Daniel now works for the Gates Foundation and is working on aerosolized mRNA “vaccines”.

Clearly the tag line for this is “It’s not conspiracy theory if it’s the truth”. But boy are these folks trying hard to hide the truth.

odysee.com

LEAKED: Proof the Red Cross Cured 154 Malaria Cases with MMS

Read more: https://mmstestimonials.co/malaria/leaked-proof-the-red-cross-cured-154-malaria-cases-with-mms |

[IMA-GregT]

@jrgerber (Ignore this first sentence, but I’ll leave it in as others watching may have understood the same) I wonder if someone has gotten to the voice over on that video (if it’s an english dub) as at around 5.45 he mentions sodium chloride a number of times. So that’s salt (NaCl) I think, and I think he should’ve mentioned Chlorine Dioxide rather, which is what I think MMS promotes.

(Now,hving watched again, I pretty sure I misheard. And even worse he had a Dutch accent, which I should understand, being an Afrikaans speaker.) He was probably saying sodium chlorite (NaClO2).

What a difference a T and a D can make! Which makes sense as “MMS is a product typically composed of sodium chlorite (NaClO2) which, when mixed with an acid, produces chlorine dioxide.”

Lots of interest in Chlorine Dioxide generally.

[Jeff Gerber]

Yes, same thing here. As I was listening to him, I knew he meant sodium chlorite, but it sounded like I was hearing sodium chloride; then I heard him say it clearly enough that I confirmed that is indeed what he was saying, sodium chlorite. You have to mix sodium chlorite with an acid to make Chlorine Dioxide.

[IMA-GregT]

@jrgerber I should just listen harder 🤣

[Jeff Gerber]

🤣

Dr. Kory has a nice writeup about it. Apparently, you can directly ingest sodium chlorite. The stomach acid activates it to produce chlorine dioxide: https://pierrekorymedicalmusings.com/p/the-safety-of-orally-ingested-chlorine

This is pretty amazing from that article:

“IS 224 MG OF CHLORITE SAFE TO INFUSE INTRAVENOUSLY?

In this ALS study, they treated patients with chlorite intravenously (recall that chlorite is the active ingredient in the popular over the counter formulation called MMS and that chlorite turns into chlorine dioxide when exposed to something acidic). In that study they reported that 2mg/kg/day doses of chlorite for 5 days in a row (then 3 days in a row on a monthly basis) was well tolerated. Thus, for a70kg male, you could take IV chlorite at doses of 140mg a day.”

pierrekorymedicalmusings.com

The Safety Of Orally Ingested Chlorine Dioxide At Commonly Used Treatment Doses

Contrary to the edicts of regulatory agencies worldwide that chlorine dioxide is "bleach," "bleach-like," or a "poison," numerous studies show the safety of oral ingestion at treatment doses.