Fuellmich Martin interview – Pandemic Timeline https://pandemictimeline.com Chronological Sequence of Events Mon, 13 Jan 2025 21:30:28 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.7.2 https://pandemictimeline.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/Covid-150x150.ico Fuellmich Martin interview – Pandemic Timeline https://pandemictimeline.com 32 32 Pfizer files patent US6372224: Canine coronavirus S gene and uses therefor https://pandemictimeline.com/2000/01/pfizer-files-patent-6372224-canine-coronavirus-s-gene-and-uses-therefor/ Fri, 28 Jan 2000 00:00:58 +0000 https://pandemictimeline.com/?p=1417 From the patent: The present invention provides the amino acid and nucleotide sequences of a CCV spike gene, and compositions containing one or more fragments of the spike gene and encoded polypeptide for prophylaxis, diagnostic purposes and treatment of CCV infections. — Patent US6372224B1 This is the patent for the spike protein virus, a vaccine…

]]>

From the patent:

The present invention provides the amino acid and nucleotide sequences of a CCV spike gene, and compositions containing one or more fragments of the spike gene and encoded polypeptide for prophylaxis, diagnostic purposes and treatment of CCV infections.

Patent US6372224B1

This is the patent for the spike protein virus, a vaccine for the canine Coronavirus, which is actually one of the multiple forms of Coronavirus.

From the Reiner/Martin interview:

But as you know, up until 1999, the topic of Coronavirus vs V [VSV?] the patenting activity around Coronavirus was uniquely applied to veterinary sciences. The first vaccine ever patented for Coronavirus was actually sought by Pfizer. The application for the first vaccine for Coronavirus, which was specifically this s spike protein. So the exact same thing that allegedly we have rushed into invention. The first application was filed January 28 2000, 21 years ago. So the idea that we we mysteriously stumbled on the the way to intervene on vaccines is not only ludicrous, it is incredulous because Timothy Millor, Sharon Klepfer, Albert Paul Reed, and Elaine Jones on January 28 2000, filed what ultimately was issued as US Patent 6372224 which was the spike protein virus, a vaccine for the canine Coronavirus, which is actually one of the multiple forms of Coronavirus. But as I said, the early work up until 1999 was largely focused in the area of vaccines for animals, the two animals receiving the most attention were probably Ralph Barics work on rabbits and the rabbit cardiomyopathy that was associated with significant problems among rabbit breeders, and then canine Coronavirus in Pfizer’s work to identify how to develop s and spike protein vaccine target candidates giving rise to the obvious evidence that says that neither the Coronavirus concept of a vaccine, nor the principle of the Coronavirus itself as a pathogen of interest with respect to the spike proteins behaviour is anything novel at all. As a matter of fact, it’s 22 years old, based on patent filings. What’s more problematic, and what is actually the most egregious problem is that Anthony Fauci and NIAID found the malleability of Coronavirus to be a potential candidate for HIV vaccines. And so SARS is actually not a natural progression of a zoonetic modification of Coronavirus.

Dr. David Martin at 02:53

Sources:

See also, on this site:

 

 

 

 

 

 

]]>
UNC Chapel Hill files patent US7279327: Methods for producing recombinant coronavirus https://pandemictimeline.com/2002/04/unc-chapel-hill-files-patent-7279327-methods-for-producing-recombinant-coronavirus/ Fri, 19 Apr 2002 00:00:25 +0000 https://pandemictimeline.com/?p=1910 A helper cell for producing an infectious, replication defective, coronavirus (or more generally nidovirus) particle cell comprises (a) a nidovirus permissive cell; (b) a nidovirus replicon RNA comprising the nidovirus packaging signal and a heterologous RNA sequence, wherein the replicon RNA further lacks a sequence encoding at least one nidovirus structural protein; and (c) at…

]]>

A helper cell for producing an infectious, replication defective, coronavirus (or more generally nidovirus) particle cell comprises (a) a nidovirus permissive cell; (b) a nidovirus replicon RNA comprising the nidovirus packaging signal and a heterologous RNA sequence, wherein the replicon RNA further lacks a sequence encoding at least one nidovirus structural protein; and (c) at least one separate helper RNA encoding the at least one structural protein absent from the replicon RNA, the helper RNA(s) lacking the nidovirus packaging signal. The combined expression of the replicon RNA and the helper RNA in the nidovirus permissive cell produces an assembled nidovirus particle which comprises the heterologous RNA sequence, is able to infect a cell, and is unable to complete viral replication in the absence of the helper RNA due to the absence of the structural protein coding sequence in the packaged replicon. Compositions for use in making such helper cells, along with viral particles produced from such cells, compositions of such viral particles, and methods of making and using such viral particles, are also disclosed.

Patent US7279327B2

From the Reiner/Martin interview:

… in 1999 Anthony Fauci funded research at the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill, specifically to create, and you cannot help but, you know, lament what I’m about to read because this comes directly from a patent application filed on April 19 2002. And you heard the date correctly 2002 where the NIAID built an infectious replication defective Coronavirus that was specifically targeted for human lung epithelium. In other words, we made SARS and we patented it on April 19 2002, before there was ever any alleged outbreak in Asia, which as you know, followed that by several months. That patent issued is US Patent 7279327. That patent clearly lays out in very specific gene sequencing, the fact that we knew that the ACE receptor, the ACE2 binding domain, the s1 spike protein, and other elements of what we have come to know as this scourge pathogen was not only engineered, but could be synthetically modified in the laboratory, using nothing more than gene sequencing technologies, taking computer code and turning it into a pathogen or an intermediate of the pathogen. And that technology was funded exclusively in the early days as a means by which we could actually harness Coronavirus as a vector to distribute HIV vaccine.

Dr. David Martin at 02:53

To see how DNA is generated directly from a computer, see “How We Make DNA” – Cambrian Genomics.

Sources:

See also, on this site:

 

 

 

 

]]>
CDC files patent US7220852: Coronavirus isolated from humans https://pandemictimeline.com/2004/04/cdc-files-patent-7220852-coronavirus-isolated-from-humans/ Mon, 12 Apr 2004 00:00:24 +0000 https://pandemictimeline.com/?p=1420 Disclosed herein is a newly isolated human coronavirus (SARS-CoV), the causative agent of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS). Also provided are the nucleic acid sequence of the SARS-CoV genome and the amino acid sequences of the SARS-CoV open reading frames, as well as methods of using these molecules to detect a SARS-CoV and detect infections…

]]>

Disclosed herein is a newly isolated human coronavirus (SARS-CoV), the causative agent of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS). Also provided are the nucleic acid sequence of the SARS-CoV genome and the amino acid sequences of the SARS-CoV open reading frames, as well as methods of using these molecules to detect a SARS-CoV and detect infections therewith. Immune stimulatory compositions are also provided, along with methods of their use.

Patent US7220852B1

From the Reiner/Martin interview:

Coronavirus as a circulating pathogen inside of the viral model that we have is actually not new to the human condition and is not new to the last two decades. It’s actually been part of the sequence of proteins that circulates for quite a long time. But the alleged outbreak that took place in China in 2002, going into 2003 gave rise to a very problematic April 2003 filing by the United States Centre for Disease Control and Prevention. And this topic is of critical importance to get the nuance very precise, because in addition to filing the entire gene sequence on what became SARS Coronavirus, which is actually a violation of 35 US Code Section 101. You cannot patent a naturally occurring substance. The 35 US Code Section 101 violation was patent number 7220852.

Dr. David Martin at 15:32

According to Dr. David Martin, this is the patent that records the entire gene sequence for the SARS Coronavirus.  All other Coronavirus related patents contain a segment of this sequence.  According to Dr. Martin, the sequence found for SARS CoV 2 is a segment of the original SARS Coronavirus.  This is documented in his report.

Source:

See also, on this site:

Related:

 

 

 

]]>
Sequoia Pharmaceuticals files patent US7151163: Antiviral agents for the treatment, control and prevention of infections by coronaviruses https://pandemictimeline.com/2004/04/sequoia-pharmaceuticals-files-patent-7151163-antiviral-agents-for-the-treatment-control-and-prevention-of-infections-by-coronaviruses/ Wed, 28 Apr 2004 00:00:20 +0000 https://pandemictimeline.com/?p=1422 The invention provides compositions and methods that are useful for preventing and treating a coronavirus infection in a subject. More specifically, the invention provides peptides and conjugates and pharmaceutical compositions containing those peptides and conjugates that block fusion of a coronavirus, such as the SARS virus, to a target cell. This blocking mechanism prevents or…

]]>

The invention provides compositions and methods that are useful for preventing and treating a coronavirus infection in a subject. More specifically, the invention provides peptides and conjugates and pharmaceutical compositions containing those peptides and conjugates that block fusion of a coronavirus, such as the SARS virus, to a target cell. This blocking mechanism prevents or treats a coronavirus infection, such as a SARS infection, in a subject, such as a human subject.

— Patent US7151163B2

From the Reiner/Martin interview:

Dr David Martin  25:57

The patent in question, the April 28th 2003 patent 7151163, issued to Sequoia Pharmaceuticals has another problem. The problem is it was issued and published before the CDC patent on Coronavirus was actually allowed. So the degree to which the information could have been known by any means other than insider information between those parties is zero. It is not physically possible for you to patent a thing that treats a thing that had not been published, because CDC had paid to keep it secret. This, my friends is the definition of criminal conspiracy racketeering and collusion. This is not a theory. This is evidence. You cannot have information in the future in form [for] a treatment for a thing that did not exist.

Reiner Fuellmich  27:16

This could well blow up into a Rico case, ultimately.

Dr David Martin  27:20

This is, it is a Rico case. It’s not could blow up into it, it is a Rico case. And the Rico pattern, which was established in April of 2003 for the first Coronavirus, was played out to exactly the same schedule when we see SARS CoV 2 show up when we have Moderna getting the spike protein sequence by phone from the vaccine research centre at NIAID prior to the definition of the novel subclade. How do you treat a thing before you actually have the thing?

Reiner Fuellmich Interviews Dr David Martin

Sources:

Related:

See also, on this site:

 

 

 

]]>
The CDC files patent US7776521: Coronavirus isolated from humans https://pandemictimeline.com/2007/05/the-cdc-files-patent-7776521-coronavirus-isolated-from-humans/ Mon, 14 May 2007 00:00:30 +0000 https://pandemictimeline.com/?p=1921 Disclosed herein is a newly isolated human coronavirus (SARS-CoV), the causative agent of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS). Also provided are the nucleic acid sequence of the SARS-CoV genome and the amino acid sequences of the SARS-CoV open reading frames, as well as methods of using these molecules to detect a SARS-CoV and detect infections…

]]>

Disclosed herein is a newly isolated human coronavirus (SARS-CoV), the causative agent of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS). Also provided are the nucleic acid sequence of the SARS-CoV genome and the amino acid sequences of the SARS-CoV open reading frames, as well as methods of using these molecules to detect a SARS-CoV and detect infections therewith. Immune stimulatory compositions are also provided, along with methods of their use.

Patent US7776521B1

From the Reiner/Martin interview:

Dr David Martin  15:32

The 35 US Code Section 101 violation was patent number 7220852. Now, that patent also had a series of derivative patents associated with it, these are our patent applications that were broken apart because they were of multiple patentable subject matter. But these include US Patent 46592703p, which is actually a very interesting designation, US Patent 7776521. These patents not only covered the gene sequence of SARS Coronavirus, but also covered the means of detecting it using RT-PCR. Now, the reason why that’s a problem is if you actually both own the patent on the gene itself, and you own the patent on its detection, you have a cutting advantage to being able to control 100 percent of the provenance of not only the virus itself, but also its detection, meaning you have entire scientific and message control. And this patent sought by the CDC was allegedly justified by their public relations team as being sought so that everyone would be free to be able to research Coronavirus. The only problem with that statement is it’s a lie and the reason why it’s a lie is because the patent office not once but twice rejected the patent on the gene sequence as unpatentable because the gene sequence was already in the public domain. In other words, prior to CDCs filing for a patent, the patent office found 99.9 percent identity with the already existing Coronavirus recorded in the public domain, and over the rejection of the patent examiner. And after having to pay an appeal fine in 2006 and 2007, the CDC overrode the patent office’s rejection of their patent and ultimately in 2007 got the patent on SARS Coronavirus. Now, every public statement that CDC has made that said that this was in the public interest is falsifiable by their own paid bribe to the patent office. This is not something that’s subtle, and to make matters worse they paid an additional fee to keep their application private. Last time I checked, if you’re trying to make information available for the public research, you would not pay a fee to keep the information private. I wish I could have made up anything I just said, but all of that is available in the public patent archive record which any member of the public can review. And the Public PAIR, as it’s called at the United States Patent Office, has not only the evidence but the actual documents which I have in my possession. Now, this is critically important. It’s critically important because fact checkers have repeatedly stated that the novel Coronavirus, designated as SARS CoV 2 is in fact distinct from the CDC patent. And here’s both the genetic and the patent problem. If you look at the gene sequence that is filed by CDC in 2003, again in 2005 and then again in 2006, what you find is identity in somewhere between 89 to 99 percent of the sequence overlaps that have been identified in what’s called the novel subclade of SARS CoV 2. What we know is that the core designation of SARS Coronavirus, which is actually the clade of the betacoronavirus family and the subclade that has been called SARS CoV 2 have to overlap from a taxonomic point of view. You cannot have SARS designation on a thing without it first being SARS. So the disingenuous fact checking that has been done saying that somehow or another CDC has nothing to do with this particular patent, or this particular pathogen, is beyond both the literal credibility of the published sequences. And it’s also beyond credulity when it comes to the ICTV taxonomy because it very clearly states that this is in fact a sub clade of the clade called SARS Coronavirus. Now, what’s important is on the 28th of April, and listen to the date very carefully because this date is problematic.

Sources:

Related:

See also, on this site:

 

 

]]>
Ablynx files patent US9193780: Amino acid sequences directed against envelope proteins of a virus and polypeptides comprising the same for the treatment of viral diseases https://pandemictimeline.com/2009/06/ablynx-files-patent-9193780-amino-acid-sequences-directed-against-envelope-proteins-of-a-virus-and-polypeptides-comprising-the-same-for-the-treatment-of-viral-diseases/ Fri, 05 Jun 2009 00:00:35 +0000 https://pandemictimeline.com/?p=1424 The present invention relates in part to amino acid sequences that are directed against and/or that can specifically bind to an envelope protein of a virus, as well as to compounds or constructs, and in particular proteins and polypeptides, that comprise or essentially consist of one or more such amino acid sequences. — Patent US9193780B2…

]]>

The present invention relates in part to amino acid sequences that are directed against and/or that can specifically bind to an envelope protein of a virus, as well as to compounds or constructs, and in particular proteins and polypeptides, that comprise or essentially consist of one or more such amino acid sequences.

Patent US9193780B2

From the Reiner/Martin interview:

Dr David Martin  33:24

Oh it does. The 5th of June 2008, which is an important date because it is actually around the time when DARPA the Defence Advanced Research Programme in the United States actively took an interest in Coronavirus as a biological weapon. June 5 2008 Ablynx, which as you know is now part of Sanofi, filed a series of patents that specifically targeted what we’ve been told is the novel feature of the SARS CoV 2 virus. And you heard what I just said, this is the 5th of June 2008.

Reiner Fuellmich  34:09

They found what?

Dr David Martin  34:10

Specifically they targeted what was called the poly basic cleavage site for SARS Cov, the novel spike protein and the ACE2 receptor binding domain which is allegedly novel to SARS CoV 2, and all of that was patented on the 5th of June 2008. And those patents in sequence were issued between November 24th of 2015, which was US Patent 9193780. So that one came out after the gain of function moratorium.

Sources:

See also, on this site:

 

 

]]>
Peter Daszak addresses workshop https://pandemictimeline.com/2015/03/peter-daszak-addresses-workshop/ Fri, 27 Mar 2015 00:00:47 +0000 https://pandemictimeline.com/?p=1388 The workshop was “Rapid Medical Countermeasure Response to Infectious Diseases: Enabling Sustainable Capabilities Through Ongoing Public- and Private-Sector Partnerships.”  In it, Peter Daszak gave a presentation, “Ranking risk for zoonotic potential of novel viruses.”  In this speech, he was quoted as saying, Until an infectious disease crisis is very real, present, and at an emergency…

]]>
The workshop was “Rapid Medical Countermeasure Response to Infectious Diseases: Enabling Sustainable Capabilities Through Ongoing Public- and Private-Sector Partnerships.”  In it, Peter Daszak gave a presentation, “Ranking risk for zoonotic potential of novel viruses.”  In this speech, he was quoted as saying,

Until an infectious disease crisis is very real, present, and at an emergency threshold, it is often largely ignored. To sustain the funding base beyond the crisis, he said, we need to increase public understanding of the need for MCMs [medical countermeasures] such as a pan-influenza or pan-coronavirus vaccine. A key driver is the media, and the economics follow the hype. We need to use that hype to our advantage to get to the real issues. Investors will respond if they see profit at the end of process.

Peter Daszak mentioned investors.

Did he suggest here that they create a pandemic for the purpose of selling something? Who was at this meeting? What would they be selling? Why exactly is Peter Daszak out in the jungles finding sick animals to bring back to labs?

Source:

See also, on this site:

 

]]>
Reiner Fuellmich Interviews Dr David Martin – CDC Patent Fraud https://pandemictimeline.com/2021/07/reiner-fuellmich-interviews-dr-david-martin-cdc-patent-fraud/ Fri, 09 Jul 2021 00:00:56 +0000 https://pandemictimeline.com/?p=1392 The interview cited below was conducted as part of the Stiftung Corona Ausschuss project that is expected to result in a “Nuremberg 2” trial.  Reiner Fuellmich is a lawyer for the Stiftung Corona Ausschuss project, and so this could be considered to be a deposition hearing. As Gary D. Barnett said, This recent interview between Dr. David…

]]>
The interview cited below was conducted as part of the Stiftung Corona Ausschuss project that is expected to result in a “Nuremberg 2” trial.  Reiner Fuellmich is a lawyer for the Stiftung Corona Ausschuss project, and so this could be considered to be a deposition hearing.

As Gary D. Barnett said,

This recent interview between Dr. David E. Martin and Reiner Fuellmich is so astounding as to be enough on its own to bring down the entirety of the major players perpetrating this ‘virus’ scam meant to destroy humanity.

Participants in this interview include Reiner Fuellmich, Dr David Martin, Prof Martin Schwab, Dr Wolfgang Wodarg, and Viviane Fischer.

Dr. David Martin is introduced:

Reiner Fuellmich  00:09

So I think it’s best if you introduce yourself. I know you’re the chairman of M-CAM International Innovation Risk Management, but that doesn’t tell a whole lot of people what you’re really doing?

Dr David Martin  00:25

Yeah, well, from a corporate standpoint, we have since 1998, been the world’s largest underwriter of intangible assets used in finance in 168 countries. So in the majority of the countries around the world, our underwriting systems, which include the entire corpus of all patents, patent applications, federal grants, procurement records, E-Government records, etc. We have the ability to not only track what is happening and who is involved in what’s happening, but we monitor a series of thematic interests for a variety of organizations and individuals, as well as for our own commercial use, because as you probably know, we maintain three global equity indices, which are the top performing large cap and mid cap equity indexes worldwide. So our business is to monitor the innovation that’s happening around the world and specifically to monitor the economics of that innovation, the degree to which, you know, financial interests are being served, you know, corporate interests are being dislocated, etc. So, our business is the business of innovation and its finance.

So, obviously from the standpoint of this presentation, as you know, we have reviewed the over 4000 patents that have been issued around SARS Coronavirus. And we have done a very comprehensive review of the financing of all of the manipulations of Coronavirus which gave rise to SARS as a sub clade of the beta Coronavirus family.

We were, my organization was asked to monitor biological and chemical weapons treaty violations in the very early days of 2000.

In other words, Dr. David Martin is an expert in this subject matter because he and his company have been tracking this information since about year 2000.

Of the document provided for the meeting, Dr. David Martin said:

So, obviously from the standpoint of this presentation, as you know, we have reviewed the over 4000 patents that have been issued around SARS Coronavirus. And we have done a very comprehensive review of the financing of all of the manipulations of Coronavirus which gave rise to SARS as a sub clade of the beta Coronavirus family. … I have sent to you and your team, a document that is exceptionally important. This was made public in the spring of 2020. This document which which you do have and can be posted in the public record is  quite critical in that we took the reported gene sequence, which was reportedly isolated as a novel Coronavirus, indicated as such by the ICTV, the International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses of the World Health Organization, we took the actual genetic sequences that were reportedly novel and reviewed those against the patent records that were available as of the spring of 2020. And what we found, as you’ll see in this report, are over 120 patented pieces of evidence to suggest that the declaration of a novel Coronavirus was actually entirely a fallacy. There was no novel Coronavirus. There are countless very subtle modifications of Coronavirus sequences that have been uploaded, but there was no single identified novel Coronavirus at all. As a matter of fact, we found records in the patent records of sequences attributed to novelty going to patents that were sought as early as 1999. So, not only was this not a novel anything, it’s actually not only not been novel, it’s not been novel for over two decades.

Sources:

Related:

  • Expert
    M·CAM | Aligning Innovation with Value Exchange.
    https://www.m-cam.com/.
    Expert.
  • Blog
    David Martin. “Putting Humanity Back into Humans.” David Martin | The Wobble Effect.
    http://www.davidmartin.world/.
    Blog.
  • Research Journal
    January 4, 2018. Elliot J Lefkowitz, Donald M Dempsey, Robert Curtis Hendrickson, Richard J Orton, Stuart G Siddell, and Donald B Smith. “Virus Taxonomy: The Database of the International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses (ICTV).Nucleic Acids Research 46 (D1): D708–17.
    https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkx932.
    Research Journal.
  • Reference
    Clade – Definition, Function and Examples.Biology Dictionary.
    https://biologydictionary.net/clade/.
    Reference.
  • Video Expert
    September 20, 2021. Clay Clark with David Martin. Dr. David Martin | Exposing the Truth About “The Great Reset,” the COVID-19 Vaccines and Dr. Fauci. Thrivetime Show: Business School without the BS. Runtime: 1:36:06.
    https://rumble.com/vmr79b-dr.-david-martin-exposing-the-truth-about-the-great-reset-the-covid-19-vacc.html.
    Video, Expert.
    Dr. David Martin does a great job matching humor with Clay Clark, which is saying a lot.  Be sure to check out the extensive description on this video link.  I may need to give this link its own post, since it contains new info drops.

See also, on this site:

 

]]>