just checked the version they have on plandemicmovie.com and that part from 00:17:13,670 --> 00:17:25,899 is not part of their video. So, it's best to remove that part from the .srt files.
Well, this is interesting. I downloaded the version from plandemicmovie.com, and there are actually many small differences. I think they released one version first, some people got it and uploaded on CensorpshipTube (which I got pretty early on), and then they did some edits and posted v2. Many scenes are cut a bit differently, a few frames off here and there. 90% of the subs fit perfectly, but I had to adjust and shift a bunch of parts. A few lines got removed.

The "He called Tony Fauci the Bernie Madoff of science." line is also missing from the shorter version.

Anyway, I'm uploading a zip file with both versions.

> PlanDemic,_a_film_about_the_global_plan_to_take_control_of_our_lives,_liberty,_health_&_freedom.srt
The original one, for the video uploaded on my Yandex account, duration 26:08.

> plandemic-part1.srt
For the version currently taken from plandemicmovie.com, duration 25:52.

The one on Sott is 25:52 long, so the second file should work for that.
 

Attachments

  • plandemic-english.zip
    27.7 KB · Views: 7
I think that's pretty much the case. Hubris, mockery. They feel they're untouchable. And it probably gives them a rush when they know they'd actually shown you what they'd do.

Maybe there is more to this. Besides that it might give them a rush to show us their symbols and plans in advance there seems to be a kind of preparation and offering of limited choices.
I found this article in which also the C's are mentioned.

Link to full article:Why Negative Forces Seem to Respect Freewill
[QUOTE
Clue Dropping

That targets are encouraged to remain naive may appear contradictory to the fact that some matrix agents tend to purposely clue-drop, waving warning signs in the face of their targets before proceeding with further infiltration.



The clues can be anything literal or symbolic. Literal clues include warning phrases said in seeming jest, their personal history, and behavior. Symbolic clues are ironic and may appear in their names, word choice, and synchronicities related to them.



Whatever it may be, it provides a clue that the target is in danger, much like the warning colors of a poisonous plant or the hiss of a snake. If the target ignores the clues, then the agent proceeds with the next step. Each dropped clue is a subtle way of asking permission to get closer. Any ignorance of that clue is permission granted.

The question is, if 4D STS require that an individual has no awareness of certain elements of reality in order for them to be manipulated, then why do agents purposely drop clues and risk the individual gaining more awareness? Why risk revealing their agenda by giving hints?



The answer is that while reality manipulation is an acausal phenomenon that happens outside one's realm and therefore beyond the engagement range of a target's freewill, agents are within one's realm and automatically in direct engagement with an individual's freewill because of their sheer physical presence in one's environment.



Once freewill is engaged, what applied to acausal reality manipulation becomes defunct.






Why 4D STS Subvert Rather Than Violate Freewill

All this becomes clear with the following realization: that 4D STS sometimes cannot, and other times choose not, to violate the freewill of a target.



There are two ways to avoid violating freewill: either don't engage it in the first place, or do only what the target permits. Reality manipulation occurs from outside one's realm, and so freewill is not engaged in such cases, so there is no freewill violation.



Agents, because they are in one's realm already and in engagement with a target's freewill, have no choice but subtly ask permission if they wish to not violate freewill or are not able to do so.

They cannot violate freewill in cases where they are engaging a freewill that is more powerful than theirs. This includes cases where an individual is stronger than they are, or where he has divine protection whereby sovereign beings intervene and overpower the lesser manipulators. It also includes cases where the freewill of multiple beings is anchored to the same reality element and reinforces it beyond the manipulability threshold of 4D STS.



This is why although our timeline or reality can indeed be changed, there are limits to what they can change. They cannot change the entire timeline as they please, only elements that are relatively non-anchored.

Then there are cases where they are able to violate freewill, but choose not to.



The reason is complex but will be explained here.






Realm Dynamics

According to the Cassiopaeans, realms are divisions of reality based on experience and assumptions.



Beings in different realms have different assumptions about reality and will have different experiences; those in the same realm will have similar experiences. The more a group of beings interact with each other, the more their realms merge.



Two beings in completely different realms will rarely interact with or perceive each other. Realms are basically fenced off from each other according to the FRV or frequency resonance vibration (FRV) of an individual.



FRV is the strength and tone of his soul vibration based on the level of his being, which in turn depends upon his level of knowledge and direction of evolution, which is tied to his assumptions and experiences.



Realms also measure the engagement range of one's freewill, and so entering a person's realm means engaging his freewill.

Because two beings from completely different realms cannot directly interact with each other, for them to do so there must be a common element or bridge formed between their realms. One way of looking at this is to think of the common element as a frequency bridge that provides resonance between the two and allows transfer of information and energy.



If both have a unique spectrum of fundamental vibration that would ordinarily share no common component frequencies, then the frequency bridge is the introduction of a common fundamental tone between the two realms.



4D STS exist in an extremely negative realm and are thus usually barred from perceiving or interacting tangibly with an individual that is of a completely different realm. In order to manipulate him in any way, they must use a frequency bridge which normally is the individual's own negative emotions.



These negative emotions provide a frequency sub-spectrum that is in resonance with the realm of 4D STS and allows them to penetrate his realm and interact with him on some level. The more his realm is in resonance with theirs, the more they can manipulate him, and the more objective their manipulations will appear.



If their realms becomes virtually identical, then he is under their complete control and is part of the STS hierarchy.

Because realms are projected divisions of one's FRV, and the FRV is a product of one's being, it is mainly through a change in being that the realm changes. Negative forces who require a reality bridge would prefer the target's being change toward a more negative frequency. This would open his realm to easier penetration.



So what does it take to change being?



Beingness can only be changed by the individual himself, by freely choosing to make negative choices which lower his frequency and align him with the STS evolutionary current.



Anything that happens to him which violates his freewill does not change his being for the following reason:

Freewill is about choice, and one learns by facing the consequences of one's choices. If a situation arises that does not violate freewill but rather offers choice, then if the individual later regrets making a choice, it is entirely his own fault for having done so.​


Furthermore, the lesson he learns, had he learned it earlier, would have allowed him to make a different choice. In other words, it is because choice was given that his lesson has any value at all.​

If he were given no choice - his freewill thus being violated - then nothing he could have learned earlier would have made any difference, and thus it wouldn't be a lesson at all.



Therefore, freewill violations do not result in lessons for the individual, and without learning anything, his being does not change. Without a change of being, the FRV (frequency resonance vibration) and realm boundary remains relatively unaffected.

Therefore, those who seek to influence a change in a target's realm toward a more palatable frequency must necessarily respect his freewill. All they can do is offer choices, biasing the choices so that the individual is more likely to choose the negative option and therefore tarnish his being.



Biased as they are, as long as they are still choices, his freewill is not violated.



It's amazing what degree of manipulation can be done which does not qualify as a freewill violation, for “permission”
is a broad term.





][/QUOTE]
 
We watched it yesterday night and it is very interesting. She says that she has found a kind of remedy for cancer that is not expensive and so far the FDA is blocking it.

Found it here:

 
I could be mistaken but here's a version with Slovak subtitles:

They are Czech and reasonably good. We would use them to speed up the translation process for SOTT version. By the way, we are lucky to have this Czech guy who started doing subtitles for many recent important videos including the COVID press conference with Dr. Erickson.

I couldn't download it since it's on BitChute, maybe someone has the magic to do that?
I'm not sure how this should be coordinated and should the discussion be moved to the translation group, or at least start a dedicated thread?

Probably best would be to start a thread here:

For Linux I have just discovered this very simple VideoDowloader (part of Ubuntu Software center) which easily grabs recordings from almost any platform including BitChute, D Tube and RuTube and you can opt for mp3 or mp4 plus the compression quality of your choice, up to 1080 HD.

VideoDownloader.jpg

If there is no long-term immunity, how are they going to argue for a vaccine? and if there is long-term immunity, by the time the vaccine is on the market, herd immunity has taken over. On top of that viruses have a tendency to become less virulent (dangerous) the longer they circulate in a population.

I think they have one shot to try - to intentionally release something deadly. One or two big international sport or cultural events around same time would be sufficient to make this happen. And it would be a good reason to impose lockdowns again everywhere immediately. And then they could say: "You see, we told you it would be better to stay in quarantine and you didn't listen! Now we have to vaccinate you every year even though the vaccines don't work reliably but we have no other choice."

If anything, free will means they can do whatever they want without warning us. If they had to do something, it wouldn't be free will.
Besides, how are humans in 3D even supposed to know anything about cosmic laws? Most people don't know anything about that, so it can hardly be a 'rule' for 3D. The point of 3D learning is that you don't know the rules in the first place. You learn mostly through suffering and your own mistakes.

If they're doing these things on purpose, it could be a part of 'their philosophy', whatever that is, but not of any cosmic laws, imo. But mostly I think they're doing things they believe they can get away with and don't perceive them as all that dangerous. Just a small risk that makes things more interesting.

I agree with the second paragraph but think you are wrong on the first one. We don't know about the laws consciously but we have conscience so we 'feel' them. That's how we navigate through everything and if we do something wrong, we 'know' it even though we have never read any Universal declaration of souled beings' rights. And besides that, the cosmic laws must be observed to at least some degree otherwise things would fall apart. They would not last for long. If people don't follow their heart the comets will come. If Lizzies, who know much more of the cosmic laws consciously, don't respect our free will at all, they will be kicked out of this school and loose their food.

Therefore the Lizzies were able to lure us into 3D Earth lockdown only when they revealed a bit of the nature of the environment - they could not hide everything as that would go against the law just to put us here without our consent. I vaguely remember exchange between C's and Laura along the lines of "How did they manage to convince us this will be good for us?" and they replied "What do you think they used as the bait?" ... probably they showed us something like a 4K HD romantic picture of fantastic party with sex, drugs and rock'n'roll involved but they 'forgot' to mention we will get their silly predator mind, will forget, suffer and have a very little chance of getting out. Never mind the time-travelling factor involved later on.

They still must keep obtaining various forms of consent but it's getting easier and easier as the population is getting more brainwashed. However, they are going to overdo it soon and the balance will be restored once again, playing field levelled and that's where this new reality that shall be explored will arise.

I know someone here started a thread about mandatory vaccination, and what we can do to arm ourselves if it comes to that related to COVID-19 (or any other disease or virus). Perhaps the posts in this COVID-19 thread that are relevant to that should be copied there so that we all can use it as a resource. I'll go ahead and copy this one.

Actually, I just did a search... couldn't easily find that thread so I'll have to keep searching.

Here are two related threads:

 
I imagine that one would have to research the above relative to the use of the term "experiment." At first glance, it sounds like a lawyer would have to make an argument for vaccination related to experimentation. With that in mind, perhaps more germane to the issue of human rights as it pertains to vaccination has to do with something called "informed consent." Apparently, this idea also harks back to the Nuremberg Trials.

Here's the legal definition of experiment. I reckon that if there are proven side effects, then each injection is an experiment to see who will develop the side effects :-P but I'm not a lawyer sooo...Unless the Nuremberg Code actually defines 'experiment' I believe the definition from a legal dictionary is the next source to check.

Screen Shot 2020-05-10 at 12.35.27 am.png
 
This great article at SOTT describes the UK situation really well and i am curious as to how it will play out as it seems now quite plain that what is happening there is hurting the population big time.


Vanessa Beeley describes how through decades long preparations and a net of ties between policy makers, policy influencers, Big Pharma, business interests, global organizations and the one and only Bill Gates, the goal for UK seems to be mandatory vaccination, mass surveillance, a slave-like population and all the money and power for the top players:

'The H1N1 vaccine travesty must serve as a warning against precipitous vaccine development motivated by lockdown cabin fever, when the lockdown itself is looking more and more likely to be orchestrated to achieve precisely this outcome.

At the same time, as the possibility of compulsory vaccination is under discussion, the government intends to roll out a surveillance apparatus that will ensure forever-control over an already politically weakened workforce pushed ever deeper into financial insecurity, first by austerity measures and now by Covid-19.'

I also read that one does not even have to download a tracer app, but that installing the next mandatory IOS update on one's phone already does the trick (am not very tech savvy).

Google Apple Contact Tracing (GACT): a wolf in sheep’s clothes. // Jaap-Henk Hoepman (the author explains how a tracer app works and displays a tremendously naive character in that he trusts google and apple to do the right thing, yeah right 😄).

I found this excerpt from the Wave series book 2 Soul Hackers, chapter 10, last alinea's relevant here:

'So, essentially, the difference between being STS, but moving in the direction of STO (an STO candidate), and being STS intensifying in the STS mode, seems to consist in deliberately choosing STS. Most people are duped and tricked into choosing it. When they begin to understand what it is that they are really doing, they begin to wake up. And, when they wake up, they then make the choice – to give or to take.
And the all blinks neither at the Darkness nor at the Light. “Remember, density refers to one’s conscious awareness only. Once one is aware, ALL conforms to that awareness.” Everywhere you look, there is the Face of God.

Knight-Jadczyk, Laura. Soul Hackers: The Hidden Hands Behind the New Age Movement (The Wave Series Book 2) . Red Pill Press. Kindle Edition.

Enjoy the show😎
 
I was not able to find the original short video with Dr.Judy Mikovits on Christina Aguayo's YT channel (there are a few other ones) so here is the one with Czech subs (just 2:18 mins).

What will happen in the US when the current COVID vaccination plan becomes mandatory for everyone? Dr. Mikovits says at least 50.000.000 Americans will die, likely during the first wave since this is the amount of people whose bodies have already been compromised by previous vaccines that contain gammaretrovirus.

 

Trump says coronavirus will disappear without a vaccine. Fauci has said the opposite.

President Trump has been bullish about a coronavirus vaccine — so much so that experts have had to talk him off a more aggressive timeline for it.
But on Friday, Trump seemed to shift his rhetoric on the topic, saying we don’t even need one for the virus to go away. “I just rely on what doctors say,” Trump said when pressed.
Now get rid of that little rat Fauci. There's been enough Faucism.
 
Okay, here's the questionnaire for the poll. It's in docx format for ease of replacing translated versions. Please don't otherwise modify it without asking. We all need to be using the same model.

So, for any of you who feel ambitious and very curious about what is going on, this is your ticket to find out.

If anybody wants to put it online to get something going that way, just let us know and go for it.

FOTCM members created one on-line website this Covid19 Questionnaire. Answers can be done in any of the 18 different languages. Please share it with others.

 
But outside of the American Constitution what's being talked about harks back to something called The Nuremberg Code. The following is an excerpt from the article I've linked to below from a site called The Liberty Beacon:
Here's the legal definition of experiment. I reckon that if there are proven side effects, then each injection is an experiment to see who will develop the side effects :-P but I'm not a lawyer sooo...Unless the Nuremberg Code actually defines 'experiment' I believe the definition from a legal dictionary is the next source to check.

You would think that in Germany you would be protected - we even have a specific article in our constitution, based on the Nazi experiments, that says we have a "right to physical integrity". BUT, this constitutional right has already been limited long before Corona to allow mandatory vaccination for certain professions and in certain situations :( On the positive side, I'm pretty sure a blanket mandatory vaccination law or even making it conditional to take part in professional life in general to be vaccinated won't stand a chance before the court. Or so I hope...
 
It can be implemented under a state of emergency or martial law but there's more to it that addresses a long history of law removing the rights of the people.

Here's a trick they use. In policy, statute and act, they don't use either the word 'human' or 'men/women' - those terms indicate life.

In policy, act and statute they almost always use the word 'person/s' , and person doesn't have to be a living being - it can be a legal fiction. In law, the definition of 'person' is quite long and convoluted. Additionally, law operates on presumptions and consent. Presumptions stand unless they can be rebutted and consent can be legally withdrawn if you can rebut the presumption of 'personhood' or show that the agreement or contract did not fill the legal elements of a contract. If you don't challenge the presumption then the legal maxim 'Qui tacet consentit' or 'Silence gives consent' is in operation.

Blacks Law 4th Edition:


So by agreeing to an identity that determines that you are a 'person' you can be treated as though you are a corporate entity/agent and subject to administrative laws, policies, statutes and acts based on contracts and agreements through international private law that inherently remove your human, constitutional and common law rights - unless you can rebut the presumption with proof or show that the contract or agreement did not fulfil the legal elements of a contract.

So back to the question - legal? Yes. Dirty trick? Also yes.

Having said all of the above, here is the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. If you read it, pay particular attention to the articles where they use the word 'person' and where they alternatively use 'men/women' or 'everyone' because in that they are making distinctions depending on what each article is addressing and they are essentially referring to different jurisdictions or area's of law by using those different terms.


The fundamental basis of common law that constitutions were written to limit the powers of governments from infringing is that everyone has the right to own property for their own subsistence and is free to do what ever they like so long as they do not harm another or their property - or free will and external consideration.
It sounds like the legal system is just as corrupted as pretty much every other system in place around here. It all looks like a big steaming pile of monkey crap!
 
I just added a post into the Corona Timeline thread, but I did not include it in the thread although it mentions the Wuhan events and it can be contextualized as a post Wuhan event, because between October-November 2019 and March 2020, there is not enough time to conceptualize, commission and create the software that derived the results upon which this report was created.

March 20, 2020

This post belongs into the category of decision factors. The date of publishing is irrelevant because the information contained herein does not refer to the actual software used for modeling, which in my opinion is the actual culprit that brought about the mayhem and foolishness that lead to such drama and tragedy that everyone has to go thru.
Suffice to say I am happy that the programming community is doing something about it. Going back to the source, I put the link to the pdf and another link is in the Key Info. I read the report and while I cannot make an informed opinion on the contents, at least I got a very valuable notion on what the lockdown stages are about. Although unsettling, I encourage everyone to read it.

Imperial College London, publishes on their website Report 9 - Impact of non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) to reduce COVID-19 mortality and healthcare demand.

Report 9 - Impact of non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) to reduce COVID-19 mortality and healthcare demand

The authorship belongs to
Key info
Date:
16 March 2020
Authors:
Neil M Ferguson, Daniel Laydon, Gemma Nedjati-Gilani, Natsuko Imai, Kylie Ainslie, Marc Baguelin, Sangeeta Bhatia, Adhiratha Boonyasiri, Zulma Cucunubá, Gina Cuomo-Dannenburg, Amy Dighe, Ilaria Dorigatti, Han Fu, Katy Gaythorpe, Will Green, Arran Hamlet, Wes Hinsley, Lucy C Okell, Sabine van Elsland, Hayley Thompson, Robert Verity, Erik Volz, Haowei Wang, Yuanrong Wang, Patrick GT Walker, Caroline Walters, Peter Winskill, Charles Whittaker, Christl A Donnelly, Steven Riley, Azra C Ghani.
Correspondence:
Professor Neil Ferguson
neil.ferguson@imperial.ac.uk
Download the full PDF for Report 9See all reports
WHO Collaborating Centre for Infectious Disease Modelling; MRC Centre for Global Infectious Disease Analysis; Abdul Latif Jameel Institute for Disease and Emergency Analytics; Imperial College London, UK

Summary
The global impact of COVID-19 has been profound, and the public health threat it represents is the most serious seen in a respiratory virus since the 1918 H1N1 influenza pandemic. Here we present the results of epidemiological modelling which has informed policymaking in the UK and other countries in recent weeks. In the absence of a COVID-19 vaccine, we assess the potential role of a number of public health measures – so-called non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) – aimed at reducing contact rates in the population and thereby reducing transmission of the virus. In the results presented here, we apply a previously published microsimulation model to two countries: the UK (Great Britain specifically) and the US. We conclude that the effectiveness of any one intervention in isolation is likely to be limited, requiring multiple interventions to be combined to have a substantial impact on transmission.

Two fundamental strategies are possible: (a) mitigation, which focuses on slowing but not necessarily stopping epidemic spread – reducing peak healthcare demand while protecting those most at risk of severe disease from infection, and (b) suppression, which aims to reverse epidemic growth, reducing case numbers to low levels and maintaining that situation indefinitely. Each policy has major challenges. We find that that optimal mitigation policies (combining home isolation of suspect cases, home quarantine of those living in the same household as suspect cases, and social distancing of the elderly and others at most risk of severe disease) might reduce peak healthcare demand by 2/3 and deaths by half. However, the resulting mitigated epidemic would still likely result in hundreds of thousands of deaths and health systems (most notably intensive care units) being overwhelmed many times over. For countries able to achieve it, this leaves suppression as the preferred policy option.

We show that in the UK and US context, suppression will minimally require a combination of social distancing of the entire population, home isolation of cases and household quarantine of their family members. This may need to be supplemented by school and university closures, though it should be recognised that such closures may have negative impacts on health systems due to increased absenteeism. The major challenge of suppression is that this type of intensive intervention package – or something equivalently effective at reducing transmission – will need to be maintained until a vaccine becomes available (potentially 18 months or more) – given that we predict that transmission will quickly rebound if interventions are relaxed. We show that intermittent social distancing – triggered by trends in disease surveillance – may allow interventions to be relaxed temporarily in relative short time windows, but measures will need to be reintroduced if or when case numbers rebound. Last, while experience in China and now South Korea show that suppression is possible in the short term, it remains to be seen whether it is possible long-term, and whether the social and economic costs of the interventions adopted thus far can be reduced.
 
Back
Top Bottom