Years ago I heard a new term:  IoT.  Being interested in IT, I thought it sounded great.  It was an abbreviation for the Internet of Things.  The concept seems complex, but it's actually very simple.  You take things and you make them work on the internet.  In this way, your refrigerator, the lights in your house, your plumbing, and even your thermostat could be hooked up to a network (hardwired or wireless) to send and receive data.  It sounded great!  You could have your oven start at a certain time, monitor a home delivery for an important package, or see what your favorite pet was doing throughout the day.  It seemed like the modern break through we were all looking for, and the applications were virtually limitless.

The more I researched it, the more interesting it became.  Yes.  The Internet of Things sounded great.  There seemed to be an endless number of applications for this wonderful technology, and I thought it was the best invention of the century . . . until recently.

Being an occasional internet warrior, I started hearing about another technology, something called "vaccine nanotechnology."  What the heck is that?  I pondered and researched for a long time, and then I realized it is just what it says it is.  It's a vaccine that delivers nanotechnology.  Like IoT, this too is a pretty simple concept once you understand what a vaccine is and once you understand what nanotechnology is.

The concept of a vaccine is basically that you take a killed form of a virus.  You then inject yourself with it (hopefully with your consent and free will!) in order to stimulate your body to develop anti-bodies that can fight the real virus if and when you get it.  The idea is that some viruses are so terrible, you never want to get the actual virus, so you vaccinate yourself to build up your immunity in advance.  Sounds great.  Few people want to get polio or small pox, so it's reassuring to know that a vaccine is available.  Like these, some viruses are so terrible that vaccines are warranted in certain instances.  Not all viruses have vaccines for them, but if the disease is terrible enough, the person consents to the vaccine, and a vaccine is available, it might make sense.

Well then, what is nanotechnology?  Nanotechnology is basically very small tech.  It is microchips that are so small that they can fit nearly anywhere, including inside a vaccine.  These microchips can can send and receive signals.  You can basically program them to perform any number of functions.  Because they work with wifi, you can send signals to the microchips and receive signals from the microchips without any awareness at all on the part of the host via your basic wifi signal (like the 5G network that is coming to a metropolitan city near you!). 

Vaccine nanotechnology, therefore, is just what it says.  It is tiny (nano) microchips (technology) that are injected into the human body.  

Now, one wonders why one would want to voluntarily inject artificial technology into the human body?  What exactly would you be sending and receiving?  What exactly is the application?

I researched this, and many patents already exist for this.  In fact, these have been around for years, though not widely publicized.  One application is located in public patent number US9539201B2.  An illustration of US9539201B2 is found above.  It demonstrates an immune response before and after nanotechnology has been injected via vaccine.  The first image shows the cell in its natural state.  The second image (scrambled beyond all reckoning) shows a cell after nanotechnology has intercepted its function.  The idea is that science will basically reprogram your body without your knowledge or consent.  The idea is that science could basically force your immune system to behave differently, and you would never be the wiser.   

​Other applications include using your body to actually send and receive bank payments.  Sounds crazy, but it's true.  A company called Trust Stamp has apparently been doing this for years.  

Click here for Trust Stamp and their pilot program in Africa where they have partnered with Microsoft and the Gates Foundation to vaccinate children for banking purposes.

IoT and Vaccine Nanotechnology might seem new, but they are not.  They just haven't been widely communicated to the general public.  The truth is the technology is in circulation while the communication about it has been severely lacking.  The question we now need to ask ourselves fairly quickly with the advent of the SARS-COV-19-2 vaccine is this:  "Do I want to be the 'thing'?"  

The following article reveals some surprising facts about current research into the uses of biometric data, and the implications are staggering:
BIOMETRIC DIGITAL PAYMENT SYSTEM
​
Please take a moment to truly ponder this question:  Do I want to be the thing on the internet of things?  

Will I consent to a vaccine?  When this is released, will I even have the right to consent?  Do I want to be programmed against my will?  Do I want to receive a vaccine if I do not know what is in it?  Do I want to allow myself to be vaccinated if I am not told how it will be used and/or by whom it will be used?  Can I be hacked if I am a device on a network, just like other devices on networks can be hacked?  Even if I am told upfront how it will be used and who will have access, how do I know these things will not change over time, just as the privacy notices on my internet accounts change monthly against my will?  Could I be programmed to do something against my will or better judgement?  Do I want to know who will receive and send data to and from my physical person?  Do I want to have my immune system and other physiology compromised and intercepted by outside forces?  Do I want to be a transmitter and receiver of data on a wifi network?  

At the same time, we should be asking important questions about personal ethics.  Does this go against my religious beliefs?  Do I want to remain a free and sovereign human soul with certain inalienable rights?  Who owns the vaccine and the technology?  Does this make me a slave of a government, a corporation, or an outside entity?  Could they embed a serial number in me and eliminate all of my personal privacy?  Could someone program me to behave in a way that is counter to my beliefs, my faith, and my religion?  Does such a vaccine go against my religion and my first amendment rights?  If I consent, will I still be a free and sovereign soul with certain inalienable rights granted by God?

These are moral questions we should each be asking ourselves as mention of a vaccine starts to surface.  Such a vaccine will inevitably encroach upon our personal freedoms and moral liberties.  Do we want to be in the world of "things" just as our refrigerators, blenders, lights, and garage doors?  Decide carefully because, like all vaccines, once vaccinated, there is no going back.  There is no "undo" button in the world of vaccine nanotechnology.

PETITION FOR REDRESS OF GRIEVANCES
SUBMITTED BY THE CITIZENS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

To the Legislative, Judicial, and Executive Branches of Local, State, and Federal Government:

WE, the people of the United States of America, demand justice. It has come to our attention that Mr. Mark McCloskey and Mrs. Peggy McCloskey, an ordinary couple currently residing in the city of St. Louis are being persecuted by the local city government without just cause and without due process of law.

According to the Constitution of the United States of America, the American people have the right to petition for a redress of grievances, and WE, the people are petitioning on behalf of this couple regardless of borders, for our Constitution protects the rights and liberties of all people under the flag and Constitution of these United States of America.

We would like to remind all levels of government from municipal to state to federal that the McCloskeys had every right to stand on their own personal property which they purchased with their own hard work, sweat, time, and money. We would like to remind all levels of government that the couple had every right to hold in their hands legal property which they purchased with their own hard work, sweat, time, and money. We would like to remind all levels of government that the couple had every right to speak and utter words as granted by their right as free and sovereign human beings living on American soil. Furthermore, we would like to remind all levels of government that the couple had every right to take immediate action forthwith to protect their persons and their property in the event of criminal action as protected under the second amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America as well as the Castle Law Doctrine of Missouri.

We do not take lightly the government’s persecution and harassment of innocent citizens lightly, and we will now cite in detail every incident in which the government has overstepped its bounds to violate our most sacred rights as Americans living under our nation’s flag:

1.) Congress shall make no law . . . Abridging the freedom of speech (First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America). The government shall immediately cease and desist from persecuting and harassing this innocent couple for words uttered while standing within the borders of the United States of America, much less on the property of their own home.

2.) . . . The right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed (Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America). The government shall immediately cease and desist from persecuting and harassing this innocent couple for keeping and bearing arms. Furthermore, the couple shall not be questioned as to their reason for HOLDING private property while standing on the property of their own private residence.

3.) We would further like to remind the government that no crime was committed. The property was not discharged. No bullet - or even grain of sand - was released from the gun whether by accident or intention. No person was injured. Not so much as a hair was plucked from a single head. No action was taken of a violent nature. Since owning a gun is legal, any attempt to persecute this couple for such ownership shall be construed as a direct attack by the government on the Constitution of the United States of America and on the civil rights and liberties of all citizens of the United States of America.

4.) The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized (Fourth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America). Under this article, we demand that Kimberly Gardner, a civil servant who swore an oath to protect and serve the Constitution and the Bill of Rights of the United States of America, be immediately removed from office and be required to personally pay from her own personal bank account all court costs for the McCloskeys which have resulted from her failure to uphold her sworn oath. Evidence shows that she personally, directly, and knowingly gave an order to have municipal law enforcement remove the personal property belonging to the McCloskeys, not only without any search warrant having been issued as described in Amendment Four, but without so much as any crime or suspicion of crime having been committed. Not so much as a grain of sand was dislodged by the innocent couple. As such, this personal attack on the McCloskeys represents a personal attack on the property of every United States citizen, and we, the people, demand justice through the removal of Kimberly Gardner from office and through a personal reimbursement by Kimberly Gardner for court expenses which would otherwise be paid for inappropriately through tax dollars. We will not abide by supporting such tyranny and inappropriate use of tax monies to pay the corrupt and persecute the innocent.

5.) . . . Nor shall (any person) be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation (Fifth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America). It is a an egregious affront to all citizens that the McCloskeys are being asked to answer to a Grand Jury when no crime was committed. Not so much as a grain of sand was tossed at a bystander, and, as such, any criminal persecution of the innocent will be construed as a tyrannical act of the government and as an affront to the United States citizenry at large. Furthermore, no monies were offered by Kimberly Gardner in exchange for the couple’s property. Therefore, the citizens demand that Kimberly Gardner be required to pay from her personal coffers a just rental as monetary payment in exchange for the time she has retained the couple’s personal property, the value of which is to be set by the McCloskeys, and furthermore demand that she immediately return said property to their possession immediately as is their legal right to own and bear.

6.) It shall be noted that the Castle Law Doctrine of the State of Missouri allows citizens to protect their person and their property. We would like to remind all levels of government, from local to state to federal that the McCloskeys did not fire a weapon and furthermore that not a single person or bystander was injured, but that, had such an incident been warranted by the actions of an angry mob who was threatening the couple with murder and violence and vandalism, they would have been in their proper right to defend themselves on the soil of the great state of Missouri as free and sovereign souls, as well as written and specifically granted under Missouri’s Castle Law Doctrine.

Should the judicial branch, the legislative branch, or the executive branch of government require a reminder of the Constitution, Bill of Rights, Amendments, and Castle Law Doctrines of our great nation, WE THE PEOPLE ask you to kindly reference all of the copies of these governing documents which have been paid for throughout the history of our country by, not only the tax dollars of hard working American citizens but also by the blood of the patriots who have fought and died to preserve the principles of our country. We do not take these matter lightly, and we remind all civil servants of their oaths and the money that citizens pay to fund their salaries.

We furthermore submit graphic evidence which demonstrates the governing order of law in our nation as a reminder to all civil servants of the United States of America of the priority of law in our country.

It is an insult to every American regardless of color, creed, gender, age, occupation, race, national origin, and every other demographic that the McCloskeys have been treated in this manner. The disregard that has been shown for the rights of the McCloskeys, and, by extension, every American living on American soil must be remedied with immediate effect, and Kimberly Gardner must pay for her actions and her breach of oath. We will not abide by these injustices, and we seek immediate remediation for these actions.

To summarize, we require the following as per the CONSTITUTION, BILL OF RIGHTS, AND MISSOURI CASTLE LAW DOCTRINE:
* All contrived charges of any nature against the McCloskeys will be immediately dropped and no further action taken to persecute and harass these innocent citizens
* Kimberly Gardner will submit monetary compensation from her own personal bank account to the McCloskeys in the form of a rental payment for the period of time she retained their personal property at a value set by the McCloskeys
* Kimberly Gardner will immediately recuse herself from her office for failure to uphold her sworn oath to the US Constitution and Bill of Rights
* Kimberly Gardner will immediately return all illegally seized and unjustly confiscated personal property to the McCloskeys as no crime was committed and no warrant obtained
* Kimberly Gardner will personally pay the court expenses for the McCloskeys and any associated pain and suffering for putting them in a legal proceeding without any crime having been committed
* The McCloskeys will no longer be harassed or persecuted or put in a position of having to defend their actions by any branch of United States government since the couple was within their legal right under the Constitution and Bill of Rights of the United States of America
* Furthermore, since no weapon of any type was discharged with no crime of any nature having been committed, the couple will no longer be asked or required to respond in any way regarding their actions pertaining to this matter by any person at any level of government or law enforcement.

WE, THE PEOPLE FURTHER ASK THAT THE GOVERNMENT TAKE A MOMENT TO SELF-REFLECT ON THE WORDS OF DANIEL WEBSTER: “I shall exert every faculty I possess in aiding to prevent the Constitution from being nullified, destroyed, or impaired; and, even though I should see it fall, I will still, with a voice feeble, perhaps, but earnest as ever issued from human lips, and with fidelity and zeal which nothing shall extinguish, call on the PEOPLE to come to its rescue.

WE THE PEOPLE STAND WITH THE MCCLOSKEYS, and, as those having taken a sworn oath to uphold the CONSTITUTION AND BILL OF RIGHTS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, remind you to do so as well or immediately recuse yourself from your respective offices for treason.

Thus the people have spoken and so it is.

Signed,
THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA