Dr Astrid Stuckelberger: Synthetic Biology with Nanocircuits that Go with 5G

FOR SOMETHING TO BE BIOLOGICAL, YOU NEED PHOSPHOROUS AND NITROGEN AND THEY FOUND NOTHING LIKE THAT IN ALL THE VIALS THEY SAW

VIDEO: "Dr Astrid Stuckelberger: Synthetic Biology with Nanocircuits that Go with 5G" - Pub. April 6, 2025

This is a recent interview with Swiss Public Health expert, Dr Astrid Stuckelberger about the preoccupation with the term "mRNA" when defining in the ingredients of the jab, when mRNA is the least of it.

What we're dealing with is synthetic biology and nanocircuitry.

TRANSCRIPT

Dr Astrid Stuckelberger: And I want to answer to, you know, what is in the jab and what's going on with the 5G. You know, the question that Pascal said, "Ask Astrid, because it's very important."

I've been into one of the first ones who really read and said "There is oxide graphene". Some scientists in Spain, Professor [Pablo] Campra found, you know, massive oxide graphene in nanoparticle in the job in June 2021. And then, he made another report, final in November 2021.

And then, others made, like Professor Arne Burkhardt made very scientific, really in the lab of like a medical analysis of the jab. And he did, in front of lawyers. He said "This is a crime against humanity. Anybody jabbing this thing is –" it's Pfizer – it was Pfizer – "Is is a criminal."

And he found he confirmed oxide graphene. He confirmed parasites. He confirmed metal; chrome, nickel that should never be there or massively – nanoparticle. And then, he also confirmed there is a RFID-type of thing in there.

So he did a very interesting move. He took lawyers to say and to affirm.

Now, there are others. And it's very interesting, you know, how we go in a crime scene.

We have one more element, one more, some contradictory, some not. A lot of people are talking of "mRNA, mRNA. spike, mRNA," but they never really give the nature of this mRNA. And two scientists started to do the whistleblowing, Dr Nagase in Canada and Dr Monteverde.

And for me, that was a key to this crime scene. And they said that, "For something to be biological, you need phosphorous and nitrogen." And they found nothing like that in all the vials they saw.

And it was confirmed again, after. So, it's not biological. What is in this little vial is not biological! So what is it? It is synthetic nanotech. Yes. And and beyond maybe other things we don't know.

You see, I leave it open, because we are in such a crazy situation of evil that we have to be open, so that we can stop and treat people.

So now, in the scientific community where I speak a lot, you know, in conference, I show the graphic of first question. "Is it biological or not?"

It's not. It's synthetic. David Martin said "They should never have accepted those patents. They're all synthetic, not biological!"

Then, you you start explaining. But if you explain mRNA, you have to define if it is synthetic or not. You have to say, "Is it a nanorobot," and you call mRNA?

Or do you call mRNA the consequence of a causality – and the causality is something synthetic and like a robot, which I think that is.

The mRNA spike is only an effect or an element of this nanocircuit and nanotech, because it's not possible that spike protein is everywhere, in the body after an injection.

So it is the transporter for oxide graphene; is like a flying carpet. I've made a report on that "flying carpet".

And it's – you can put a genome, you can put a parasite, you can put a bacteria and you can code it. And it mimics the code of a molecule, because we have the codes of molecules with Dr [Jacques] Benveniste in France and Professor [Luc] Montagnier tried to steal all his findings and then he got killed.

You know, so we know that biocoding exists since 50 years, but it's become very sophisticated, now. And they can send this biocode to the oxide graphene...it can load the data, up to terahertz and it can send it. And so it is like a computer.

Bill Gates is perfectly suited to know, with his engineers to develop this with DARPA. So we know this, that this can take control of the mind and of the body. And I invite everybody who has not seen this fantastic video of Dr Charles Morgan of DARPA.

And he's teaching on YouTube, the military, how oxide graphene can take command of someone on the other side of Earth through Wi-Fi and it's called "Psycho-Neurobiology and War". I don't know if you've seen it?

VIDEO: "Dr Charles Morgan on Psycho-Neurobiology and War" - Orig. Pub. June 15, 2018

(Roll Video of Dr Charles Morgan)

Army Soldier: (Introducing Dr Morgan) Today, we have Dr Charles Morgan to talk to us about neuroscience and psychology and a whole gamut of things.

Right now, he is a Professor of National Security Studies at the University of New Haven. His focus is teaching National Security Studies, Domestic and International Intelligence Analysis and issues.

Dr Morgan is developing a concentration in the human aspects, intelligence analysis and Psychological Operations arenas, that are relevant to the Intelligence Community.

He has a pretty robust background, with military folks, doing research at Sears School, helping with selection processes for Special Operations Forces, down in Fort Bragg, etc. So, without further ado, I'll hand it over.

Dr Charles Morgan: So, what I would like to talk to you a little bit about today is something I was asked to do in 2010 and 2011. I was getting ready to leave, over at CIA, where I'd worked for a number of years.

And the Intelligence Science Board said, "Could you give us a brief on what's in store for us in the future?"

I was like, "I don't know. Predicting the future is really hard." So I told my boss at the time, I said, "Well, I think the best I'll do is make an estimate, over what I think is going to happen in the next five years," given certain technologies that were being developed at the time – and this is a bit of an extension of that – I present it to the SSG.

And it was some information I think some people didn't know. And I think it's good for people to be aware of what's going on out there.

The one thing that makes predicting a little bit of the future easier, when you look at biomedical science is that labs are working fairly systematically with overtly-stated goals.

But the really fun part was that you're taking over somebody else's physical body with the mind of another human. So what do you think would be the next step? You follow medical research: You say you can make a robot move. You can make a human hand move. What would you do next?

You say, "Wow, they're getting brains connected to run things." You have to begin to think either like doctors or like security and intelligence people, right?

Can you actually send and receive sensory information, like 'The Matrix'?

Dr [Craig] Venter's work is, in my view the equivalent of the development of nuclear weapons, when you realize that he created life in a cell, back in 2010. I don't know if people are familiar with his work, but this technology paired with something called CRISPR, which is like an editing software for genes, makes a number of things immediately available.

What he did is he programmed yeast cells to produce anything he wanted: They can produce perfume. They can produce petroleum. They can produce any peptide, anything we program the DNA to do and it's in the living cell.

So in medicine, the goal in medicine now is to be able to do designer medicine and therapy. If we can design a cell to get into your body and release the right product for you, you won't be losing half the drugs you take through your liver, when you swallow a pill and it gets digested.

These can be inserted into you through the hypospray needles, almost like Dr McCoy on Star Trek, getting the hypospray. It just blasts, now plasmids into your squamous cells. But Venter was able to do that and has the patent on the technology. But you can engineer anything.

You can engineer a thing that would only kill one person in the world.

VIDEO REPEATS:

You can engineer a thing that would only kill one person in the world.

It's how it's done. You put in a specific gene slicing. You program what you like. You put it in the cell and it can reproduce and make as much as you like.

Dr Astrid Stuckelberger: It's very interesting. When people are not convinced, I show them, "Go and see this and you will understand already a bit. Go and see the [CDC's] 'Pandemic Preparedness for Zombies'. You will understand.

WHITE PAPER: "Preparedness 101: Zombie Pandemic" - Orig. Pub. in 2011 by the Centers for Disease Control

Go and see that the ID is in the body of people who are dead and even in the cemetery, you know:

VIDEO: "Internet of Dead Bodies" - Pub. Jan 5, 2024 by ForbiddenKnowledgeTV.net

And go and see the autopsy that what they're taking out of the blood is something like catsup. But nobody's really describing it:

VIDEO: "Embalmer Richard Hirschman Reveals Novel Clotting in 65% of Cases" - Pub. Feb 8, 2022 by ForbiddenKnowledgeTV.net

And I suspect they're afraid to say really what it is, because they don't know. Because, when there are two or three scientists who said something very interesting that goes with this AI science plasma, going around. It's that there is a parasite, as an egg:

VIDEO: "Critically Thinking with Dr Carrie Madej and Dr Christine Northrup – Tentacled Organism Identified?" - Pub. Oct 2, 2021 by ForbiddenKnowledgeTV.net

If you put it at the temperature of the body under microscope, it develops and the egg bursts out and

VIDEO: "SHOCKING: Dr. Carrie Madej Releases FIRST LOOK at Pfizer Vial Contents" - Pub. Oct 21, 2021 by ForbiddenKnowledgeTv.net

There's a lot to go and seek and to understand the causality of causality and not only talk of this mRNA! And I'm fed up of this mRNA! It's a messenger! It's a lot more!

I got censored in Stockholm in a conference because I said, "Go and look at the genome-editing document that WHO produced, because this is important."

But the cause of the cause is a synthetic injection with nanocircuits that go on with 5G. It's been evidenced by experts who recognized and did it, that it is a nanocircuit.

It's beyond what doctors know, what normal scientists know. And we have to get every engineer in – or veterans who have who know anything about nanoparticles and nanotech – to come and help us to understand what's going on, because we have to know how to detach this from the body and clean.

Sabrina Wallace gets into the latest detail of all of this, which I will cover in my next post, but here's a teaser:

"The cyber physical backbone with the IEEE was already in place in 2017. And Alison McDowell told you to write letters to the stakeholders, the people who pay their bills. You don't pay their bills – so, what do they care about your letters?!

Spartacus, March 25th, 2025: "It's a far more plausible scenario than people would think. AI don't have to run on computers alone. That's just one substrate. Biology is another substrate that AI can run on."

Yeah, human bodies make great antennas and the most powerful quantum computer is between your ears, said Our Divine Lady of the Red Phone.

DNA computers, lipid-based logic gates, chemical computation through receptor-ligand interactions, etc. 2006 paper entitled, "Towards Computing with Proteins". That's molecular communication, right now, today, and since 2014, commercially:

WHITE PAPER: "Towards Computing with Proteins" - Pub. April 1, 2006 by PubMed

To quote the abstract:

"We discuss how to design protein molecules that would serve as the best computational element by functioning as a nanological gate, utilizing DNA tags for recognition, phosphorylation, exonuclease reactions for information processing."

You're a walking hard drive. DNA steganography. That's what I said.