Biological Weapons – Strategic Culture Foundation https://www.strategic-culture.org Strategic Culture Foundation provides a platform for exclusive analysis, research and policy comment on Eurasian and global affairs. We are covering political, economic, social and security issues worldwide. Sun, 10 Apr 2022 20:53:47 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=4.9.16 And What About Those Biolabs? https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2022/03/31/and-what-about-those-biolabs/ Thu, 31 Mar 2022 15:00:18 +0000 https://www.strategic-culture.org/?post_type=article&p=799999 Stop the narrative I want to get off!

The semi-official United States government plus media lie machine knows that constructing a plausible reason to bomb the crap out of someone all depends on where you begin your narrative. If you keep starting your accusations at a point where the target has done something bad, all you have to do is repeat yourself over and over again to drown out any alternative backstory that surfaces. And if you really want to demolish all contrary views, all you have to do is liken the targeted foreign leader to Adolph Hitler and keep repeating. That tactic was used with Saddam Hussein of Iraq and is now being employed against Vladimir Putin of Russia and it always works.

In the current context of Ukraine versus Russia the trick has been to tie everything to the invasion by Putin’s armed forces over four weeks ago, an undoubted act of aggression. Once you establish that as your launching point, preceding developments are rendered moot. Who cares about US promises not to expand the NATO alliance eastwards after the Soviet Union broke up in 1991? And there is also Washington’s role in regime change in Ukraine in 2014? Or even the relentless demonization of Russia linked to the 2016 US presidential election followed by any unwillingness by Washington to negotiate even the most reasonable of Putin’s demands? Fuggedabout it! And also forget about considering whether or not the US has any national interest in going to war over Ukraine. Only Tucker Carlson and Tulsi Gabbard seem inclined to challenge the basic premise, which is to raise the question “Since Russia does not threaten us why are we doing this? Do we really want a possible nuclear war over Ukraine?”

Just read the New York Times and you will learn that it is not about what’s good for America at all. It is all about a big bully country attacking a “democratic” neighbor with the US and its brave allies standing up as the standard bearers of a Washington imposed “rules based international order.” And now the US is upping the ante by pushing ahead with its insistence that Russia is committing war crimes. But convincing the world on that point is a bit more difficult to accomplish. If one were to ask the question “Which nation in the world commits the most war crimes?” the general international response might well be Israel or the United States. Part of the problem would be working out an acceptable definition for a war crime while also developing a methodology for defining “the most.” If Israel attacks Syria four times in a week is that four separate war crimes or only part of one continuous war crime. As the United States has military bases in both Syria and Iraq that the respective governments have not authorized, and have in fact, asked the Americans to leave, is that a single war crime of illegal invasion and occupation or a continuous one punctuated only by the occasions when US troops kill a few of the natives?

In any event it is difficult to “convict” Russia as neither Israel nor the US has ever been held accountable for the war crimes they have committed, to include shooting and bombing civilians, hospitals, schools at random and occasionally wedding parties and other social gatherings. President George W. Bush even started a couple of wars in places like Afghanistan and Iraq based on fabricated “intelligence” and the greatly beloved Barack Obama did the same to Libya and Syria. Both are now regarded as venerable elder statesmen even though they should be in prison and there is lately some talk among Democrats of seeing Obama or his wife run again in 2024 for the highest office in the land. And is that Hillary waiting in the wings for a second try? Either way, it will be a bad day for anyone trying to establish a modus vivendi for working with Russia.

America’s blood lust vis-à-vis Russia is completely bipartisan, with the few sensible voices in Congress drowned out by the drumroll in high places accompanying the avalanche of propaganda pouring out of the mainstream media. It has long been axiomatic that the first victim of war propaganda is truth, but the United States only needs the stimulus of the possibility of war or conflict to begin its pattern of lying. And, as the current situation illustrates, it is quite prepared to designate enemies that in reality do not threaten the country. It did so to bring about a greatly enlarged US commitment in Vietnam and also through the Cold War by deliberate CIA overestimates of the power and reach of the Soviet Union. Since 9/11 there has been a succession of presidents who have lied about nearly everything relating to national security and foreign policy, leading to invasions, assassinations, other types of interventions, and a “sanctions” prone government that has denied ordinary citizens of food and medicines while leaving the leadership of the targeted countries untouched.

One of the recent lies is a replay of the old “let’s get Saddam Hussein” playbook. Remember those savage Iraqi soldiers tearing Kuwaiti babies out of their incubators and throwing them onto the floor? Of course, it was all a lie concocted by the Kuwaiti ruling family and US government largely neocon accomplices. Now we are learning that the vile Russians bombed a maternity hospital! Except, of course, that it may have turned out to be completely untrue. And the media is now exclaiming that “Russia is putting the planet on the brink of World War 3!” while the New York Times is indicting political conservatives as purveyors of Russian propaganda. Actually, it was the United States and NATO that have opened the door to a possible nuclear holocaust, but one hates to dispute what is an apparently a profitable and well-received story line.

But the best bit of lying has to be the ongoing propaganda war over twenty-six biological laboratories in Ukraine funded at least in part by the Pentagon. “Nothing to see here” says the Biden White House, while Russia is saying “Just a minute, folks…” Meanwhile the plot thickens as emails have now surfaced indicating that Joe Biden’s son Hunter was involved in obtaining, and profited from, the US government’s funding of the labs.

The biolab controversy began when the United States government’s State Department number three Victoria Nuland recently admitted to a congressional panel that the labs exist and also added that Ukraine possesses chemical and biological weapons. She then realized her error and both backtracked and elaborated that “uh, Ukraine has, uh, biological research facilities [and] we are now in fact quite concerned that Russian troops, Russian forces, may be seeking to, uh, gain control of [those labs], so we are working with the Ukrainiahhhns [sic] on how they can prevent any of those research materials from falling into the hands of Russian forces should they approach.”

The statement is absurd as the Russians undoubtedly already possess their own stocks of bioweapons. The existence of the labs themselves may be linked to the legacy of the break-up of the Soviet Union in 1991, when, by one account, the US provided assistance through its “Cooperative Threat Reduction Program” to manage the existing bio and chem labs lest their toxic chemicals and pathogens fall into the wrong hands. But the US has actually done much more than that, Ron Unz observes how “Over the decades America had spent over $100 billion dollars on ‘biodefense,’ the euphemistic term for biowarfare development, and [has] had the world’s oldest and largest such program, one of the few ever deployed in real life combat.”

Currently, the US government claims blandly that the labs, which are run by America’s Department of Defense, remain active for “peaceful research and the development of vaccines.” The US Embassy in Kiev described the activity in greater detail as working “to consolidate and secure pathogens and toxins of security concern and to continue to ensure Ukraine can detect and report outbreaks caused by dangerous pathogens before they pose security or stability threats.”

Some Ukrainians have, however, been suspicious of their purpose, particularly as their activities are secret and are managed by the Pentagon rather than some civilian agency. And if the original objective was to prevent the development of bioweapons, why is the US still hanging around seventeen years later? Former Ukrainian Prime Minister Mykola Azarov, who held the post under President Viktor Yanukovych, spoke about how the decision to start collaborating with the Americans was taken by Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko’s office and subsequently implemented under President Viktor Yushchenko in 2005. It was generally believed in the government that the agreement was focused on Ukrainian biosecurity, but all its related activities were and are classified and Ukrainian citizens were not even allowed to work together with the Americans.

There was some pushback on the labs, to include a cursory inspection in 2010-2012 and by 2013 the Ukrainian government sent an official letter demanding that the labs be closed. The 2014 regime change intervened however, and the decision was never implemented by the new regime.

It should be noted that if one is to protect against toxins and pathogens one must first create them in order to manipulate them or prevent them. If one thinks back to the notorious Anthrax scare in the United States in 2001, investigators determined that the lethal strain of the pathogen had actually been created in a US Army biological weapons lab at Fort Detrick Maryland. One might also consider COVID and the widely held belief that the Wuhan Institute of Virology had been manipulating various coronavirus strains to make them more contagious and lethal.

Nuland clearly admitted that there were US-funded bioweapons in Ukraine when she expressed concern that Russia might occupy one of the labs and be tempted to acquire the material for its own use against Kiev. And the Biden Administration, clearly embarrassed by the admission, has attempted to turn the tables by rejecting Russian suggestions that the labs might be seeking to design biological pathogens that target certain ethnic groups, which is why the existing labs have been placed all around the world, including Ukraine. As far back as 2017, Russian President Vladimir Putin expressed his concerns about US collection of biological material from ethnic Russians, as Unz puts it “certainly a very suspicious project for our government to have undertaken.”

If these Pentagon funded laboratories are indeed involved in propagating mutated strains of pathogens like anthrax and plague as biological weapons, like may have taken place at Wuhan, it would be a violation of Article I of the “UN Biological Weapons Convention,” making the United States government indisputably a War Criminal, with its leaders subject to the death sentence under the Nuremberg Laws which were in large part established by the United States Government itself in 1946. That aside, the real concern right now should be that the US/NATO will stage some kind of false flag incident which will lead to calls for direct military intervention. Watching Biden’s serial blunders and cover-ups suggests that there is nothing that Biden and Blinken will not do, up to an include started some kind of hopefully manageable war to boost the presidents sinking approval ratings. Now that Joe Biden is talking tough, it is hard to imagine how he will get off of the horse that he is riding without stepping into some sort of armed conflict. As the former Reagan Administration official Paul Craig Roberts has astutely observed “The evil that [now] resides in Washington is unprecedented in human history.”

unz.com

]]>
Russia’s U.S. Biowarfare Claims in Ukraine Need Serious Answers https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2022/03/18/russias-us-biowarfare-claims-in-ukraine-need-serious-answers/ Fri, 18 Mar 2022 18:33:47 +0000 https://www.strategic-culture.org/?post_type=article&p=795054 If we are ever to restore peace, then we need to understand where the hostility comes from, how, and why.

The United States and Russia continued this week with furious sparring over the issue of biological laboratories in Ukraine. The U.S. accuses Russia of “disinformation” about the labs, saying that they were standard sanitary facilities studying common diseases and epidemiology. For its part, Russia claims that the laboratories were conducting far more sinister and illicit research into developing biowarfare weapons.

Surely, the quickest way to discern the relative validity of concerns is the following basic fact. The research facilities numbering up to 30 locations in Kiev, Kharkov, Kherson, Lvov, Odessa and Poltava, among other cities, were being funded by the Pentagon to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars. The figure is estimated at $200 million and, it seems, the research has been going on for several years up until recently. If the laboratories were involved in benign disease investigations then why was the Pentagon the sponsor and liaison organization? Why not the U.S. Department of Health, or Center for Disease Control, instead of the Department of Defense? And why were the laboratories ordered to destroy their samples when Russia launched its military intervention in Ukraine – an intervention that Moscow claims is justified on the grounds of self-defense?

This week the Russian Ministry of Defense named the Pentagon’s liaison officer formerly at the U.S. embassy in Kiev who was responsible for the laboratory programs as Joanna Wintrol. It was suggested that American lawmakers should ask this person to give testimony on the purpose of the facilities.

The involvement of the Pentagon in the activities of dozens of laboratories across Ukraine is the most strident fact pointing to concerns that the research was being conducted for the nefarious purpose of developing biological weapons.

It is telling, too, that anyone who raises questions about the activity is immediately denounced as a Russian propagandist. They are vilified as trying to amplify Moscow’s justification for its military intervention into Ukraine that began on February 24. A diverse range of American public figures has called for a transparent investigation into concerns over U.S. bioweapons being developed in Ukraine. They include journalists like Tucker Carlson and Glenn Greenwald, former U.S. Marine intelligence officer Scott Ritter, former congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard, and professor of international law Frances Boyle.

Russia is endeavoring to have the matter raised at the UN Security Council despite American objections. China has also endorsed Russia’s concerns and calls for a full investigation. Given that China has previously raised questions about U.S. covert laboratory work on coronaviruses at Fort Detrick, Maryland, as possibly being responsible for releasing the Covid-19 coronavirus and the ensuing global pandemic it is understandable why Beijing is now taking a keener interest in the discovery of shadowy Pentagon laboratories in Ukraine. China has angrily rejected American attempts to smear it as the originator of the Covid-19 pandemic.

In any case, the matter of Pentagon-funded laboratories in Ukraine can’t simply be dismissed by arrogant assertions of innocence by Washington. After all the lies the U.S. has told about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq that were used for justifying a war that killed over one million Iraqis, the Americans have no credibility whatsoever. The irony here is that Russia went into Ukraine and seems to have actually found evidence of WMD unlike the Americans when they invaded Iraq in 2003.

The background to the present inquiry is that Russia has long expressed fears that the United States was engaged in biological warfare research at facilities set up in former Soviet republics. This concern over clandestine facilities has been shared by independent investigative journalists such as Dilyana Gaytandzhieva who has reported on U.S. bioweapon laboratories in Georgia among other places.

Officially, the United States has sought to deny all allegations of such illicit activities which would put it in gross violation of the Biological Warfare Convention (1983). The Pentagon has claimed that laboratories in Ukraine and elsewhere have been charged with securing Soviet-era bioweapons. But decades later, surely that explanation is wearing thin, if not altogether obsolete.

The issue flared up again – unintentionally – when Victoria Nuland, the U.S. Under Secretary of State with responsibility for Ukraine (responsibility in more ways than her formal title indicates) admitted to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on March 8 that there were dangerous biological research laboratories in Ukraine funded by Washington. So dangerous, indeed, that Nuland openly expressed concern that Russian forces might come into their possession. To do what? Use them as weapons? Or, more realistically, be able to prove that the Pentagon was funding the development of bioweapons in Ukraine?

Some American media have gladly quoted a few Russian biologists who are dismissive of Moscow’s claims of U.S. bioweapons in Ukraine. They assert the strains of pathogens are not particularly dangerous. How they can be so insouciant is curious. The Russian military experts on biological weapons say the samples being experimented on in Ukrainian laboratories included pathogens causing a host of deadly diseases, ranging from brucellosis, diphtheria, dysentery, and leptospirosis. Pathogens being studied included anthrax and coronaviruses. Furthermore, the research also involved investigating animal to human transmission of these diseases, such as through bird migration paths specific to Russia. There is also evidence of local outbreaks of these diseases in recent years that are atypical for seasonal conditions.

The documents demonstrating Pentagon sponsorship of the Ukrainian laboratories are original and verifiable, according to Moscow. It has published some of the documents which appear to be genuine. Of course, with Western draconian censorship against Russian news outlets, it is harder for the international public interest to avail of relevant information.

Still, however, the case for an international investigation under the auspices of neutral biowarfare experts is one that is valid and urgent.

We have already seen the worldwide impact of the Covid-19 disease that erupted in late 2019. The last thing Europe and the world needs are a chain of potentially deadly bioweapons facilities in Ukraine that the Pentagon is desperate to cover up.

Many questions need answering seriously. It is contemptible to simply brush these questions aside as “Russian propaganda”. The U.S. has a long and vile history of using bioweapons dating back to killing native American populations with smallpox and later civilian populations in Central America and Cuba. Thus, the U.S. has forfeited any benefit of the doubt owing to its well-documented practices of bioterrorism; especially considering the conspicuous involvement of the Pentagon in Ukraine’s laboratories.

The issue also opens up the bigger picture of Russia’s demands for a security treaty in Europe and the end to NATO expansionism and decades of aggressive threatening. Right now the Western media is saturated with anti-Russian smears and Russophobia. Yet, this is precisely why the questions about the U.S., NATO, Pentagon, and their connections to Ukraine need to be focused on.

Russia has insisted on Ukraine and other former Soviet republics being excluded from the U.S.-led military bloc – for good reasons. The turning of Ukraine into a platform of hostility towards Russia since the CIA-backed coup in Kiev in 2014 is the essential background to why the current war has manifested in Ukraine. The apparent involvement of Pentagon biowarfare laboratories in Ukraine is one reason among several why Russia was compelled to take defensive action with its intervention in Ukraine.

If we are ever to restore peace, then we need to understand where the hostility comes from, how, and why.

]]>
U.S. Biological Labs in Ukraine: What Could Possibly Go Wrong? https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2022/03/14/u-s-biological-labs-in-ukraine-what-could-possibly-go-wrong/ Mon, 14 Mar 2022 17:11:42 +0000 https://www.strategic-culture.org/?post_type=article&p=794981 The Russians’ argument for opening a ‘special operation’ in Ukraine just got a massive boost, Robert Bridge writes.

As Russia confirms the existence of biological research laboratories on Ukrainian soil, one of the primary architects of the 2014 Ukrainian coup, Victoria Nuland, has sounded the alarm. With yet another ‘conspiracy theory’ debunked as reality, does the shocking revelation provide Russia with the ultimate casus belli?

The fog of war is clearing fast in Ukraine, and what’s being discovered is profoundly disturbing.

That much became obvious this week when the Republican Marc Rubio asked U.S. Deputy Secretary of State Victoria Nuland during a Senate Committee hearing: “Does Ukraine have chemical or biological weapons?” The response was every bit as unexpected as it was unnerving. First, the unexpected part: Nuland the inveterate neocon actually confirmed the existence of these previously denied labs.

Choosing her words as though the jobs of millions of fact-checkers hung in the balance, Nuland said: “Uh, Ukraine has biological research facilities, which, in fact, we are now quite concerned Russian troops, Russian forces may be seeking to, uh, gain control of. So we are working with the Ukrainians on how they can prevent any of those research materials from falling into the hands of, uh, Russian forces should they approach.”

Despite all the previous talk about the ‘Ukrainian labs’ story being a fever dream of QAnon chat rooms, Russian media was reporting on the existence of these facilities over two years ago, just as Covid viral symptoms were sweeping a locked-down planet.

“Eight laboratories … were built and modernized with the participation of the Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) as part of the ‘Program of Involvement in Special Biological Activities’ in the period from 2005 to 2014,” Izvestia reported in March 2020 to the sound of crickets in the West. “Laboratories were built in Vinnytsia, Dnipropetrovsk, Transcarpathian, Lviv, Kharkiv, Kherson, Ternopil regions…”

So much for ‘Russian disinformation.’

Although it has become unfashionable these days to dabble in coincidence theories, one reason for Washington coming clean about the dirty labs was likely connected to the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs releasing a statement – the very same day as Nuland’s confessional – confirming the existence of these facilities, as well as the toxic research being conducted there.

“We confirm that, during the special military operation in Ukraine, the Kiev regime was found to have been concealing traces of a military biological program implemented with funding from the United States Department of Defence,” Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said in a statement.

“Documentation on the urgent eradication of highly hazardous pathogens of plague, anthrax, rabbit-fever, cholera and other lethal diseases on February 24 [the same day the Russian ‘special operation’ kicked off] was received from employees of Ukrainian biolaboratories,” she continued. “This included an instruction from the Ministry of Health of Ukraine on the urgent eradication of stored reserves of highly hazardous pathogens sent to all biolaboratories.”

And now for the unnerving part. Of all the possible things the daft Republican Senator could have asked Nuland next – especially in a crucial election year – Rubio opted for a scene straight out of the Keystone Cops.

“I’m sure you’re aware that the Russian propaganda groups are already putting out … information about how they’ve uncovered a plot by the Ukrainians to release biological weapons in the country, with NATO’s coordination,” Rubio ruminated, before delivering Nuland one of those limp-wristed underhand volleyball serves one normally gives to a child. “If there is a biological or chemical weapons incident or attack inside of Ukraine, is there any doubt in your mind that 100 percent it would be the Russians that would be behind it?”

To which Nuland responded: “There is no doubt in my mind, Senator, and it is classic Russian technique to blame on the other guy what they are planning to do themselves.”

It is certainly strange that the bipolar American establishment, which trembles at the thought of a few Proud Boys, has given judicial carte blanche powers to a Ukrainian government that has proven to be infiltrated by neo-Nazi ideology. But since we’re talking about the Russians, it seems that everything is fair game, up to and including Facebook endorsing hate speech against Russians. Whatever nefarious actions the fascists may undertake, the gavel of justice will fall heavy against the Russians. Case already closed.

A similar thing happened with Hillary Clinton’s disappeared emails. The main subject of inquiry is not possible criminal behavior on the part of U.S. officialdom, but rather that the Russians will somehow capitalize on it. So let’s not waste time questioning what damaging information were on Clinton’s servers or brewing inside of those Ukrainian labs, because the intentions of the United States and its allies are always beyond suspicion! This is sheer madness, of course, and the very same dirty tactics were used against the Syrian government of Bashar al-Assad in its fight against ‘moderate’ rebel groups.

Does Moscow have grounds for concern over these developments happening on its border? All things considered, yes, they most certainly do. Suffice it to recall that in July 2017 the U.S. Air Education and Training Command (AETC), one of the nine Major Commands of the United States Air Force, issued a tender to collect samples of ribonucleic acid (RNA) and synovial fluid from the Russian population. The advertisement specifically mentioned that the samples “shall be collected from Russia and must be Caucasian.” It is particularly interesting that the Air Force specifically emphasized – yet never explained – that it would not consider tissue samples from Ukrainians.

The DNA work was startling enough to get a mention from the Russian president.

“Do you know that biological material is being collected all over the country, from different ethnic groups and people living in different geographical regions of the Russian Federation,” Vladimir Putin asked the Russia’s Human Rights Council. “We are a kind of object of great interest.”

Then, with a hint of things to come, the Russian leader said: “Let them do what they want, and we must do what we must.”

In October 2017, Franz Klintsevich, the first deputy chairman of the Federation Council’s Committee for Defense and Security, commented on Putin’s remarks on his Facebook page: “This kind of activity has been going on for quite some time. But lately it has taken quite “indecent” forms,” Klintsevich wrote. “I do not claim that it is directly about preparing a biological war against Russia. But her scripts are undoubtedly being developed.”

So how did the Western establishment respond to the news of biological weapons being developed on the territory of Ukraine? With a lockstep clampdown on Russian news agencies. Even DuckDuckGo, the alternative website that millions of users trusted not to rig algorithms to any ideology, said they would, exactly like Google, down rank Russian news stories. This egregious tampering and censorship, coming at a time when the Russians are on the ground in Ukraine, gaining access to the most disturbing revelations, looks like Big Tech is working directly with the government to bury news on weapons of mass destruction – incidentally, the pretext that the United States and its allies used when they attacked Iraq in March 200.

Now that the Russians seem to have discovered yet another smoking gun in Ukraine in the form of chemical WMDs, their argument for opening a ‘special operation’ there just got a massive boost.

]]>
Beijing, the Five Eyes or Something Else? Who’s to Blame for the COVID Pandemic? https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2021/05/19/beijing-five-eyes-or-something-else-who-blame-for-covid-pandemic/ Wed, 19 May 2021 17:30:06 +0000 https://www.strategic-culture.org/?post_type=article&p=738893 Ever since the earliest days of the Coronavirus pandemic, evidence began to emerge that the virus was not a naturally occurring evolutionary phenomenon as asserted by the WHO, Nature Magazine, and editors at the Lancet, but had other origins.

Among the earliest of those who found themselves supporting this theory were the Chinese Foreign Ministry Spokesman Lijian Zhou who made international waves by sharing two articles by Larry Romanov on the possibility of “gene targeting” of the virus which was having a disproportionately bad effect on Iranians, Italians and various Asian genotypes. Zhou was soon joined by bioweapons experts like Francis Boyle, prominent virologists Luc Montagnier and Judy Mikovits, followed by a growing array of scholars, scientists and academics from around the world who all assessed that the virus’ apparent gene sequencing implied human handiwork. While all agreed that COVID appeared to have originated from a lab, it was still unclear whether that lab was Chinese or controlled by the USA.

Another obvious question arose with this lab theory: Was it an accidental leak or was it consciously deployed?

Since pandemic war game operations had become a normalized part of western geopolitical life from the early days of Dark Winter in 2000 to the Rockefeller Foundation’s 2011 Lock Step to the World Economic Forum’s Event 201 (and dozens more in between), the likelihood of conscious deployment was a very serious possibility.

Who had the motive, means and modus operandi to carry out such a global operation?

The Wuhan Theory Begins

By February 2020, the Wuhan lab leak hypothesis began to make headlines fed by evidence that Dr. Anthony Fauci had exported certain gain of function coronavirus experiments from US bioweapons laboratories to Wuhan’s Institute of Virology- one of two BSL-4 labs in China equipped to conduct this sort of research.

When Sir Richard Dearlove (former head of MI6) became a loud proponent of the Wuhan lab leak hypothesis in June 2020, something seemed amiss. Dearlove certainly knew a thing or two about bioweapons. He knew very well of the Pentagon’s vast array of internationally extended bioweapons labs peppered across the world, and he certainly understood the art of misdirection being himself a byzantine shadow creature who operated at the highest echelons of British intelligence. Dearlove was after all in charge of the “yellowcake” dodgy dossier that launched an Iraq war, he knew of the fallacious reports of nerve gases used by the governments of Libya and Syria sponsored by MI6, had even overseen major components of Russiagate that drove a color revolutionary process in the USA. Dearlove also knew a thing or two about the Porton Down labs that manufactured Novichok used in the Skripal Affair.

While Dearlove’s cheerleading of the Wuhan lab theory raised alarm bells, as time passed, no smoking gun evidence of an alternative lab-leak hypothesis surfaced that one could fully “take to court”. In this respect, Dearlove’s operation had the upper hand since receipts from Fauci’s NIH to the Wuhan Lab did conveniently make headlines, and acted as a “smoking gun” in the minds of many.

Before going into the next phase of the story, it is important to recall that the absence of empirical evidence is not by itself a proof of one party’s innocence, just as the existence of a piece of empirical evidence is not a proof of another party’s guilt.

Wuhan Lab Origins Go Viral Again

In recent weeks, the Wuhan lab leak hypothesis has once again become all the rage.

Rand Paul’s May 10 showdown with Fauci over this the latter’s funding of the Wuhan Institute of Virology added fuel to the fire. Sky News’ May 7 reporting of public Chinese policy papers discussing covid-based bioweapons have gone viral. On March 26, former Center of Disease Control head Robert Redfield asserted his support for the Wuhan lab leak theory. While the scanned receipts of the funds transfer from Fauci’s NIH to research in China via Eco Health Alliance ($600 thousand went to Wuhan) for coronavirus research, had been available since last February, one must wonder why it is now over a year later that this fact is being spread across the perception landscape on all levels.

Both mainstream and alternative media across the western world representing both the left and right have jumped on board the bandwagon blaming China for leaking the virus whether by accident or intent (though obviously, intent is the conclusion which anyone is expected to draw once the Wuhan lab leak theory is accepted). But again, I must ask: In a world of misdirection, psychological warfare and perception management, do the clues that we are being given force us to conclude that the Chinese government is behind the global pandemic or is another culprit likely to be found?

Chinese Leaders Blame the CIA

Zeng Guang, a chief epidemiologist at China’s Center of Disease Control recently joined the conspiracy club on February 9, 2021 in an interview with Chinese media. While denying that the Chinese Wuhan lab is the source of the virus as so many in the west have claimed, Guang asserted that SarsCov2’s origins in a laboratory should not be discounted. Pointing to the vast globally extended US bioweapons labs littering the earth (and citing the USA’s proven track record of deploying bioweapons as part of its asymmetrical war arsenal since WWII), Guang asked:

“Why are there so many laboratories in the United States when biology labs are all over the world? What is the purpose? On many things, the United States requires others to be open and transparent, only to find that it is the United States itself that is often the most opaque. Whether or not the United States has any special fame on the issue of the new corona virus this time, it should have the courage to be open and transparent. The United States should take responsibility for proving itself to the world, rather than being caught up in hegemonic thinking, hiding itself from the virus and dumping others.”

Guang was himself joined by Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Hua Chunying who had also pointed to the Pentagon’s globally extended array of bioweapons laboratories saying:

“I’d like to stress that if the United States truly respects facts, it should open the biological lab at Fort Detrick, give more transparency to issues like its 200-plus overseas bio-labs, invite WHO experts to conduct origin-tracing in the United States, and respond to the concerns from the international community with real actions.”

Those who tend to avoid looking at the history and scope of Pentagon controlled bioweapon warfare tend to ignore the content of such remarks cited by those Chinese officials above for a multitude of reasons. For one: it is easy to believe that Fauci and Gates are corrupt, and this theory not only implicates both men but also ties them to a Chinese government which most westerners have been brainwashed to fear as a bastion of global debt-trappery, genocide, and communist imperialism out to destroy western values.

After conducting a short review of some of the fundamental facts of recent world history alongside certain geopolitical realities of our present world order referenced by the head of the Chinese CDC, I believe that China’s Wuhan Lab is being set up. Here are five facts to support my case…

Fact #1) Depopulation Then and Now

While many people may wish to avoid looking at this fact, depopulation is a driving factor behind international unipolar policy today as it had been during the days of WW2 when Rockefeller Foundation, Macy Foundation, City of London and Wall Street interests gave their backing to both the rise of fascism as an economic miracle solution for the economic woes of the great depression and eugenics (the science of population control) as the governing religion of a new scientific priesthood.

Today, this agenda masquerades behind a new transhumanist movement, shaped by words like “Fourth Industrial Revolution”, “decarbonized economies”, and “Great Resets”. The primary targets of this agenda remain: 1) the Institution of the sovereign nation states, and 2) the “overpopulated zones” of the world with a focus on China, India, South America and Africa.

For anyone who would find themselves instinctively inclined to brush aside such claims as “conspiracy theorizing”, I would encourage a brief review of Sir Henry Kissinger’s infamous NSSM-200 report: Implications of Worldwide Population Growth for U.S. Security and Overseas Interests published in 1974. This declassified report went far to transform US foreign policy from a pro-development philosophy to a new paradigm of population control. In his report, Kissinger warned that “if future numbers are to be kept within reasonable bounds, it is urgent that measures to reduce fertility be started and made effective in the 1970s and 1980s….(Financial) assistance will be given to other countries, considering such factors as population growth… Food and agricultural assistance is vital for any population sensitive development strategy… Allocation of scarce resources should take account of what steps a country is taking in population control… There is an alternative view that mandatory programs may be needed….”

In Kissinger’s twisted logic, US Foreign Policy doctrine had too often foolishly sought to end hunger by providing the means of industrial and scientific development to poor nations.

A true Malthusian through and through, Kissinger believed that aiding the poor to stand on their own feet would result in global disequilibrium as the new middle classes would consume more, and use the strategic resources found under their own soil, which would set the world system accelerated entropy.

This was deemed unacceptable to the mind of Kissinger and any misanthropic follower of Malthus who shared his views of humanity and government.

Kissinger’s Master-Slave Global Society

At the time of Kissinger’s ascent to power as Secretary of State under Nixon, a new grand strategy was unleashed designed to create a new “master-slave” dependency between the developed and undeveloped sectors of the world… with a special emphasis on the 13 nations targeted by NSSM 200 plus China.

China itself was only permitted to acquire western tech needed to start climbing out of abject poverty on the condition that they obeyed the Rockefeller-World Bank demands that one child policy programs were imposed to curb population growth.

Kissinger began organizing for this new set of relations in society around “Have”, post-industrial consumers and a massive “Have-Not” class of poor laborers with access to industry, but remaining stagnant, cheap and without the means of purchasing the goods they produced. The other darker skinned parts of the world would be even more worse off, having neither the means of production, nor consumption while remaining in constant states of famine, war and backwardness. These dark age zones would be largely made up of Sub Saharan Africa and would find their resource-rich lands exploited by the corporate middle men and financiers trying to run the world order above the “obsolete order” of nation states.

Kissinger’s model of a world order was absolutely static with no room for population growth or technological progress. Mao and the Gang of Four which ran the cultural revolution appeared to be highly compatible with Kissinger’s agenda. But when Mao died and the Gang of Four were rightfully imprisoned, a new long-term strategy known as the Four Modernizations shaped by Zhou Enlai and carried out by Deng Xiaoping was launched. This program was far more foresighted than Kissinger realized.

Fact #2) China is currently a leading force of pro-population growth.

While the west has been accelerating into a decaying path on every measurable level, China is quickly moving in an opposing trajectory via extending long term investments and advanced tech development into its own society as well as to its neighbors through such comprehensive projects as the Belt and Road Initiative.

While its own population has not healed from the disastrous 1979 one child policy and is far from achieving the 2.1 children per couple needed for replacement fertility, it did lift the one child limit to two in 2015 and leading Bank of China economists have called for a total elimination of all limits immediately. Meanwhile, the top-down national orientation of China towards increasing the free energy needed to support and grow the economy is unlike anything we have seen in the closed-system western world for many decades.

A vital fact often forgotten is that together China and India were instrumental in sabotaging the December 2009 COP-14 program in Copenhagen which had promised to establish legally binding emission target cuts to guide the de-carbonization (and de-industrialization) of much of society.

The London Guardian had reported in 2009 that “Copenhagen was a disaster. That much is agreed. But the truth about what actually happened is in danger of being lost amid the spin and inevitable mutual recriminations. The truth is this: China wrecked the talks, intentionally humiliated Barack Obama, and insisted on an awful “deal” so western leaders would walk away carrying the blame.”

Apparently China and India, along with African governments like Sudan (which had not yet been carved up on the careful watch of Rhodes Scholar Susan Rice) did not wish to sacrifice their industry and national sovereignty on the altar of climate change models and technocrats that had only weeks earlier been publicly exposed as frauds by East Anglia University researchers during the embarrassing Climategate scandal.

While China and India should be celebrated for having sabotaged this effort 11 years ago, very few people have been able to hold this drama in their memory, and fewer still realize how this fight over sovereignty was in any way connected to China’s 2013 creation of the Belt and Road Initiative as the vital force behind the emerging Multipolar Alliance.

Fact #3) Soros at Davos 2020: The two greatest threats to Open Society: 1) Donald Trump’s USA and 2) Xi Jinping’s China.

During his January 2020 Davos speech, Soros took aim at both Trump and Xi Jinping as the two greatest threats to his Open Society who had to be stopped at all costs. In September 2019 (just as Event 201 was happening) Soros wrote in the Wall Street Journal:

“As founder of the Open Society Foundations, my interest in defeating Xi Jinping’s China goes beyond U.S. national interests. As I explained in a speech in Davos earlier this year, I believe that the social-credit system Beijing is building, if allowed to expand, could sound the death knell of open societies not only in China but also around the globe.”

Before becoming mired into the “China virus” narrative, Donald Trump had worked exceptionally hard to emphasize good relations with China and even managed one of the most important trade deals that had successfully moved into phase one the week Soros spoke at Davos. This first phase involved China creating a market to purchase US finished goods as part of the program to rebuild America’s lost manufacturing sector that had been hollowed out over 5 decades of “post industrialism”. Where Kissinger called NAFTA “the most creative step toward a new world order taken by any group of countries since the end of the Cold War” Trump went far to renegotiate the anti-nation state treaty giving nation states a role to play in shaping economic policy for the first time in over 25 years.

It is important to also recall that Trump resisted the war hawks pushing a total military encirclement of China begun under Obama’s Asia Pivot which is today threating nuclear war. He took the fuel out of the THAAD missile encirclement of China which has justified its expansion based on the “North Korean threat” for over a decade- always denying the truth that the real targets were both Russia and China. Trump’s push to build friendly relations with Kim Jong Un had much greater ramifications in changing US Pacific military policy than many realized, although that fact was certainly not missed by the Chinese intelligentsia.

While the Soros/CIA-driven color revolutionary operations have so far failed to divide up China in Hong Kong, Tibet and Xinjiang, they have been successful in the USA.

Fact #4) The Pentagon’s Global Bioweapons Complex Is a Fact

While China is the proud owner of a total of TWO BSL-4 labs (both within its own borders), a vast array of dozens of Pentagon-run bioweapons labs litter the international landscape. Exactly how many is hard to estimate as Alexei Mukhin (Director General of Russia’s Center for Political Information) stated in a May 2020 interview:

“According to the Russian Ministry of Defense, in the post-Soviet space, 65 American secret bio-laboratories operate: 15 – in Ukraine, 12 – in Armenia, 15 – in Georgia, 4 – in Kazakhstan. In the United States, such activity is prohibited . Accordingly, the Pentagon, in its own laws, is engaged in illegal activities (in spirit, not in letter). The goal is the creation of biological weapons directed against the peoples who inhabited the territory of the USSR.”

In 2018, investigative journalist Dilya Gaytandzhieva documented the Pentagon’s multibillion dollar budget that sustains bioweapons labs in 25 nations (and 11 within the USA itself) which grew exponentially since the December 2001 bioweaponized anthrax attack killed five Americans and justified a hyperbolic increase of bioweapon warfare to rise from $5 billion when Cheney’s Bioshield Act was passed in 2004 to over $50 billion today.

Additionally, an October 2000 policy document co-authored by William Kristol, John Bolton, Richard Perle, Dick Cheney, Paul Wolfowitz, Elliot Abrams, and Donald Rumsfeld titled Rebuilding America’s Defenses (RAD) explicitly stated that in the new American Century, “combat will likely take place in new dimensions: In space, cyber-space and perhaps the world of microbes… advanced forms of biological warfare that can “target” specific genotypes may transform biological warfare from the realm of terror to a politically useful tool”.

Fact #5) International Pandemic War Game Scenarios Laid the groundwork for the international response to Covid. Not China

The driving force behind such bioweapon war game exercises such as the June 2000 Operation Dark Winter, the May 2010 Rockefeller Foundation report Operation Lock step, and the World Economic Forum/Gates Foundation/CIA Event 201 pandemic exercises indicate that China is not the causal nexus.

All in all, these facts have persuaded me that China is being set up and is in fact a primary target for destruction.

How China would find itself the beneficiary of such an irresponsible unleashing of a novel virus that hammered its own economy, accelerated the blow out of the world financial bubble economy and annihilated the foundations of international stability is absurd to the extreme… especially considering the fact that everything China has done for the past decades has indicated a consistent desire to create stability, long term development and win-win cooperation with the international community.

Nothing similar has been seen among members of the Five Eyes or their Trans Atlantic network of over bloated imperialists.

The oligarchy running the Trans Atlantic System certainly loves the centralized control found in the Chinese system, and they adore the behaviorist social credit stuff, but that is where their admiration ends. The Kissinger, Gates, Carney or Schwab-types hate and fear everything China has actually done for development, endind poverty, population growth, national banking, long term credit generation, building full spectrum industrial economies and defending sovereignty along with Russia whom they are tightly bonded with in the Eurasian Multipolar alliance.

The author can be reached at matt.ehret@tutamail.com

]]>
Atlantic Council Braces for Opportunities of Potential Bioterror Attack https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2021/02/14/atlantic-council-braces-for-opportunities-of-potential-bioterror-attack/ Sun, 14 Feb 2021 18:30:12 +0000 https://www.strategic-culture.org/?post_type=article&p=694737 By Raul DIEGO

Less than a month away from the one-year anniversary of the pandemic’s official declaration, policy wonks at the Atlantic Council together with former and current government officials are dissecting the “lessons” of the Covid-19 epidemic to advise the Biden administration on the steps to take in order to avert the next disaster.

Following a report by the Atlantic Council’s “Forward Defense” program housed within the Scowcroft Center for Strategy and Security published in October, a panel comprised of the report’s author Franklin D. Kramer and others, including former Deputy Secretary of Homeland Security Jane Holl Lute and Jaclyn Levy, Director of the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA), discussed Kramer’s “key findings” and how these should influence White House policy moving forward.

Right from the top, Atlantic Council Vice President and Director of the Scowcroft Center, Barry Pavel introduced the proceedings by establishing that the American “homeland” is “a theater increasingly under threat,” which is facing a broad “spectrum of non-kinetic risks to U.S. critical infrastructure and national security, such as cyberattacks, industrial espionage [and] potentially bioweapons.”

The last point squares with Bill Gates’ prediction that the most imminent threat to the U.S. will come in the form of a bioterrorist attack – a topic he most recently broached during an interview with “Veritasium” in early February. “Somebody who wants to cause damage could engineer a virus,” Gates warned, adding that “the cost, the chance of running into [such a virus] is more than just the naturally-caused epidemics like the current one.”

Gates has been spreading the idea of a bioterrorist attack since 2017 when he revealed to a group of Redditors that he was “concerned about biological tools that could be used by a bioterrorist.” He also told The Telegraph that same year that engineering a new strain of the flu would be “relatively easy.”

Despite buttressing his image as a supervillain in popular Internet culture, such warnings did not originate with Gates and have been fueling the rise of the biosecurity state in the U.S. since the late 1960s, when the father of bioterrorist plots Joshua Lederberg and his cohorts in government were sounding the alarm over Soviet bioweapons and imminent bioterror attacks that called for more robust policies, laws, and new federal agencies to deal with the purported threat.

Not out of nowhere

Those efforts yielded significant changes, culminating in the Blue Ribbon Study Panel on Biodefense, which produced the first comprehensive policy directive to address these questions on a legislative level through the National Blueprint for Biodefense in 2015 and the establishment of the Bipartisan Commission on Biodefense, co-chaired by former Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge and former Senator Joe Lieberman.

The pillars of biodefense outlined in the 2015 Homeland Security Presidential Directive 

The pillars of biodefense outlined in the 2015 Homeland Security Presidential Directive

In September of last year, the Commission announced the creation of the Apollo Program for Biodefense. As its name suggests, the promoters of the biosecurity state want to liken their renewed zeal to space missions by tackling the challenges “with the same ambition and ingenuity that put the first human on the moon in 1969,” in the words of co-chair Ridge.

Just this past January, the Commission published the program’s first report, subtitled “Winning the Race Against Biological Threats,” which closely aligns with the thrust of the Atlantic Council’s approach to its policy recommendations for the Biden administration, and uses the COVID-19 pandemic as the jumping-off point to push for things like a “national pathogen surveillance and forecasting center” and the full implementation of the 2015 Study Panel’s recommendations.

Pavel, who is also the Director of the Atlantic Council’s Scowcroft Center for Strategy and Security, echoed the sentiment by exhorting Biden to adopt what the think tank is calling strategies of “resilience” to safeguard the “health, economic and security sectors” of the United States, warning that “if the U.S. is to avoid and mitigate major systems shocks like Covid-19 in the future, the President will need to prioritize and expand its focus on resilience in the early days of this administration.”

They’re all in it together

The Forward Defense panel discussion centered on the requirements for a national strategy based on the findings of the October report, which the author summarized in the following five points: First, to “undertake major research and development programs”; second, to “enhance public health”; third, to use artificial intelligence “to predict epidemiological trends”; fourth was the development of “a national pandemic plan and, finally “prepare US biodefense for bioterrorism threats.”

Jaclyn Levy from the IDSA referred to the progress made in these matters over the years, conceding that “the U.S. government [had] developed already prior to 2020 a number of pandemic preparedness programs and resources. But, operationalizing them during the pandemic proved to be a challenge.” She further expressed her belief that “federal coordination and federal support are absolutely critical to mounting a successful response [to biological threats],” and going as far as attributing the spread of Covid-19 to “the lack of a coordinated, centralized testing strategy funded by federal dollars.”

Levy was also keen on expanding the collection of genomic data from the population, extolling the efforts to advance “precision medicine” through public-private partnerships like the All of Us Research Program which set out to collect and sequence the genomes of one million people “stored in a biobank, which is housed by the Mayo Clinic,” as well as other “true sort of public-private partnership[s]” with Google and it’s parent company Alphabet, cautioning against turning away from such endeavors over potential privacy concerns.

Franklin Kramer followed that with his own stamp of approval, stating that “with the right incentive… we really can bring the private sector and the innovation capacities, both in the United States and with allies and partners to work on these issues,” proposing that institutions like Fauci’s NIAID approach Congress with a five or ten-year plan, similar to how the Pentagon does to procure funding for public-private partnerships in regards to these programs.

The final piece

In 2008, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation donated the seed funding for the creation of the IDSA’s Center for Global Health Policy (CGHP), which bills itself as “a trusted leader in shaping and advancing international and national policies and investments in global HIV, TB, health security and antimicrobial resistance.”

Through the CGHP, IDSA is a regular “non-state” participant in World Health Organization executive board meetings and is a strong advocate for global immunization campaigns, which along with the vaccine development and surveillance, remains one of the top priorities of the Gates Foundation.

In a section titled “Lessons From The Pandemic— Underprioritizing Resilience” from his report, Kramer highlights the GAVI foundation – a Gates initiative – as an example of how the private sector was better prepared for a pandemic than most governments were, quoting from the organization’s own website describing it as “an elegant solution to encourage manufacturers to lower vaccine prices for the poorest countries in return for long-term, high-volume and predictable demand from those countries.”

It seems that as the COVID-19 pandemic approaches its first year anniversary, all of the previously scattered tactics and methods employed to deliver a true biosecurity state are consolidating. The only thing missing is the military defense component, which is the principal focus of the Scowcroft Center. Conveniently, Bill Gates’ bioterror prediction could put that final piece into place.

mintpressnews.com

]]>
Why Does the Public Tolerate Its Biological Warfare? https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2020/06/12/why-does-the-public-tolerate-its-biological-warfare/ Fri, 12 Jun 2020 14:50:19 +0000 https://www.strategic-culture.org/?post_type=article&p=418448 Eric ZUESSE

As Jeffrey A. Lockwood recounted in his 2008 book Six-Legged Soldiers: Using Insects as Weapons of War, the first four nations that pioneered biological warfare were during the 1930s — Hitler’s Germany, Hirohito’s Japan, and Churchill’s England and Canada. However, under U.S. President Franklin Delano Roosevelt in the 1940s, a biowarfare R&D program, “Operation Capricious,” was created in 1943 so secretly that though it operated under William J. “Wild Bill” Donovan, who headed the OSS predecessor to the CIA, it was hidden even from Donovan himself. The way it was hidden is that it was being described to higher-ups as purely defensive, R&D against insect pests that enemy nations might use against America by bombing America with germ-infected insects. It was placed under the direction of George W. Merck, the hereditary President of the pharmaceutical giant, Merck & Co. This newly formed U.S. biological warfare program, that he headed, produced and stockpiled bacillus anthracis (anthrax), clostridium botulinum (botulism), and other deadly bacteria. However, starting under U.S. President Harry S. Truman, the actually aggressive program was finally approved and operationalized by the U.S. military in 1952 against North Korea and parts of China, but it was crude and unsuccessful, like all prior biowarfare efforts had been.

No biological warfare program has ever been strategically successful, because the really effective pathogens, such as viruses or the plague, simply cannot be successfully targeted — they are too contagious — and no weapon that can’t be targeted can be of use either tactically or strategically. However, the United States today has a vast network of biological-warfare laboratories, by far the world’s largest, many of them located in foreign countries.

As Major Leon A. Fox, who was the chief of the Medical Section for the U.S. Army’s Chemical Warfare Service, was the first to point out, in 1932, which then became published in the journal The Military Surgeon, v. 72, #3, in 1933, and republished in the Veterinary Bulletin, v. 28, pages 79-100:

Bacterial warfare is one of the recent scare-heads that are being served by the pseudo-scientists. …
How are these agents to be introduced into the bodies of the enemy to produce casualties? … Certainly at the present time we know of no disease-producing micro-organisms that will respect uniform or insignia. … The use of bubonic plague today against a field force, when the forces are actually in combat, is unthinkable for the simple reason that the epidemic could not be controlled. …
Many are now associating chemical warfare and bacterial warfare, with the result that in the resolution of adjournment, voted by the General Commission of the Disarmament Conference on July 23, 1932, at Geneva, we find chemical, bacteriological, and incendiary warfare grouped for consideration. …
Certainly at the present time, practically insurmountable difficulties prevent the use of biologic agents as effective weapons.

So, although the U.S. Government, ever since at least 1952, has tried to use bacteria and viruses as weapons, the result has always been failure, for two reasons:

1: Such ‘weapons’ didn’t behave as they had been hoped to behave — they’re uncontrollable (just as Dr. Fox had predicted), and no uncontrollable thing can be effectively used as a weapon.

2: Even if they were to have behaved as they had been hoped to, they cannot be effectively targeted (which again is what Fox had predicted): they would have endangered not only the targeted country but the entire world, even if they worked, since all of us are humans, and since biological ‘weapons’ work only if they’re extremely contagious and thus pose an extreme danger to the entire human species.

Consequently: all of that public expenditure (maybe in the trillions of dollars) is sheer waste, in terms of national defense. But it’s even worse than waste, because it poses extreme danger to ANY nation, including to the one that develops the given ‘weapon’.

And Fox was likewise correct that grouping “chemical and biological weapons” together is plain stupid. Perhaps it works as propaganda, but it certainly is false as science, and as military strategy and tactics. This fact, too, is hidden from the public, instead of published to the public.

The U.S. Arms Control Association, which is secretive but was founded by major figures in America’s military-industrial complex and is charitably funded by U.S. billionaires, has squibs on 16 countries as currently having real or alleged “Chemical and Biological Weapons”, and this ‘charitable’ Association groups together those two types of ‘weapons’, so as to hide the obvious fact that ‘biological weapons’ cannot really exist, as a practical matter, since we all are humans (not only a given targeted country are), and therefore those fake ‘weapons’ are certainly not rationally to be discussed in the same category along with chemical weapons, which — like nuclear weapons — can be targeted, and therefore can and do actually exist as weapons, so that “nuclear weapons and chemical weapons” might be rationally  discussed together, but “chemical and biological weapons” cannot (since there are no actual ‘biological weapons’). The ONLY reason why “chemical and biological weapons” are discussed together is that this enables the U.S. military contractors, who derive profits from selling to the United States Government, to continue their “socialism-for-the-rich” gravy train, by treating germs and viruses (which are contagious) as if they were merely chemicals (which are not contagious). For example: On 24 January 2008, Barton J. Bernstein’s article in the Journal of Strategic Studies“America’s biological warfare program in the Second World War” described U.S. President Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s unsuccessful attempt, on 14 July 1943, to find out “Why is it so confidential to destroy insect pests?” And it’s why that Deep State program was headed by George Merck, who “led the War Research Service, which initiated the U.S. biological weapons program with Frank Olson.”

Nonetheless, as Whitney Webb well documented in her 30 January 2020 “Bats, Gene Editing and Bioweapons: Recent DARPA Experiments Raise Concerns Amid Coronavirus Outbreak”, the Pentagon currently has an extensive program of R&D into even just specifically bat-based biological ‘weapons’, and China has cooperated with the Pentagon in that research. Why would China be cooperating with America in order to develop unnaturally deadly — human-created — human pathogens? Whereas America’s funding of this ‘research’ is open, publicly acknowledged (even though the ‘weapons’ that might result from it would be international war-crimes to use), China’s Government claims to have no biological-warfare program. Who, then was funding such useless ‘research’ at the Wuhan lab?

The basic question here, however, is “Why does the public tolerate its biological warfare?” and one possible reason why they tolerate it might be that they are propagandized by the media of the billionaires who benefit from bioweapons R&D — profit from it — and who (like the Arms Control Association, and like the also billionaires-owned-and-controlled media) hide the reality, so that the profits from this useless R&D can continue flowing, from the Government, to themselves.

Who profits from biowarfare R&D? Who are the people that have been behind this?

The laboratories, that do it, receive some, but not all, of their funding from the governments (the taxpayers) in all nations that perform this research — mainly the U.S., but also including China, Canada, and perhaps a few others.

Here are the top 100 U.S. corporations that profit from warfare — invading and militarily occupying and subduing foreign countries (since all actual dangers to U.S. national security that haven’t been “false-flag” events such as 9/11, ended when World War II ended, and were produced in order to increase U.S. military expenditures, not actually in order to protect Americans or anyone else). Other than some universities, such as (in 2015) #56 Johns Hopkins, and #82 Johns Hopkins Health Sys Corp., and drugmakers, like #89 GlaxoSmithKline, few of them seem even possibly to be receiving federal money for the development of biological ‘weapons’. However, if some of them are owned or controlled by the same people who own or control Merck or other drug companies that might be profiting from this, then control of the military contractors could be boosting those drug companies’ stock values. And the ownership and control of virtually all major corporations is hidden by many devices, both legal and illegal. What exists in such a situation is secret government, not even possibly a democratic government.

Regarding specifically China: Are some Chinese profiting from this research; and, if so, which ones? And why isn’t the Chinese Government publicly exposing them, legally trying them in entirely public proceedings, and executing them if clear evidence is presented to the public that they had been doing this illegal research for private profit? Because, if the Chinese Government won’t do that, then it’s not really illegal in China.

All the while, the nation that has by far the largest biological-warfare program, the U.S., continues to expand it, instead of bans it — as international law would require, if the U.S. Government even paid attention to international law, which it doesn’t. (This U.S. flouting of international law is endorsed by both of America’s political Parties; it is bipartisan in the U.S.)

If the public will no longer tolerate its funding biological warfare, then when will the massive public demonstrations be organized throughout the world condemning the U.S., China, and other governments, that either participate in this R&D or else tolerate instead of clearly outlawing it — punish everyone in the given nation who participates in it?

Why haven’t these massive public demonstrations, against this R&D, already occurred?

If this won’t happen, then there is no public demand for accountability, and then this purely destructive R&D will continue, and it will continue to be publicly funded, though it benefits only some stockholders and corporate executives, and causes massive global harm — perhaps including the coronavirus-19 pandemic.

]]>
Sir Dearlove Joins Anti-China Counter-Gang Operation https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2020/06/10/sir-dearlove-joins-anti-china-counter-gang-operation/ Wed, 10 Jun 2020 16:00:36 +0000 https://www.strategic-culture.org/?post_type=article&p=418418 Former MI6 chief Sir Richard Dearlove’s new role as anti-China provocateur gives us the opportunity to look into the mind of empire and see how our society is being played to acquiesce to an agenda that will ultimately lead to WW III. By adding his voice to those Anglo-American fanatics blaming China for creating COVID-19 in a lab and intentionally spreading it around the world, Sir Dearlove has demonstrated a classic case of “gang/counter-gang operations” practiced by the British Empire for centuries.

The Origins of Gang/Counter-gang Operations

British agent Frank Kitson produced an insidious little 1960 handbook called Gangs and Counter-gangs  based on his work coordinating special operations against the 1955 Mau Mau uprising in Kenya which threatened to break this valuable African region free of British colonialism. Kitson’s handbook was a modern adaption of a centuries-old practice according to the needs of putting down independence and civil rights movements that threatened to undo the age of empires.

During his work in Kenya, Kitson recognized that when outnumbered and faced with organized independence movements, it is just not very effective for thinly spread colonialists to try to put them down by force directly and much wiser to change the rules of the game by a slight of hand. The formula for changing the game is to cultivate one or more opposition groups to whatever force is posing a threat to the empire… and then cultivate a counter-gang to that opposition group to create a new set of conflicts within your target population (Hence the name “gang/counter-gang”). While the target society becomes polarized by the two warring (yet ultimately controlled) opposition movements, the genuine independence movement simply gets diffused and lost in the chaos.

Describing his insight which would later be put to use in the FBI’s COINTEL program within America soon thereafter, Kitson wrote:

“As a result of our informers and pseudo gangs we were getting to know a bit about the future movements of the gangs which was much better than merely analysing past events. We had a long way to go before we could say that we were producing the information that would enable the Security Forces to destroy the Mau Mau in our area… I began to feel that at last I was on the road which led to the desired goal.” [p.90]

The Case of the Civil War

A useful pre-20th century example of this sort of operation was witnessed with British Intelligence’s support for BOTH southern rebels one the one side of the 1861-65 Civil War and radical abolitionists on the northern side of the war. To add a degree of sophistication here, the abolitionist movement itself was polarized between violent vigilante abolitionists like John Brown vs the “peaceful” abolitionists like William Lloyd Garrison who really just wanted the Union to dissolve and liberally “agree to disagree” with the slave-loving confederacy to the South.

Before and during the war, President Lincoln and his allies had to contend with all of these controlled opposition movements who could only seem to agree on one thing: Break up the Union. When he realized how this gang/counter-gang operation was being run, former slave Frederick Douglass broke with the abolitionists in order to support Lincoln whom he recognized had the only principled strategy to fully ending slavery (and colonialism) forever from the earth (1).

A more recent display of Kitson’s strategy can be found in the efforts to lay the blame on the coronavirus pandemic squarely on China.

COVID-19’s Anomalous Origins

In late January 2020, with the publication of a report from the Kuzuma School of Biological Sciences, the theory of COVID-19’s natural evolution was first put into serious doubt. Although the Indian team was forced to retract their paper under immense pressure, researchers such as Dr. Luc Montagnier, Francis Boyle, Dr. Judy Mikovits and Pierre Brigage increasingly pointed out the anomalous traces of HIV sequences spliced throughout the COVID-19 genome implying a laboratory origin.

Increasingly doctors working on the front lines in New York such as Dr. Kyle-Sidell began reporting the anomalous behaviour of COVID-19 symptoms as unlike any pneumonia he had ever seen and observed that COVID-19 acted more like some form of high altitude sickness, with ventilators not only useless but resulting in deaths in 9 out of 10 patients (meaning they were actually provoking deaths).

With these growing anomalies, thinking citizens became increasingly concerned by the disturbing matter of the vast Pentagon-controlled bioweapons infrastructure scattered throughout the globe. Bulgarian researcher Dilyana Gaytandzhieva’s reported on the Pentagon’s 25 bioweapons labs– all of whom were conducting billions of dollars of secretive research on new and more virulent forms of viruses, with over $50 billion spent on the practice officially ever since Dick Cheney’s Bioshield Act of 2004 was signed into law.

By March, even China’s foreign Ministry raised the possibility that the virus came to China via the American team who participated in the Wuhan Military Games in October 2019- an event at which several athletes were hospitalized for COVID-like symptoms.

On May 13th, the Russian government directly put into question America’s bioweapons laboratories in Georgia and Ukraine with Sergei Lavrov saying: “These [U.S.] laboratories are densely formed along the perimeter of the borders of the Russian Federation, and, accordingly, next to the borders of the People’s Republic of China.”

A May 14th report from China’s Global Times stated: “The U.S. can’t just claim all reasonable inquiries to its bio-labs as “conspiracy theories,” and when U.S. politicians keep accusing China’s lab in Wuhan as the origin of COVID-19 without providing any evidence, they should respond to the questions on U.S. bio-labs, including the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases at Fort Detrick.”

It is tough to dismiss this sort of matter as “conspiracy theory” when North Carolina’s Chapel Hill bioweapons labs went so far as to create a novel coronavirus called SHCO14 designed to jump from bats to humans with USAID/CIA grant money in 2015 and events sponsored by both the Rockefeller Foundation, the CIA and Bill Gates have been using novel coronaviruses in their pandemic scenarios for over a decade (2).

The China Counter-Gang Narrative

When it became evident that the story of the laboratory origins of COVID-19 wasn’t going to disappear on its own, a new counter-narrative was spun which involved embracing the evidence of the laboratory origins while shifting the blame from the hands of Anglo-American intelligence to… China.

Emerging out of the bowels of Oxford’s Henry Jackson Society, the lie was concocted early on that the culprit behind this virus’ origins was none other than China whose BSL-4 laboratory in Wuhan had been conducting research on novel coronaviruses and had received $3.7 million grant from the U.S. National Institute of Health from 2014-2019. Is this proof that China caused COVID-19? Some people who want you to think emotionally while ignoring big swaths of reality say so.

Here the story subdivided itself further, as one group represented by Niall Ferguson, Mike Pompeo and Steve Bannon maintain that the international spread of the virus was done deliberately with China apparently going so far as to intentionally pack planes full of sick people to contaminate the world (a lie entirely annihilated by Daniel A. Bell on April 211st), and another group which includes some well-intended dupes like Francis Boyle or Montagnier which maintain that COVID-19 leaked out by accident.

No matter what form this sleight of hand has taken, it has been just that: a misdirection designed to ensure that the truth of the Pentagon’s bioweapons labs would be lost in the chaos stirred up by the blame-game with President Trump now falling for the anti-China line and entertaining the possibility of cutting America from all relations with China unless nations suffering from COVID are paid trillions in reparations.

Now we should not be surprised to find MI6’s very own former director Sir Richard Dearlove to be a loud voice in this anti-China clamor.

The same Sir Richard Dearlove that covered up Princess Diana’s death while director of MI6’s Special Operations from 1994-1999, who oversaw the Yellowcake Dodgy dossier while director of MI6 in 2002 and who vetted another dodgy dossier created by his former employee Christopher Steele in 2016 designed to overthrow President Trump and usher in a war with Russia, has now joined the propaganda operation to blame COVID-19 entirely on China.

On June 4, Sir Dearlove stated “I think this started as an accident… if China ever admits responsibility, will it pay for repairs? I think this will make every country in the world rethink how it sets up its relations with China and how the international community will behave towards Chinese leadership… Of course, the Chinese must have thought “If we are to suffer a pandemic, perhaps we should not try too hard to warn our competitors, so to speak, that they will suffer from the same disadvantages that we have.”

Sir Dearlove’s comments were timed to coincide with a new University of London peer-reviewed paper entitled “A Reconstruction of Historical Etiology of the SARS-CoV-2 Epidemic” which stated that the virus’ sequencing indicated “intentional manipulation”. The British researchers stated that the virus “was probably designed through a Wuhan laboratory experiment to develop ‘high potency chimeric viruses”.

Amidst the turmoil and confusion caused by these gang/counter-gang operations radiating noise and polarization across the political and scientific landscape, the reality of the financial collapse looms over head as one system sits upon the precipice of collapse and a battle wages over who will control the emergence of the new system. Will this inevitable new system be a multi-polar order defined by cooperation on space exploration, new discoveries and long-term infrastructure benefiting all nations and cultures, or will it be an order defined by a 21st century Anglo-American oligarchy sitting atop an ivory tower as a divided world of chaos and depopulation suffers from below?

The author can be reached at matt.ehret@tutamail.com

Notes

(1) As I wrote in my recent report, while the Civil War raged on, the British Empire’s strategists under the leadership of the X Club’s Thomas Huxley to polarize the scientific community around a controlled debate between Darwinism on the one side vs radical creationism on the other while all principled approaches to creative/directed evolution developed by Cuvier, von Humboldt, von Baer and Dana were lost in the sandstorm.
(2) Philanthrocapitalism, past and present: The Rockefeller Foundation, the Gates Foundation, and the setting(s) of the international/global health agenda by Anne-Emanuelle Birn, University of Toronto, 2014 is one useful resource as is the September 2019 Global Vaccination Summit and October 2019 Event 201.

]]>
How Biosecurity Is Enabling Digital Neo-Feudalism https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2020/05/15/how-biosecurity-is-enabling-digital-neo-feudalism/ Fri, 15 May 2020 14:00:35 +0000 https://www.strategic-culture.org/?post_type=article&p=390643 Italian master thinker Giorgio Agamben has been on the – controversial – forefront examining what new paradigm may be emerging out of our current pandemic distress.

He recently called attention to an extraordinary book published seven years ago that already laid it all out.

In Tempetes Microbiennes, Patrick Zylberman, a professor of History of Health in Paris, detailed the complex process through which health security, so far at the margins of political strategies, was sneaking into center stage in the early 2000s. The WHO had already set the precedent in 2005, warning about “50 million deaths” around the world caused by the incoming swine flu. In the worst-case scenario projected for a pandemic, Zylberman predicted that “sanitary terror” would be used as an instrument of governance.

That worst-case scenario has been revamped as we speak. The notion of a generalized obligatory confinement is not warranted by any medical justification, or leading epidemiological research, when it comes to fighting a pandemic. Still, that was enshrined as the hegemonic policy – with the inevitable corollary of countless masses plunged into unemployment. All that based on failed, delirious mathematical models of the Imperial College kind, imposed by powerful pressure groups ranging from the World Economic Forum (WEF) to the Munich Security Conference.

Enter Dr. Richard Hatchett, a former member of the National Security Council during the first Bush Jr. administration, who was already recommending obligatory confinement of the whole population way back in 2001. Hatchett now directs the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI), a very powerful entity coordinating global vaccine investment, and very cozy with Big Pharma. CEPI happens to be a brainchild of the WEF in conjunction with the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

Crucially, Hatchett regards the fight against Covid-19 as a “war”. The terminology – adopted by everyone from President Trump to President Macron – gives away the game. It harks back to – what else – the global war on terror (GWOT), as solemnly announced in September 2001 by Donald “Known Unknowns” Rumsfeld himself.

Rumsfeld, crucially, had been the chairman of biotech giant Gilead. After 9/11, at the Pentagon, he got busy aiming to blur the distinction between civilians and the military when it came to GWOT. That’s when “generalized obligatory confinement” was conceptualized, with Hatchett among the key players.

As much as this was a militarized Big Pharma spin-off concept, it had nothing to do with public health. What mattered was the militarization of American society to be adopted in response to bioterror – at the time automatically attributed to a squalid, tech-deprived al-Qaeda.

The current version of this project – we are at “war” and every civilian must stay at home – takes the form of what Alexander Dugin has defined as a medical-military dictatorship.

Hatchett is very much part of the group, alongside ubiquitous Anthony Fauci, the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), very close to WHO, WEF and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, and Robert Redfield, director of the U.S. chapter of the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

Further applications inbuilt in the project will include all-around digital surveillance, sold as health monitoring. Already implemented in the current narrative is the non-stop demonization of China, “guilty” of all things Covid-19-related. That is inherited from another tried and tested war game – the Red Dawn scheme.

Show me your fragility

Agamben did square the circle: it’s not that citizens across the West have the right to health safety; now they are juridically forced (italics mine) to be healthy. That, in a nutshell, is what biosecurity is all about.

So no wonder biosecurity is an ultra-efficient governance paradigm. Citizens had it administered down their throats with no political debate whatsoever. And the enforcement, writes Agamben, kills “any political activity and any social relation as the maximum example of civic participation.”

What we are already experiencing is social distancing as a political model (italics mine) – with a digital matrix replacing human interaction, which by definition from now on will be regarded as fundamentally suspicious and politically “contagious”.

Agamben has to be appalled by this “concept for the destiny of human society that in many aspects seems to have borrowed from religions in decline the apocalyptic idea of the end of the world”. Economics had already replaced politics – as in everything subjected to the diktats of financial capitalism. Now the economy is being absorbed by “the new biosecurity paradigm to which every other imperative must be sacrificed.”

How to fight against it? Conceptual weaponry is available, such as the courses on biopolitics taught by Michel Foucault at the College de France between 1972 and 1984. They may now be consulted via a decentralized platform set up by a collective which delightfully describes itself as “the crayfish”, who “advance laterally”: a concept that does justice to great rhizomatic master Gilles Deleuze.

Nassim Taleb’s concept of Antifragile is also quite helpful. As he explains, “Antifragile is the antidote to Black Swans.” Well, Covid-19 was a Black Swan of sorts: after all deciding elites knew something like it was inevitably coming – even as lowly Western politicians, especially, were caught totally unprepared.

Antifragile contends that because of fear (very much in evidence now) or a “thirst for order” (natural to any political power) “some human systems, by disrupting the invisible or not so visible logic of things, tend to be exposed to harm from Black Swans and almost never get any benefit. You get pseudo-order when you seek order; you only get a measure of order and control when you embrace randomness.”

The conclusion is that “in the black swan world, optimization isn’t possible. The best you can achieve is a reduction in fragility and greater robustness.”

There’s no evidence, so far, that a “reduction in fragility” in the current world-system will necessarily lead towards “greater robustness.” The system has never proved to be so fragile. What we do have is plenty of indications that the system collapse is being refitted, at breakneck speed, as digital neo-feudalism.

Lost in a biopolitical quarantine

Byung-Chul Han, the South Korean philosopher who teaches in Berlin, has attempted to lay it all out. The problem is he’s too much of a hostage of an idealized vision of Western liberalism.

Byung-Chul Han is correct when he notes that Asia fought Covid-19 with rigor and discipline inconceivable in the West – something that I have followed closely. But then he evokes the Chinese social credit system to mount an attack on China’s society of digital discipline. The system unquestionably allows for biopolitical surveillance. But it’s all about nuance.

The social credit system is like the formula “socialism with Chinese characteristics”; a hybrid that is effective only when responding to China’s complex specificities.

The maze of facial recognition surveillance cameras; the absence of restriction to data exchanged between internet providers and the central power; the QR code that tells whether you’re “red” or “green” in terms of infection; all these instruments were applied – successfully – in China to the benefit of public health.

Byung-Chul Han is forced to admit that does not take place only in China; South Korea – a Western-style democracy – is even considering that people in quarantine should wear a digital bracelet. If we talk about the different Asian models used to fight Covid-19, nuance is the norm.

The Asian-wide collectivist spirit and discipline – especially in Confucianist-influenced societies – works irrespective of the political system. At least Byung-Chul Han admits, “all these Asian particularities are systemic advantages to contain the epidemic.”

The point is not that Asian disciplinary society should be seen as a model for the West. We already live in a digital global Panopticum (where’s Foucault when we need him?) Social network vigilance – and censorship – deployed by the Silicon Valley behemoths has already been internalized. All our data as citizens is trafficked and instantly marketized for private profit. So yes; digital neo-feudalism was already in effect even before Covid-19.

Call it surveillance turbo-neoliberalism. Where there’s no inbuilt “freedom”, and it’s all accomplished by voluntary servitude.

Biopolitical surveillance is just a further layer, the last frontier, because now, as Foucault taught us, this paradigm controls our own bodies. “Liberalism” has been reduced to road kill a long time ago. The point is not that China may be the model for the West. The point is we may have been set up for an endless biopolitical quarantine without even noticing it.

]]>
Cults and Bioterrorism: A Toxic Duo https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2020/05/04/cults-and-bioterrorism-toxic-duo/ Mon, 04 May 2020 15:45:56 +0000 https://www.strategic-culture.org/?post_type=article&p=383801 Far right-wingers in the United States and other countries are pushing the propaganda line that China was somehow involved in the creation or spread of the Covid-19 virus, formally known as SARS [Severe acute respiratory syndrome]-CoV-2, to the rest of the world either deliberately or from an accidental release from the Wuhan Institute of Virology. Although nation-states have, over the decades, conducted research on and produced biological warfare weapons, there is no recent documented proof of a government being engaged in the widespread release of a biological warfare agent to cause maximum deaths. The 1972 Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, and Stockpiling of Bacteriological (Biological) and Toxin Weapons and on their Destruction, the short name of which is the Biological Warfare Convention, bans the production or release of bio-weapons as well as mandates the destruction of existing stockpiles.

The People’s Republic of China acceded to the Biological Warfare Convention on November 15, 1984. China has experienced a horrifying history of being victimized by biological warfare. The Imperial Japanese Army’s Unit 731 was responsible for spawning bubonic plague among the Chinese population by spreading plague-infected fleas over Chinese cities from low-flying aircraft. Typhoid and paratyphoid was spread throughout the city of Nanking by Unit 731 by introducing typhus germs into well water and food. A Japanese bio-war attack on Changda infected more than 10,000 people with cholera. Unit 731 also introduced smallpox, botulism, dysentery, and anthrax on to unsuspecting Chinese civilian populations. Those who now accuse the Chinese government of developing Covid-19 as a weapon have neither an appreciation for recent Chinese history nor an understanding of how China was victimized by biological warfare during World War II.

Although there is no recent history of nation-states propagating a biological warfare attack – the allegations by U.S. and British intelligence about Saddam Hussein possessing a bio-warfare capability turned out to be bogus – there is a history of dangerous religious cults being involved in preparing for or carrying out biological warfare attacks.

Since the 1970s, there have been several cases of religious cults either dabbling in biological warfare research or engaged in deploying it. The cults involved include the Japanese Aum Shinrikyo movement, the Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh cult, the “People’s Temple” of Reverend Jim Jones, and the one that requires a much closer investigation after the spread of Covid-19, the Chinese Falun Gong.

At the center of the current propaganda war being waged on China is Falun Gong, a shadowy religious cult that has ties to the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency. The cult’s newspaper, “The Epoch Times,” has been accredited by the Donald Trump White House and its propaganda has been championed by such Trump allies as Republican Senators Tom Cotton of Arkansas and Ted Cruz of Texas, as well as former Trump ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley and right-wing radio commentator Rush Limbaugh. Trump’s personal attorney, Rudolph Giuliani, whose main responsibility for Trump appears to be the proffering of far-out and discredited conspiracy theories, has accused China of creating Covid-19 as a “bio-weapon.” “The Epoch Times” has championed many bogus stories being advanced by Giuliani. Being enticed into the world of Falun Gong is not Giuliani’s only entanglement with a cult. His support of the Iranian cult, the Mojahedin-e-Khalq (MEK), has turned the former New York mayor into a favorite for anyone wanting unsubstantiated allegations and propaganda to reach the ears of Donald Trump.

Falun Gong propaganda is also creeping into the pronouncements of Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and America’s diplomatic circles. Increasingly, Falun Gong propaganda is creeping into official press releases from the State Department with accusations that Covid-19 development was a project of the “Chinese Communist Party.” Similar propaganda has also found its way into the broadcasts of Radio Free Asia, part of the U.S. government propaganda operation that is under the auspices of the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG). The attempt to revive a Cold War with China has also been emboldened by the Republican Attorneys General of Missouri and Mississippi, who have both filed lawsuits against the government of China for damages from Covid-19.

The State Department and White House war on the World Health Organization (WHO), including the Trump administration’s freeze on funds to the international organization, has relied on Falun Gong propaganda that claim the WHO is a “China-centric” body. The cult, which practices the same sort of character assassination campaigns witnessed by several other right-wing organizations, has targeted the top three officials of WHO — Director-General Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesuas, Assistant Director-General Dr. Bruce Aylward, and Executive Director of the WHO Health Emergencies Program Dr. Michael Ryan — as “Chinese Communist” agents-of-influence. The rhetoric is torn right out of the Cold War history pages of the 1950s.

Falun Gong’s “spiritual leader,” Li Hongzhi, is a textbook case of a cult leader. The Jilin, China-born Li, who lives in New York City and a permanent resident of the United States, claims that he acquired “supernatural powers” at the age of eight in China. These powers include the ability to walk through walls and levitate. Li claims that extraterrestrials have invaded the minds of humans and it has led to a reliance on computers overseen by massive corruption.

In a couple of recent articles in The Epoch Times, Falun Gong appears to be taking credit for launching Covid-19, which runs counter to the anti-Beijing propaganda emanating from Pompeo, White House trade official Peter Navarro, and leading congressional Republicans. On March 11 and April 26, 2020, The Epoch Times ran two editorials suggesting that Covid-19 was not a virus caused by the Chinese government, but one intended to destroy the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and its international supporters. The articles states:

“The spreading of the virus shows a clear pattern, which is, it is selectively targeting the CCP and is aimed at eliminating the CCP and those who are pro-communist or who have close ties with the CCP. All regions that are hard-hit by the virus outside China are those having intimate ties with the CCP, those who have supported the CCP in terms of trade, investment, or helping the CCP improve its international image. Likewise, individuals who have been the CCP’s supporters often find themselves vulnerable to the CCP virus.” The article suggests that New York City became a hot zone for the virus because of its financial links to the Chinese government and the presence of the United Nations and Wall Street, the latter accused of being a “behind the curtains financier helping the Chinese Communist regime prolong its life.”

The Falun Gong articles also contain a stark warning for New York City: “the priority is to start cleansing the CCP infiltration from New York.” Does “cleansing” include carrying out a mass casualty event by a cult that also targeted Wall Street, including three targets — MSCI (Morgan Stanley Capital International), FTSE Russell, Bloomberg Index — and JP Morgan, the United Nations headquarters, and New York City’s “economy, finance, commerce, media, culture, education, [and] Chinese-American community?”

The Epoch Times articles offer a Covid-19 cure: “Staying away from the CCP, condemning the CCP, not supporting the CCP can help any individual, organization, and country alleviate or even avoid the attacks of the CCP virus. They will then embrace a wonderful future.”

Such a manifesto would normally attract the interest of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and Department of Homeland Security. However, with both organizations under the thumbs of Trump loyalists, such a direct threat against New York by Falun Gong has gone unnoticed. The Epoch Media Group has become part and parcel of the Trump re-election campaign. The Group’s New Tang Dynasty Television (NTDT) and Sound of Hope Radio Network are virtual propaganda arms of the White House and engage in echoing back and forth the same unfounded claims found in other pro-Trump media operations, including One America News Network (OANN), based in San Diego; and The Washington Times, the publication of yet another Asian-founded religious cult, the Unification Church of the late Korean Reverend Sun Myung Moon.

If Covid-19 has a non-natural origin, such statements place Falun Gong squarely as a major suspect in unleashing and propagating the virus. Cults have a history of committing acts of bio-chemical terrorism, including the Japanese Aum Shinrikyo movement, which launched a sarin gas attack on the Tokyo subway system on March 20, 1995, killing 13 people and injuring thousands of others. The Japanese group was also found to be in possession of the Ebola virus that was procured from Zaire in 1992. The mass suicidal People’s Temple of the CIA-linked Reverend Jim Jones was discovered to be dabbling in bio-war research at it Jonestown, Guyana compound. There were links between Jones and the Chemical and Biological Warfare Research at Dugway Proving Grounds, Utah and the CIA-connected research being conducted at the St. George’s University Medical School in Grenada. In 1984, the Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh cult, an Indian mystic movement, purposefully contaminated salad bars at ten restaurants in The Dalles, Oregon with Salmonella typhi, sending 751 people to the hospital. Both Al Qaeda and the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) were also discovered to be pursuing bio-war weapons. An Al Qaeda affiliate, Ansar al-Islam, was reported to have conducted bio-terrorism experiments in northeastern Iraq using nerve gas, aflatoxin, and ricin. An ISIL offshoot, Boko Haram, reportedly poisoned well and rivers in northeastern Nigeria with biological agents.

Falun Gong’s threat against New York City is even more alarming when considering the conclusion found in a February 10, 2014 “UK Secret UK Eyes Only” report from the Defense Science and Technology Laboratory (DSTL) in Porton Down, England. The report warned that NSAs (non-state actors) could try to weaponize viruses like the deadly Ebola. It should be noted that Falun Gong falls into the category of a non-state actor.

]]>
Big Pharma Beware: Dr. Montagnier Shines New Light on COVID-19 and The Future of Medicine https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2020/04/30/big-pharma-beware-dr-montagnier-shines-new-light-on-covid-19-and-the-future-of-medicine/ Thu, 30 Apr 2020 19:40:30 +0000 https://www.strategic-culture.org/?post_type=article&p=377194 This April 16th, Dr. Luc Montagnier became a household name around the world. This occurred as the controversial virologist decided to publicly state his support for the theory that Covid-19 is indeed a laboratory-generated creation and not a naturally occurring effect of viral evolution.

Referring to a study published at the Kusama School of Biology in New Dehli on January 31st, Montagnier (the 2008 Nobel Prize winner for his 1983 discovery of the HIV virus) made the point that the specific occurrence of HIV RNA viral segments spliced surgically within the COVID-19 genome could not have originated naturally and he described it in the following words:

“We have carefully analyzed the description of the genome of this RNA virus. We weren’t the first, a group of Indian researchers tried to publish a study showing that the complete genome of this virus that has within the sequences of another virus: that of HIV.”

While the Indian team was induced to retract their publication under immense pressure from the mainstream medical establishment (which never bothered to seriously refute the content of the study’s research but rather used the “random-mutation-makes-anything-possible” argument), Montagnier stated “scientific truth always emerges”.

Not China: Montagnier Misdiagnoses the Culprit

Montagnier’s political ignorance became all too clear when he was asked who the culprit could possibly be.

By asserting his belief that China’s BSL4 lab in Wuhan was the source, Montagnier has fallen into a trap set by Anglo-American Intelligence circles which have been promoting a military confrontation between the USA and China for a very long time.

Now even though Montagnier denies that China released this virus with malicious intent (unlike many fanatical droves of neoconservatives currently itching for war), the “Wuhan Lab origin” hypothesis completely ignores the reality of the Pentagon’s globally extended 25 bioweapons laboratories which have openly created novel coronaviruses including varieties that arose in bats as journalist Whitney Webb’s remarkable February 2020 paper demonstrated.

Even though a 2014-2017 temporary ban on “dual-use” funding was imposed onto America’s bioweapons research, nothing prevented this work from occurring internationally or even covertly within the 11 military labs on American soil itself and tied to the same Fort Detrick that was shut down in July 2019 under suspicious circumstances. As I pointed out in my previous paper The Project for a New American Century, 9/11 and Bioweapons, over $50 billion has been spent on bioweapons research since 2001 which the Project for a New American Century manifesto claimed would play a major role in the arsenal of 21st century warfare stating: “advanced forms of biological warfare that can “target” specific genotypes may transform biological warfare from the realm of terror to a politically useful tool”.

Luc Montagnier’s Wave Therapy: Quackery or Brilliance?

The most powerful aspect of Montagnier’s April 16th intervention into world politics in my view is not really found in his support for the laboratory-origins theory, but rather in the scientist’s often overlooked proposition for an international crash program in something called electromagnetic wave therapy. Rather than investing in vaccines, Montagnier has explained that it were much wiser for nations of the world to launch a crash project into a very different approach to viral treatments than is currently common in polite society saying:

“I think we can make interference waves which are behind the RNA sequences that can eliminate those sequences with waves and consequently stop the pandemic”

Before brushing this off as “quackery” as so many are wont to do, one should keep in mind that President Trump himself has indicated his interest in Montagnier’s approach in his April 23rd briefing telling reporters:

“Supposing we hit the body with a tremendous … whether it’s ultraviolet or just very powerful light. And I think you said that hasn’t been checked, but you are going to test it… And then I said supposing you brought the light inside the body, which you can do either through the skin or in some other way. And I think you said you are going to test it.”

While Trump has been vilely attacked as “unscientific” for these utterances, it is only due to the vast ignorance of Montagnier’s incredible discoveries into the electromagnetic properties of life that such mockery can go unchallenged. Montagnier’s innovations into “bleaching therapy” which Trump referenced in the same speech are also much more complex than mainstream detractors assume and has nothing to do with simply “injecting”disinfectants into the blood stream. These therapies are highly interconnected with the electromagnetic waves emitted by certain types of bacteria which Montagnier has discovered to be the most likely driving mechanism to many of the diseases both chronic and acute plaguing humanity. More will be said on that below.

What is Optical Biophysics and What did Montagnier Discover?

Optical biophysics is the study of the electromagnetic properties of the physics of life. This means paying attention to the light emissions and absorption frequencies from cells, DNA, and molecules of organic matter, how these interface with water (making up over 75% of a human body) and moderated by the nested array of magnetic fields located on the quantum level and stretching up to the galactic level.

Not to discount the bio-chemical nature of life which is hegemonic in the health science realm, the optical biophysician asks: which of these is PRIMARY in growth, replication, and division of labor of individual cells or entire species of organisms? Is it the chemical attributes of living matter or the electromagnetic properties?

Let me explain the paradox a bit more.

There are approximately 40 trillion highly differentiated cells in the average human body, each performing very specific functions and requiring an immense field of coherence and intercommunication. Every second approximately 10 million of those cells die, to be replaced by 10 million new cells being born. Many of those cells are made up of bacteria, and much of the DNA and RNA within those cells is made up of viruses (mostly dormant), but which can be activated/deactivated by a variety of methods both chemical and electromagnetic.

Here’s the big question:

HOW might this complex system be maintained by chemical processes alone- either over the course of a day, month or an entire lifetime?

The simple physics of motion of enzymes which carry information in the body from one location to another simply doesn’t come close to accounting for the information coordination required among all parts. This is where Montagnier’s research comes in.

After winning the 2008 Nobel Prize, Dr. Montagnier published a revolutionary yet heretical 2010 paper called “DNA Waves and Water” which took the medical community by storm. In this paper, Montagnier demonstrated how low frequency electromagnetic radiation within the radio wave part of the spectrum was emitted from bacterial and viral DNA and how said light was able to both organize water and transmit information! The results of his experiments were showcased wonderfully in this 8 min  video:

Using a photo-amplifying device invented by Dr. Jacques Benveniste in the 1980s to capture the ultra low light emissions from cells, Montagnier filtered out all particles of bacterial DNA from a tube of water and discovered that the post-filtered solutions containing no material particles continued to emit ultra low frequency waves! This became more fascinating when Montagnier showed that under specific conditions of a 7 Hz background field (the same as the Schumann resonance which naturally occurs between the earth’s surface and the ionosphere), the non-emitting tube of water that had never received organic material could be induced to emit frequencies when placed in close proximity with the emitting tube! Even more interesting is that when base proteins, nucleotides and polymers (building blocks of DNA) were put into the pure water, near perfect clones of the original DNA were formed!

Dr. Montagnier and his team hypothesized that the only way for this to happen was if the DNA’s blueprint was somehow imprinted into the very structure of water itself resulting in a form of “water memory” that had earlier been pioneered by Jacques Benveniste, the results of which are showcased in this incredible 2014 documentary “Water Memory”.

Just as Benveniste suffered one of the most ugly witch hunts in modern times (led in large measure by Nature Magazine in 1988), Montagnier’s Nobel prize did not protect him from a similar fate as an international slander campaign has followed him over the past 10 years of his life. Nearly 40 Nobel prize winners have signed a petition denouncing Montagnier for his heresy and the great scientist was forced to even flee Europe to escape what he described as a culture of “intellectual terror”. In response to this slander, Montagnier stated to LaCroix magazine:  “I’m used to attacks from these academics who are just retired bureaucrats, closed off from all innovation. I have the scientific proofs of what I say”.

Describing the greatest challenges to advancing this research, Montagnier stated:

“We have chosen to work with the private sector because no funds could come from public institutions. The Benveniste case has made it so that anyone who takes an interest in the memory of water is considered… I mean it smells of sulphur. It’s Hell.”

Casting Montagnier’s Research in a New Light

In a 2011 interview, Dr. Montagnier recapitulated the consequences of his discoveries:

“The existence of a harmonic signal emanating from DNA can help to resolve long-standing questions about cell development, for example how the embryo is able to make its manifold transformations, as if guided by an external field. If DNA can communicate its essential information to water by radio frequency, then non-material structures will exist within the watery environment of the living organism, some of them hiding disease signals and others involved in the healthy development of the organism.”

With these insights in mind, Montagnier has discovered that many of the frequencies of EM emissions from a wide variety of microbial DNA is also found in the blood plasmas of patients suffering from influenza A, Hepatitis C, and even many neurological diseases not commonly thought of as bacteria-influenced such as Parkinsons, Multiple Sclerosis, Rheumathoid Arthritis and Alzheimers. In recent years, Montagnier’s teams even found certain signals in the blood plasmas of people with autism and several varieties of cancers!

Over a dozen French doctors have taken Montagnier’s ideas seriously enough to prescribe antibiotics to treat autism over the course of six years and in opposition to conventional theories, have found that amidst 240 patients treated, 4 out of 5 saw their symptoms either dramatically regress or disappear completely!

These results imply again that certain hard-to-detect species of light emitting microbes are closer to the cause of these ills than the modern pharmaceutical industry would like to admit.

A New Domain of Thinking: Why Big Pharma Should Be Afraid

As the filmed 2014 experiment demonstrated, Montagnier went even further to demonstrate that the frequencies of wave emissions within a filtrate located in a French laboratory can be recorded and emailed to another laboratory in Italy where that same harmonic recording was infused into tubes of non-emitting water causing the Italian tubes to slowly begin emitting signals! These DNA frequencies were then able to structure the Italian water tubes from the parent source a thousand miles away resulting in a 98% exact DNA replica!

Standing as we are, on the cusp of so many exciting breakthroughs in medical science, we should ask: what could these results mean for the multi-billion dollar pharmaceutical industrial complex which relies on keeping the world locked into a practice of chemical drugs and vaccines?

Speaking to this point, Montagnier stated:

“The day that we admit that signals can have tangible effects, we will use them. From that moment on we will be able to treat patients with waves. Therefore it’s a new domain of medicine that people fear of course. Especially the pharmaceutical industry… one day we will be able to treat cancers using frequency waves.”

Montagnier’s friend and collaborator Marc Henry a professor of Chemistry and Quantum Mechanics at the University of Strasbourg stated:

“If we treat with frequencies and not with medicines it becomes extremely cost effective regarding the amount of money spent. We spend a lot of money to find the frequencies, but once they have been found, it costs nothing to treat.”

Whether produced in a lab as Montagnier asserts or having appeared naturally as Nature Magazine asserts, the fact remains that the current coronavirus pandemic has accelerated a collapse of the world financial system and forced the leaders of the world to discuss the reality of a needed new paradigm and new world economic order. Whether that new system will be driven by Pharmaceutical cartels, and sociopathic bankers running global health policy for a technocratic elite of social engineers or whether it will be driven by nation states shaping the terms of that new system around human needs, remains to be seen.

If nation states manage to stay in the driver’s seat of this new system, then it will have to be driven by certain fundamental principles of healthcare for all, science practice reform and broader political/economic reform whereby the sacredness of human life is placed above all considerations of monetary profit. In this light, such crash programs into long term projects in space science, asteroid defense, and Lunar/Mars development will be as necessary in the astrophysical domain as crash programs in fusion energy will be in the atomic domain. Uniting both worlds, is the domain of life sciences that intersects the electromagnetic properties of atoms, cells and DNA with the large scale electromagnetic properties of the Earth, Sun and galaxy as a whole.

The author can be reached at matt.ehret@tutamail.com

]]>