Connect with us

Uncategorized

Trump Vs Biden: Will The Future Belong To The Patriots Or The Globalists?

Trump Vs Biden: Will The Future Belong To The Patriots Or The Globalists?

Published

on

Trump Vs Biden: Will The Future Belong To The Patriots Or The Globalists? Tyler Durden Thu, 11/19/2020 - 20:20

Authored by Matthew Ehret via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

It is an undeniable fact that the republic has entered one of the most dangerous crises of its short existence. This is not only due to the disputed election results of November 3rd, but also to a multitude of other factors beyond American borders, including the global financial crisis which a certain pandemic has unleashed upon the world, and slide towards a major world war between great powers that has accelerated chaotically in recent years.

As unpopular as it might be to state in polite society, as of this writing it is still impossible to state with 100% certainty that Joe Biden will in fact be inaugurated on January 20, 2021. The simple reason for this is that verifiable evidence of vast partisan vote fraud tied to the highest echelons of British Intelligence have mount with every passing day with Dominion voting systems most recently accused of erasing 2.7 million Trump votes across the nation, and giving 220 000 pro-Trump votes given to Biden in Pennsylvania (along with hundreds of other vote counting anomalies and technology glitches across all major swing states). These and other major signs of mass vote fraud have giving rise to reasonable questions of the validity of the official results which will be taken to the courts as Gen. Michael Flynn’s Attorney Sidney Powell eloquently laid out recently.

Trump, Biden and the Oncoming Meltdown

By now most people reading this are aware (or should be aware) that the trans Atlantic financial system has been set to melt down under a $1.5 quadrillion derivatives time bomb being held together by a mix of wishful thinking, hyperinflationary money printing and vast unpayable securitized debts waiting to default. It should also come as no surprise that the Great Reset Agenda designed to coordinate the “post-COVID world order” has nothing to do with any actual pandemic, and everything to do with imposing a new bankers’ dictatorship onto the nations of the earth. If you are uncertain about these claims, I invite you to read my recent study “What the Great Reset Architects Don’t Want you to Know About Economics”.

Both Trump and Biden profess to support American leadership to the world going into this storm, but both men operate on very much opposing paradigms of what this means, and what foreign policy tradition should be activated.

Where Biden has championed the idea that “America should lead the world” in opposition to the dangerous rise in “authoritarianism, nationalism and illiberalism” giving the reigns of foreign policy over to a team packed with hawkish representatives of the Military Industrial Complex, Trump has done something different.

On November 9 the incumbent president fired Mark Esper (possibly to subvert a planned coup) and instated General Christopher Miller to the position of Defense Secretary who has called for a total end to the 19 year Afghan war stating: “we are not a people of perpetual war. It is the antithesis of everything for which we stand and for which our ancestors fought. All wars must end.”

Having vocalized his desires to return the USA to its traditional protectionist, non-interventionist agenda repeatedly over four years, Trump famously characterized the battle at hand as one of “patriots against the globalists.”

And yet, despite these facts, many apparently intelligent people have celebrated that the “bad orange man” has finally been ousted and normality may once again occur.

Hogwash.

In an April 2020 Foreign Policy article, Joe Biden called for the re-assertion of American leadership of the world order stating that “for over 70 years, the United States under democratic and republican presidents, played a leading role in writing the rules” of the world order. Predicting the two possible scenarios that will befall the world should the USA continue to “abdicate our leadership” as Trump has done, Biden says that either: 

1) Someone else takes America’s place as global hegemon that doesn’t “advance our interests and values or

 2) “No one will and chaos will ensue”.

But wait a minute!

Shouldn’t there be a third option in Biden’s crystal ball? What about the option of a world defined by sovereign nations working in win-win cooperation and mutual self interest? Sadly, from a zero-sum mind that can only think in “balance of power” terms, this third scenario cannot exist.

The paradox for such little minds, however is that the very essence of America’s emerging from WWII in a leading position that Biden praises is entirely premised on the understanding that the world is more than a zero sum system.

The Forgotten Multi-Polar Traditions of the USA

From the drafting of the UN Charter in 1941, the formulation of the Bretton Woods system in 1944, to the UN Declaration of Human Rights in 1948, there is no doubt that there is very little that America has not directly influenced.

While this leadership is undeniable and often objectively destructive as sin, it is too easily forgotten that the UN Charter, as outlined by Franklin Roosevelt was premised on the belief that America must never become an empire but merely help those in need by providing the means of industrial development. This was essentially understood as the internationalization of the New Deal which included social safety nets, bank regulation, productive work guarantees and infrastructure projects to all other nations aspiring independence across Africa, Asia and the Americas or struggling the heal from the destructive effects of the war.

FDR’s vision for the IMF/World Bank mandates were never to reconquer poor nations under a new system of debt slavery and conditionalities, but to extend productive credit for long term megaprojects that were in the common aims of mankind and which angered Churchill immensely.

Most importantly, this vision was premised on the need for a trust-based U.S.-Russia-China alliance that never would have permitted the emergence of a bipolar Cold War.

Working alongside such anti-imperial co-thinkers as Republican leader Wendell Willkie, Vice President Henry Wallace, economist Harry Dexter White, confidante Harry Hopkins, Asst. Secretary of State Sumner Welles and Attorney General Robert Jackson (to name a few), this small but powerful group of patriots representing both parties, worked vigorously to ensure not only that the Wall Street/City of London Frankenstein Monster of Nazism would be put down but that Churchill’s vision of a restored British Imperial system would not succeed.

The True Spirit of the United Nations

Unlike the earlier “League of Nations” which intended to destroy all national sovereignty in the wake of WWI, the United Nations was always meant to become a platform for dialogue, and economic multilateral trust-building much more in harmony with the multipolar alliance now sweeping the world (and scaring the hell out of the thing that controls Joe Biden).

If this is hard to believe, let me cite article one:

“To maintain international peace and security, and to that end: to take effective collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace, and for the suppression of acts of aggression or other breaches of the peace, and to bring about by peaceful means, and in conformity with the principles of justice and international law, adjustment or settlement of international disputes or situations which might lead to a breach of the peace

To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace;

To achieve international co-operation in solving international problems of an economic, social, cultural, or humanitarian character, and in promoting and encouraging respect for human rights and for fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language, or religion; and

To be a centre for harmonizing the actions of nations in the attainment of these common ends.”

These principles were expanded even further to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights on December 10, 1948 which re-iterated the founding principles of America’s Declaration of Independence- extending those unalienable rights to all mankind as FDR envisioned stating in its preamble:

“Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world,

“Whereas disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind, and the advent of a world in which human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want has been proclaimed as the highest aspiration of the common people,

“Whereas it is essential, if man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law,

“Whereas it is essential to promote the development of friendly relations between nations,

“Whereas the peoples of the United Nations have in the Charter reaffirmed their faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person and in the equal rights of men and women and have determined to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom,

“Whereas Member States have pledged themselves to achieve, in co-operation with the United Nations, the promotion of universal respect for and observance of human rights and fundamental freedoms,

“Whereas a common understanding of these rights and freedoms is of the greatest importance for the full realization of this pledge,

“Now, Therefore THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY proclaims THIS UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS as a common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations, to the end that every individual and every organ of society, keeping this Declaration constantly in mind, shall strive by teaching and education to promote respect for these rights and freedoms and by progressive measures, national and international, to secure their universal and effective recognition and observance, both among the peoples of Member States themselves and among the peoples of territories under their jurisdiction.”

These were the ideas that were meant to give life to the “Four Freedoms” first enunciated by President Roosvelt in 1941 and re-asserted by his anti-imperial Vice President Henry Wallace in 1942.

Now admittedly this positive American foreign policy outlook which launched the post-war age is a far cry from anything the world has come to recognize in the USA since the emergence of the Cold War… and especially since the murder of John F Kennedy who had done much to resist America’s full takeover by this newly revised British Empire (which some have chosen in recent years to label “the deep state”).

Much like the U.S. Constitution itself, these principles largely remained ink on parchment as a new age of Cold Warriors, Rhodes Scholars and Fabians directed from British Intelligence created NATO, divided the world among the lighter skinned haves and darker skinned have nots while unleashing a system of endless wars onto the earth under a new Pax Americana.

These are the forces like Lord Mark Malloch Brown and George Soros who together have poured billions of dollars into promoting the post-nation state order using anti-UN Charter doctrines like Responsibility to Protect (R2P), overthrowing governments with color revolutions and running a current coup against President Trump.

Today a small window is still open for a renewal of the forgotten traditions of the American republican traditions that were upheld by such leaders as John Quincy Adams, Lincoln, Grant, Garfield, McKinley, Harding, FDR and JFK. President Trump has clearly taken a stand in opposition to the reconquest of the republic by the deep state and it remains to be seen if the American people have the fortitude to do everything in their power to organize themselves in defense of the republic and civilization more generally.

Read More

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

Incest Is Best? The Economist Says Copulating-Cousins Cool “In Most Cases”

Incest Is Best? The Economist Says Copulating-Cousins Cool "In Most Cases"

With America facing population collapse thanks to a pandemic which…

Published

on

Incest Is Best? The Economist Says Copulating-Cousins Cool "In Most Cases"

With America facing population collapse thanks to a pandemic which compounded already-shrinking birth rates, petrified young men who don't want to get #MeToo'd for trying to get past 1st base, and record numbers of young Americans identifying as anything but heterosexual, The Economist wants you to know that it's "probably fine" to bang your cousin, which they also note is "illegal in 25 American states."

After a dig at Kentucky for a 'quickly withdrawn' proposal to remove "first cousin" from the state list of incestuous family relations, the article goes on to 'ackshually' explain that the risk of genetic mutations among the offspring of first cousins is 'greater' than non-incest relations, however 'the increase is quite small.'

Justifying 'kissing cousins' further, The Economist suggests that it's unfair to prevent incest because "Many other couples face far higher risks of genetic complications for their offspring, and those unions are not banned," such as people with recessive genes for certain disorders, such as sickle-cell anemia or cystic fibrosis, their offspring has a 25% chance of being born with that disorder, "Yet those marriages are allowed."

"The law against first-cousin marriage is a major form of discrimination," said University of Washington Department of Medicine Director of Genetic Counseling, Robin Bennett (M.S., CGC, (she/her)).

Robin Bennett, not a PhD, who says it's fine to bang your cousin

According to Bennett, "the risks are very low and not much different than for any other couple."

The Economist then goes on to let us know that 'the Bible does not directly ban sexual relations between cousins,' ("how else would all of mankind have descended from Adam and Eve?" they write), though "The Roman Catholic Church did later prohibit first cousins from marrying, though exceptions were made for a fee."

That said, there are limits, even for The Economist...

Charles Darwin, the father of evolutionary biology, who married his first cousin in 1839, was reportedly conflicted about his own arrangement. The Darwins had ten children, but three of them died during childhood and three of his surviving children never had any offspring with their spouses. Some historians surmise that the children suffered from genetic abnormalities due to their parents being closely related—the families of Darwin and his wife had a long history of intermarriage.

Yet despite the fairly low genetic risk for most couples, the “ick” factor prevails in Western culture. The family dynamics can be difficult to explain to others. Many consanguineous couples choose to keep quiet, says Ms Bennett. For this reason it is difficult to know how many of these couples exist in America. -The Economist

Maybe the plan is to either get people banging their cousins, or keep the border open while praising Biden's amazing 'jobs recovery'?

Also 'probably' just fine?

Tyler Durden Sat, 02/17/2024 - 20:25

Read More

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

Exchange Rate Pass Through into Import Prices, CPI

Justin Ho of Marketplace discussed the implications of the import/export price release Thursday. My view was that pass through into import prices was low…

Published

on

Justin Ho of Marketplace discussed the implications of the import/export price release Thursday. My view was that pass through into import prices was low in the short run, and even in the long run was not very large, while pass through into the broader price index was unlikely to be large. Not sure I was alone in this view, but here’re my thoughts.

Figure 1: Import price ex-fuel (blue), nominal trade weighted US dollar exchange rate (up is depreciation) (tan), both in logs, 2020M02=0. NBER defined peak-to-trough recession dates shaded gray. Source: BLS, Federal Reserve Board via FRED, NBER, and author’s calculations.

The variables are defined so that one anticipates the two variables to comove positively. In fact, there is not much of a correlation apparent in (log) levels. Since both series are nonstationary, it makes sense to estimate in log first differences. Sampling the data as end-of-quarter, and estimating the regression from 2002Q1-2023Q4 (with four lags of exchange rate), one gets the long run pass through coefficient at about 0.3 (ignoring any other factors like domestic slack and measures for exporting country costs). The adjusted R2 is 0.41. Note that, as in previous studies, the estimated pass through is much less than unity, which makes sense given that most imports are invoiced in US dollars.

Figure 2: First log difference in Import price ex-fuel (blue), nominal trade weighted US dollar exchange rate (up is depreciation) (tan). NBER defined peak-to-trough recession dates shaded gray. Source: BLS, Federal Reserve Board via FRED, NBER, and author’s calculations.

For comparison, Bussiere, della Chiaie and Peltuonen (2014) estimate the long run pass through at about 0.35 for the United States, over the 1990-2011 period. Results from the earlier 2006 Fed survey, discussed here.

What about for broader indices? For the PPI for tradable industries, the estimate is about 0.3 for 2013-20 in Amiti et al. (2022), but  0.7  for 2021, suggesting the pandemic era exhibits different behavior.

What about the impact on the broader indices? Mattschke and Sattiraju (2022) argue dollar appreciation/depreciation have very little impact on PCE inflation. Pointing out that only about 10% of a core consumer basket involves imported goods. (Oil prices denominated dollars, when they rise, are another matter.)

A caveat is in order. In the above literature, the exchange rate is taken as largely exogenous, not completely implausible given the large unpredictable component of nominal exchange rates. That being said, as Forbes, Hjortsoe and Nenova (2018) and Ha, Stocker and Yilmazkuday (2020) notes, the types of shocks (demand, monetary, supply) matter as well. For advanced economies, Ha et al. find the average exchange rate pass through into the CPI to be about 0.10.

 

 

Read More

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

RFK Jr: The Wuhan Cover-Up & The Rise Of The Biowarfare-Industrial Complex

RFK Jr: The Wuhan Cover-Up & The Rise Of The Biowarfare-Industrial Complex

Authored by Debbie Lerman via The Brownstone Institute,

The…

Published

on

RFK Jr: The Wuhan Cover-Up & The Rise Of The Biowarfare-Industrial Complex

Authored by Debbie Lerman via The Brownstone Institute,

The Wuhan Cover-Up and the Terrifying Bioweapons Arms Race (Skyhorse Publishing, December 3, 2023) is a crucial book for understanding how the Covid catastrophe happened. 

I would even go so far as to argue that RFK, Jr.’s new book is the most important Covid chronicle to date, although it ends at the beginning of 2020, before most of us were even aware that a “novel coronavirus” was circulating among us. 

The book explains the CAUSES of the global disaster, which all happened before March 2020. Everything after that are the downstream EFFECTS of what The Wuhan Cover-Up exposes.

Here’s how RFK, Jr. summarizes those effects:

Everyone has now seen that pandemics are another way for the military, intelligence, and public health services to expand their budgets and their power. In 2020, public health, defense, and intelligence agencies weaponized a [Covid-19] pandemic, resulting in unprecedented profits to Big Pharma and the dramatic expansion of the security/surveillance state, including a systemic abandonment of constitutional rights—effectively a coup d’état against liberal democracy globally.

(Kindle edition, p. 385)

Putting Covid in the Biowarfare Context

Interestingly, in the publicity blurb on the book and in interviews about it, RFK, Jr. focuses on “the etiology of the gain-of-function research” and everything that led up to a virus being engineered in a US-funded lab in Wuhan by a group of Chinese and Western scientists.

At the core of this story is RFK, Jr.’s desire to warn readers about the dangers of gain-of-function research, which he shows in the book to be irrefutably a biowarfare – not a public health – endeavor.

But in the process of constructing the argument and supplying the proof for his dire warning, and for his assertion that this type of research should be stopped immediately and forever, RFK, Jr. provides what I find to be an even more compelling story.

The story in the Wuhan Cover-Up that interests me is the rise of the biowarfare-industrial-complex – the global behemoth comprising military/intelligence alliances, Big Pharma, Big Tech, academic and medical institutions, and NGOs – that both created the virus known as SARS-CoV-2 and ran the global response to it.

In this article, I will highlight key parts of The Wuhan Cover-Up that pertain to this storyline – which I believe are downplayed in its publicity materials and are one of the main reasons it has been practically banned from polite society: The book has been so heavily censored that I cannot find a single actual review on Google. Newsweek reported that independent bookstores do not want to carry it. 

A lot of the censorship has to do with mainstream animosity toward RFK, Jr’s presidential campaign. But the explosive content of the book, as reviewed in this article, is also likely a factor.

Top-Level Summary of the Rise of the Biowarfare Industrial Complex, as Told by RFK, Jr.

  • The biowarfare industry started to grow after WWII, when Western intelligence agencies imported Japanese and German scientists to help develop weapons against Communist enemies. This was, in fact, the first task of the newly formed CIA.

  • After 9/11, funding for bioweapons research exploded, and so did the power and reach of the military and intelligence agencies in charge of such research. The research, presented to the public as “pandemic preparedness and response (PPR),” encompassed mostly attempts to engineer deadly pathogens and simultaneously to create countermeasures to them, predominantly vaccines. 

  • So much money was pouring into PPR/bioweapons research that the public health agencies and academic institutions involved in government research all became dependent on it – or, perhaps more accurately, addicted to the money and power this type of research bestowed. Multinational public-private partnerships and “non-governmental organizations” (e.g., The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and The Wellcome Trust) were created to fund and promote the need for such research.

  • In the fall of 2019 an engineered pathogen from one of the bioweapons labs in China found its way into the population. All the military, intelligence, and public health officials from China, the US, UK, and other countries, with their pharma and academic partners, conspired to cover up the lab leak, while simultaneously preparing to unleash their countermeasures on the world.

How the Nature of Biowarfare Research Has Not Changed

As RFK, Jr. tells it, the history of today’s biowarfare industry starts after WWII, when German and Japanese scientists were secretly repatriated to assist the intelligence community and military in developing chemical and biological weapons programs. 

It is no coincidence, he argues, that many sinister features of those earlier programs carried forward to the present. These features include:

  • tight alliances with the pharmaceutical industry and the media; 

  • the complicity of academia and medical schools; 

  • the co-opting of journals; 

  • intense secrecy; 

  • pervasive experimentation on human subjects; 

  • liberal use of the word “volunteers;”

  • open-air testing on large unwilling populations; 

  • ethical elasticity; 

  • the normalization of lies; 

  • the use of microbiology to alter and weaponize bugs; 

  • the use of vaccine development as a mask for bioweapons research; 

  • the corruption of the entire medical establishment 

(p. 48)

Even just this list is enough to explain what happened with Covid: Take all these ingredients, add billions of dollars and multinational public-private partnerships involving top research institutions and thousands of scientists, and how could you not get a global disaster? 

Deep CIA-Biowarfare Ties

The Wuhan Cover-Up spends a lot of time documenting the correspondence between the rise of the CIA and the emergence of the modern biowarfare program. 

 RFK, Jr. writes:

…it’s worth reviewing the agency’s seventy-five-year preoccupation with bioweapons, pandemics, and vaccines. Bioweapons development was the CIA’s first love, and has remained its relentless passion. The CIA’s natal obsession with bioweapons pitted the agency against all the idealistic underpinnings of both American democracy and the healing arts of medicine. 

(p. 46)

An important related point emphasized in the book is that bioweapons research is not an obscure, niche industry. Rather, according to The Wuhan Cover-Up, it is a top national defense concern, driving the national security agenda:

Following the collapse of the Soviet Union, the military and intelligence apparatus erected the biosecurity agenda as the new spear tip of American foreign policy. These agencies deftly replaced the fear of the Soviet monolith and creeping communism with a fear of infectious disease, which they have successfully stoked to justify vast expansions in power…

(p. 44)

Shockingly Broad Participation by Academics and Scientists

Because the biosecurity agenda – which focuses on biochemical and medical research – is so central to foreign policy and national security, it controls large swaths of research funding. Thus, as RFK, Jr. documents, it has come to encompass many top academic institutions and thousands of doctors and scientists:

Among the most alarming side effects of the federal preoccupation with bioweapons has been the systematic diversion of vast resources and armies of academic and government scientists away from public health and healing. 

(p. 46)

Today, some thirteen thousand death scientists labor on bioweapons technology on behalf of US military, intelligence, and public health agencies in some four hundred government and university bioweapons labs. 

(p. 83)

Moral Bankruptcy

When faced with Covid “conspiracy theories” – such as those put forth in The Wuhan Cover-Up – people often argue that so many doctors and scientists could not possibly have knowingly agreed to civilization-killing ideas like lockdowns and injections of unsafe medical products into billions of people. They must have believed they were actually saving humanity, right?

Wrong, according to RFK, Jr.:

History has shown again and again the bioweapons agenda’s awesome power to transform compassionate, brilliant, idealistic doctors into monsters. 

(p. 47)

They have, as a class, demonstrated thoroughly warped judgment and a reliable penchant for dishonesty and terrible ideas. 

(p. 87)

Bioweapons Research = Vaccine Research

Another crucial idea bearing on our understanding of the Covid response is that vaccine research is a primary concern for the biowarfare-industrial complex, although it is publicly presented as a public health endeavor.

The book quotes Professor Frances Boyle, author of the Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act of 1989, with this explanation:

You can’t use a bioweapon against your enemy without having in your possession an antidote with which to shield your own team from blowback. For this reason, bioweapons and vaccines are always developed in tandem with each other.

(p. 121)

Moreover, because vaccine research funding goes to both biodefense and public health agencies, they have become inextricably linked:

The military and public health agencies work in close coordination to develop vaccines for military applications, sharing information and working side by side in labs. Vaccine research often serves as a cover or rationale for illegal bioweapons development.

(p. 129)

From an Obsession of US National Security to a Tool of Globalism

As RFK, Jr. writes, after 9/11, Islamic terrorism became the focus of US national defense. After the anthrax attacks, the focus of antiterrorist activities coalesced around the need to predict, prevent, and create countermeasures to biological terrorism. 

This more reliable and terrifying enemy would soon replace the war against Islamic terror—justifying a “forever war” against germs. “Biosecurity,” a.k.a. Pandemic Preparedness and Response (PPR), provided a rationale for US presence in every developing nation.

(p. 149)

And, as further explained by RFK, Jr., the focus on bioterrorism, which first served the American imperialist impulse, then became incorporated into the program of globalism:

The emerging medical/military-industrial complex would soon be citing biosecurity as a pretext for centralized control, coordinated response among nations, a sprawling construction project for new US bioweapons laboratories, the archiving of every germ with weapons potential under the pretext of pandemic protection, the control of the media, the imposition of censorship, the erection of an unprecedented surveillance infrastructure ostensibly needed to “track and trace” infections, universal digital IDs, digital currencies to reduce disease spread, and the ceding of power by national governments to the WHO—in short, globalism. 

(p. 149)

China Becomes a Dominant Biowarfare Research Player

Concurrently, China’s leaders were working on a mission to make China a world leader in science, research, and innovation. According to The Wuhan Cover-Up, the Chinese have been using the West’s march toward globalism to infiltrate “Western academia, businesses, media, cultural groups, and government agencies that speak the language of cooperation, globalism, and public health.” (p. 257)

As part of their infiltration process, the Chinese lavished funding on Western research institutions and scientific publishing houses. And because biomedical/biowarfare research was so central to Western governments and research institutions, the Chinese were able to eventually dominate that space as well.

Thus, the book explains, China was able to “co-opt US academic institutions and US public health agencies into performing backdoor bioweapons research for the Chinese military.” (p. 274)

Why Would the US Do Bioweapons Research in/for China?

This is, perhaps, the most oft-raised question in response to the hypothesis that SARS-CoV-2 was an engineered bioweapon from a lab funded by the Chinese military, the US, and other Western governments.

As RFK, Jr. explains, with the Chinese as major funders of Western institutions, journals and projects related to biomedical research, this strange collaboration was not just unsurprising, but in fact, inevitable:

The Chinese campaign to co-opt leading scientists and the river of Chinese funding to researchers at US and British medical research universities and to the leading scientific journals had, by then, bought China powerful friends across the Western scientific establishment. 

(p. 280)

Furthermore, the interests of China intersect with the interests of major global corporations and NGOs that comprise the biowarfare-industrial-complex – many of which enriched themselves considerably through the Covid response. As RFK, Jr. writes:

There is a natural intersection of interests between Western business titans and a former communist government [the Chinese Communist Party] that has made itself the global model for seamlessly merging corporate with government power, and promoting business growth by suppressing democracy, labor, and human rights. 

(p. 572)

For its part, the US intelligence community has all kinds of reasons – all ultimately geared toward increasing its own power and influence – to engage in sensitive scientific research projects with the Chinese:

The deliberate transfer of our superior bioweapons knowledge to the Chinese—a potential enemy—makes little sense to citizens who think in terms of conventional rivalries between nations. Espionage was clearly among the complex motivations for the US intelligence community supporting Chinese bioweapons research in China. Knowing what the Chinese are up to is the mission of the US intelligence community. But quietly sharing cutting-edge technologies may also serve institutional self-interest. After all, the intelligence community expands its power by reporting the enemy’s expanding capabilities; more frightening capabilities abroad justify increased budgets and increased power at home. 

(p. 388)

Bioweapons expert Dr. Francis Boyle is quoted stating that:

Opportunities to expand institutional power and corporate profits always seem to trump patriotism and duty within the CIA’s bioweapons teams. Patriotism is a polite fiction among the bioweapons set.

(p. 383)

RFK, Jr. adds that the public health agencies, which are heavily involved in, and funded by, biowarfare research, share the CIA’s self-interested non-patriotism:

NIH and NIAID operate under the same perverse incentives that drive destructive conduct across the whole bioweapons field.

(p. 383)

A Convergence of Personal, Political, Financial and Global Interests

In the final chapters of The Wuhan Cover-Up, RFK, Jr. focuses on several key figures in the biowarfare-industrial-complex, including Jeremy Farrar of the Wellcome Trust (now at the WHO), Anthony Fauci of the NIH, and Bill Gates. 

RFK, Jr. uses these figures to show how the Covid pandemic emerged from the toxic stew of ethically compromised biowarfare research standards; military, intelligence, public health, and academic institutions/organizations dependent on biowarfare funding; the involvement of China and global interests in the booming business of “pandemic preparedness and response;” and, of course, the endless pursuit of political power and personal enrichment.

Here’s a great summary of how they all came together, through personal and institutional greed and power-mongering, to unleash the Covid catastrophe on the world:

The evidence suggests that instead of relentlessly protecting public health, Farrar exploited the pandemic to promote the venal financial agendas of his WEF [World Economic Forum] patrons, to transform Western democracies into surveillance states, to expand his personal power and paycheck, and to pander to high-level Chinese officials. Achieving these objectives required Farrar to hide [Covid’s] laboratory origins, a project in which he enlisted a cadre of his medical cartel cronies—those who, thanks to years of funding by Fauci, Farrar, and Gates, now occupy the highest echelons of virology in academia, the regulatory agencies, and pharmaceutical companies. 

(p. 539)

If for nothing else, I would recommend adding The Wuhan Cover-Up to your library as an invaluable resource on leading figures, organizations, and power brokers involved in the biowarfare-industrial-complex.

Conclusions and Comments

It was especially gratifying to me to read The Wuhan Cover-Up (all 600 pages of it), because it validated my own research, showing that the pandemic response was led by the national security/intelligence arms of government, not public health agencies. 

In fact, after reading the first few chapters – the ones that go into the history of chemical and biological warfare and the rise of the biowarfare-industrial-complex – I paradoxically felt an enormous sense of relief. 

Finally, we have a detailed account that shows – beyond what I would consider a reasonable doubt – that the entire Covid catastrophe was caused, and led, by a multinational military-intelligence-academic-pharma-tech-NGO cabal.

RFK, Jr.’s conclusion is that we should look to a future “in which the bio-elites are held responsible for their actions, people regain their rights, and the Constitution is restored to its intended preeminence.”

But how do we do that? 

I am afraid, based on the information in his own book, and the fact that RFK, Jr. himself is being censored and banned so extensively from the public square, that the solution to the problems he exposes is much more difficult and complex than just “holding the bio-elites responsible” which will somehow lead to people regaining their rights.

What we need to do is to shut down, or extract ourselves from, the global biowarfare-industrial-complex that is able to convince (or coerce?) our governments into declaring states of emergency over supposed pandemic threats, and then curtail civil rights and impose massive surveillance, censorship, and propaganda that would not be permitted in non-emergency situations. Not to mention garnering enormous wealth while forcing the world’s population to accept novel, untested, and potentially lethal medical “countermeasures.”

The Wuhan Cover-Up does a better job than any other book or article I have read at exposing the trends, forces, and institutions that brought us the Covid catastrophe – with hundreds of pages of notes and references. What’s frightening is that the enormity of the problem is beyond the scope of the book, not just to solve, but even to fully acknowledge.

Republished from the author’s Substack

Tyler Durden Fri, 02/16/2024 - 23:40

Read More

Continue Reading

Trending