Historical Amnesia
In a previous post, we noted the “pro-Democracy” elements in Hong Kong having adapted the salute of the Ukrainian fascist OUN/B (and their UPA combatant wing) “Glory to Ukraine! Glory to the Heroes!” to their political lexicon. This followed the decampment of elements of the Ukrainian Nazi Azov Battalion and Pravy Sektor (Right Sector) to Hong Kong. Their Eastern sojourn was underwritten by an EU NGO. Azov’s Hong Kong compatriots have adopted the OUN/B slogan, now the official salute of the Ukrainian police and military. ” . . . . The interest has been mutual, with Hong Kong’s ‘democrats’ drawing inspiration from Ukraine’s pro-Western Euromaidan ‘revolution’ that has empowered far-right, fascistic forces. Hong Kong protesters have embraced the slogan ‘Glory to Hong Kong’, adapted from ‘Slava Ukrayini’ or ‘Glory to Ukraine’, a slogan invented by Ukrainian fascists and used by Nazi collaborators during WWII that was re-popularized by the Euromaidan movement. . . . ” The Hong Kong iteration of the OUN/UPA salute has become an anthem. In its coverage of the banning of that song by the Chinese authorities, “The New York Times” [predictably] fails to discuss the heritage of the slogan/song, nor the nature of the Ukrainian Nazi “troubadours” who brought it to Hong Kong.
Failure in Afghanistan
A relatively rare piece of quality, incisive analysis from the Mainstream Media, Craig Whitlock’s “At War With The Truth” presents an honest, albeit attenuated, analysis of the failure of the war in Afghanistan. In addition, this paper presents the background to, and foundation of, the latest iteration of the Russia-gate psy-op: “Bountygate.” A thoughtful piece by Scott Ritter in “Consortium News” parses the deep politics of “Bountygate” and the reality of Russian policy vis a vis the Taliban and Central Asia.
Provocation: Covid-19 as a False Flag “Bio-Reichstag Fire” (Updated on 4/22/2020)
In FTR #1126, we examined the Trump administration and GOP’s exploitation of the Covid-19 outbreak as a campaign tactic and right-wing hints that the virus escaped from a Chinese biological warfare laboratory. Now, Germany, France and Britain are joining with the Trump administration and the GOP in hinting that the coronavirus escaped from a Chinese biological warfare laboratory. As a “German Foreign Policy” article notes, the tone of American, British, French and German rhetoric concerning Covid-19 is reminiscent of the deliberate disinformation that led to the invasion of Iraq in 2002. A) ” . . . . Last weekend, US President Donald Trump warned the People’s Republic that it should face consequences if it was ‘knowingly responsible’ for the spread of the pandemic. Washington is simultaneously spreading deliberate rumors that the virus could have originated in a Chinese laboratory. Whereas, scientists vehemently refute the allegations, German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas declared, he ‘does not want to exclude’ that the WHO will have to deal with these issues. On Monday, Chancellor Angela Merkel called on Beijing to show ‘transparency’ on the issue. . . .”; B) ” . . . . At the same time deliberate rumors are being spread in the United States that the Covid-19 virus could have originated in a Chinese laboratory — possibly in bioweapons lab. The US government indicated that it does not rule out this possibility; US intelligence services are currently investigating the issue. Particularly given the lie about Iraq’s alleged weapons of mass destruction, such an allegation must be perceived as a threat to lend legitimacy to new aggressions. . . .”; C) ” . . . . Already last week, German media organs have increasingly been calling China the ‘culprit’ behind the Covid-19 pandemic outbreak. Under the headline ‘what China already owes us,’ Germany’s Springer press even called for ‘reparations.’ (german-foreign-policy.com reported.[5]) Leading British and French politicians have expressed similar views. British Foreign Minister Dominic Raab has repeatedly declared that China will be held responsible for the Covid-19 pandemic. French President Emmanuel Macron has now joined the campaign. Regarding the pandemic’s alleged origin, he declared, ‘there are clearly things that have happened’ in China ‘that we don’t know about.’[6] It is not clear how Macron can know something exists that he does not know about. It is however clear that he seeks to implicate Beijing. . . .” In fact–as we have seen, the DARPA has been doing extensive research into bat-borne coronaviruses. In addition, Fort Detrick was shut down in early August of 2019 for safety violations.
Supplement to The Magic Virus Theory
As discussed in FTR #1124–among other programs–it is now possible to create ANY virus from scratch, using “mail-order” or “designer” genes. Sadly predictable journalistic bromides that the Covid-19 coronavirus could not have been/was not made in a laboratory fly in the face of bio-technology that has existed for 20 years. In FTR #282–recorded in May of 2001–we noted the terrible significance of the development of such “Designer Gene” technology. A BBC story from 1999 highlights the fears of experts that the advent of such technology could enable the development of ethno-specific biological weapons: ” . . . . Advances in genetic knowledge could be misused to develop powerful biological weapons that could be tailored to strike at specific ethnic groups, the British Medical Association has warned. A BMA report Biotechnology, Weapons and Humanity says that concerted international action is necessary to block the development of new, biological weapons. It warns the window of opportunity to do so is very narrow as technology is developing rapidly and becoming ever more accessible. ‘Recipes’ for developing biological agents are freely available on the Internet, the report warns. . . . The BMA report warns that legitimate research into microbiological agents and genetically targeted therapeutic agents could be difficult to distinguish from research geared towards developing more effective weapons. . . . Dr Vivienne Nathanson, BMA Head of Health Policy Research said: . . . ‘Biotechnology and genetic knowledge are equally open to this type of malign use. Doctors and other scientists have an important role in prevention. They have a duty to persuade politicians and international agencies such as the UN to take this threat seriously and to take action to prevent the production of such weapons.’ . . . ”
FTR #1124 The Magic Virus Theory: The “Whole-of-Society Response”
This program takes stock of some of the remarkable features of the Covid-19 coronavirus, to be seen in the context of a country whose political/intellectual elites have accepted the “Magic Bullet Theory.” (This is discussed in–among other programs–The Guns of November, Part 2.)
It is our considered opinion that the virus is part of the destabilization effort against China and is founded upon research highlighted in, among other programs, FTR #‘s 1119 and 1120.
As highlighted below, all of this must be evaluated in light of the fact that the coordinator of the anti-China effort–former Trump campaign manager Steve Bannon–is a fascist.
In addition to reviewing how the Covid-19 virus infects human lung tissue and both the upper and lower respiratory tracts, we note:
1.–The virus appears to have been a bat virus and the random mutations seen are unlikely to be natural: ” . . . . What are the odds that a random bat virus had exactly the right combination of traits to effectively infect human cells from the get-go, and then jump into an unsuspecting person? ‘Very low,’ [Kristian] Andersen [of the Scripps Research Translational Institute] says . . . . ”
2.–The ability of this bat virus to infect ACE2 was present from day one. ” . . . . . The closest wild relative of SARS-CoV‑2 is found in bats, which suggests it originated in a bat, then jumped to humans either directly or through another species. . . . When SARS-classic first made this leap, a brief period of mutation was necessary for it to recognize ACE2 well. But SARS-CoV‑2 could do that from day one. ‘It had already found its best way of being a [human] virus,’ says Matthew Frieman of the University of Maryland School of Medicine. . . .”
3.–Indeed, why was this “seventh virus” the one to infect humans “. . . . This family, the coronaviruses, includes just six other members that infect humans. . . . . Why was this seventh coronavirus the one to go pandemic? Suddenly, what we do know about coronaviruses becomes a matter of international concern. . . .”
4.–Perhaps the most notable observation made about this virus thus far: it doesn’t appear to be mutating in evolutionarily significant ways. Of the 100-plus mutations observed in the virus so far, none has emerged as evolutionarily dominant–unusual for a virus that only recently jumped to humans. and has spread prolifically. It’s as though the virus is already evolutionarily optimized for spreading among humans and there are no ‘gain-of-function’ mutations left for it acquire. As Lisa Gralinski, a coronavirus expert at the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill, described it, ‘The virus has been remarkably stable given how much transmission we’ve seen . . . . there’s no evolutionary pressure on the virus to transmit better. It’s doing a great job of spreading around the world right now.’ . . .”
5.–As discussed in other programs–including FTR #‘s 1117 and 1121, the “cytokine storms” that overwhelm the immune system of some Covid-19 victims are symptomatic of other viruses that have gone either “Gain-of-Function” alteration and/or genetic recovery and recreation–HN1 Avian Flu, SARS, and the 1918 “Spanish Flu” virus: ” . . . . These damaging overreactions are called cytokine storms. They were historically responsible for many deaths during the 1918 flu pandemic, H5N1 bird flu outbreaks, and the 2003 SARS outbreak. . . . .”
In addition, an article in Science Direct characterizes the advent of the furin-like cleavage site as a “gain-of-function” phenomenon. “Gain of Function” is a mechanism of action of an “Enhanced Potential Pandemic Pathogen.” Note the use of the word “strikingly” in this otherwise dry and pedantic academic presentation. It is VERY significant and–we suspect–betokens awareness on the part of the authors that “we aren’t in Kansas, anymore, Toto!” “. . . . STRIKINGLY [caps are ours–D.E.], the 2019-nCoV S‑protein sequence contains 12 additional nucleotides upstream of the single Arg↓ cleavage site 1 (Fig. 1, Fig. 2) leading to a predictively solvent-exposed PRRAR↓SV sequence, which corresponds to a canonical furin-like cleavage site (Braun and Sauter, 2019; Izaguirre, 2019; Seidah and Prat, 2012). This furin-like cleavage site, is supposed to be cleaved during virus egress (Mille and Whittaker, 2014) for S‑protein ‘priming’ and may provide a gain-of-function to the 2019-nCoV for efficient spreading in the human population compared to other lineage b betacoronaviruses. This possibly illustrates a convergent evolution pathway between unrelated CoVs. Interestingly, if this site is not processed, the S‑protein is expected to be cleaved at site 2 during virus endocytosis, as observed for the SARS-CoV. . . .”
The article also notes that the virus differs significantly from other coronaviruses of its type. ” . . . . Based on its genome sequence, 2019-nCoV belongs to lineage b of Betacoronavirus (Fig. 1A), which also includes the SARS-CoV and bat CoV ZXC21, the latter and CoV ZC45 being the closest to 2019-nCoV. . . . Since furin is highly expressed in lungs, an enveloped virus that infects the respiratory tract may successfully exploit this convertase to activate its surface glycoprotein (Bassi et al., 2017; Mbikay et al., 1997). Before the emergence of the 2019-nCoV, this important feature was not observed in the lineage b of betacoronaviruses. . . .”
The features of the virus noted above must be seen in the context of the DARPA research into bat coronaviruses:
1.–” . . . . the Pentagon’s Defense Advanced Research Project Agency (DARPA), began spending millions on such research in 2018 and some of those Pentagon-funded studies were conducted at known U.S. military bioweapons labs bordering China and resulted in the discovery of dozens of new coronavirus strains as recently as last April. Furthermore, the ties of the Pentagon’s main biodefense lab to a virology institute in Wuhan, China — where the current outbreak is believed to have begun — have been unreported in English language media thus far. . . . For instance, DARPA spent $10 million on one project in 2018 ‘to unravel the complex causes of bat-borne viruses that have recently made the jump to humans, causing concern among global health officials.’ Another research project backed by both DARPA and NIH saw researchers at Colorado State University examine the coronavirus that causes Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) in bats and camels ‘to understand the role of these hosts in transmitting disease to humans.’ . . . For instance, one study conducted in Southern China in 2018 resulted in the discovery of 89 new ‘novel bat coronavirus’ strains that use the same receptor as the coronavirus known as Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS). That study was jointly funded by the Chinese government’s Ministry of Science and Technology, USAID — an organization long alleged to be a front for U.S. intelligence, and the U.S. National Institute of Health — which has collaborated with both the CIA and the Pentagonon infectious disease and bioweapons research.. . . .”
2.–DARPA is doing this work, in part, at biological research facilities ringing both China and Russia. ” . . . . One of those studies focused on ‘Bat-Borne Zoonotic Disease Emergence in Western Asia’ and involved the Lugar Center in Georgia, identified by former Georgian government officials, the Russian governmentand independent, investigative journalist Dilyana Gaytandzhieva as a covert U.S. bioweapons lab. . . . Another U.S. government-funded study that discovered still more new strains of ‘novel bat coronavirus’ was published just last year. Titled ‘Discovery and Characterization of Novel Bat Coronavirus Lineages from Kazakhstan,’ focused on ‘the bat fauna of central Asia, which link China to eastern Europe’ and the novel bat coronavirus lineages discovered during the study were found to be ‘closely related to bat coronaviruses from China, France, Spain, and South Africa, suggesting that co-circulation of coronaviruses is common in multiple bat species with overlapping geographical distributions.’ In other words, the coronaviruses discovered in this study were identified in bat populations that migrate between China and Kazakhstan, among other countries, and is closely related to bat coronaviruses in several countries, including China. . . .
The unusual features of the virus must also be seen in the context of the Steve Bannon-led anti-China destabilization effort. It is our opinion that the spreading of the virus is intended to provoke the “Whole-of-society” response. As discussed in FTR #947, the dominant intellectual and political influence on Bannon is the Italian fascist Julius Evola. Originally a supporter of Mussolini, he ultimately decided Mussolini was too moderate and in an ideological “Gain-of-Function” mutation, associated himself with the Nazi SS, who were financing his work by the end of World War II.
Bannon’s assessment of U.S.-China relations amounts to a declaration of “Totaler Krieg–Total War.” ” . . . ‘These are two systems that are incompatible,’ Mr. Bannon said of the United States and China. ‘One side is going to win, and one side is going to lose.’ . . . .”
The coronavirus attack we believe was unleashed on the U.S. and the world as a whole (to alienate it from China) and China itself (to inflect economic damage and stir up domestic unrest) is the manifestation of what the head of the FBI expressed: ” . . . . ‘I think it’s going to take a whole-of-society response by us.’ . . .”
Of paramount importance is the fact that statements being issued to the effect that the virus was not made in a laboratory are not just irrelevant, but absurd. ANY virus can be made in a laboratory, from scratch as is being done for the SARS-CoV‑2 (Covid-19) virus.
The bromides being issued–all too predictably–that the virus could not have been/wasn’t made in a laboratory are the virological equivalent of the Magic Bullet Theory.
We first discussed “Designer Genes” in FTR #282.
Ralph Baric–who did the gain-of-function modification on the Horseshoe Bat coronavirus, has been selected to engineer the Covid-19.
” . . . . The remarkable ability to ‘boot up’ viruses from genetic instructions is made possible by companies that manufacture custom DNA molecules, such as Integrated DNA Technology, Twist Bioscience, and Atum. By ordering the right genes, which cost a few thousand dollars, and then stitching them together to create a copy of the coronavirus genome, it’s possible to inject the genetic material into cells and jump-start the virus to life. The ability to make a lethal virus from mail-order DNA was first demonstrated 20 years ago. . . .”
Note what might be termed a “virologic Jurassic Park” manifestation: ” . . . . The technology immediately created bio-weapon worries. . . . Researchers at the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) drove that point home in 2005 when they resurrected the influenza virus that killed tens of millions in 1918–1919. . . .”
A key factor spurring our suspicion concerning genetic-engineering of one or more variant of the Covid-19 virus concerns a 2015 Gain-of-Function experiment done by the above Ralph Baric: “Ralph Baric, an infectious-disease researcher at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, last week (November 9) published a study on his team’s efforts to engineer a virus with the surface protein of the SHC014 coronavirus, found in horseshoe bats in China, and the backbone of one that causes human-like severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) in mice. The hybrid virus could infect human airway cells and caused disease in mice. . . . The results demonstrate the ability of the SHC014 surface protein to bind and infect human cells, validating concerns that this virus—or other coronaviruses found in bat species—may be capable of making the leap to people without first evolving in an intermediate host, Nature reported. They also reignite a debate about whether that information justifies the risk of such work, known as gain-of-function research. ‘If the [new] virus escaped, nobody could predict the trajectory,’ Simon Wain-Hobson, a virologist at the Pasteur Institute in Paris, told Nature. . . .”
FTR #1119 and FTR #1120 DARPA and the Covid-19 Outbreak, Part 1 and DARPA and the Covid-19 Outbreak, Part 2
A thought-provoking and disturbing article about DARPA research into bat-borne diseases, including some caused by coronaviruses–is set forth here.
Whitney Webb has provided us with troubling insight into Pentagon research–some of which remains classified:
1.– Into bat-borne coronaviruses. ” . . . . the Pentagon’s Defense Advanced Research Project Agency (DARPA), began spending millions on such research in 2018 and some of those Pentagon-funded studies were conducted at known U.S. military bioweapons labs bordering China and resulted in the discovery of dozens of new coronavirus strains as recently as last April. Furthermore, the ties of the Pentagon’s main biodefense lab to a virology institute in Wuhan, China — where the current outbreak is believed to have begun — have been unreported in English language media thus far. . . . For instance, DARPA spent $10 million on one project in 2018 ‘to unravel the complex causes of bat-borne viruses that have recently made the jump to humans, causing concern among global health officials.” Another research project backed by both DARPA and NIH saw researchers at Colorado State University examine the coronavirus that causes Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) in bats and camels ‘to understand the role of these hosts in transmitting disease to humans.’ . . . For instance, one study conducted in Southern China in 2018 resulted in the discovery of 89 new “novel bat coronavirus” strains that use the same receptor as the coronavirus known as Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS). That study was jointly funded by the Chinese government’s Ministry of Science and Technology, USAID — an organization long alleged to be a front for U.S. intelligence, and the U.S. National Institute of Health — which has collaborated with both the CIA and the Pentagon on infectious disease and bioweapons research.. . . .”
2.–At biological research facilities ringing both China and Russia. ” . . . . One of those studies focused on ‘Bat-Borne Zoonotic Disease Emergence in Western Asia’ and involved the Lugar Center in Georgia, identified by former Georgian government officials, the Russian government and independent, investigative journalist Dilyana Gaytandzhieva as a covert U.S. bioweapons lab. . . . Another U.S. government-funded study that discovered still more new strains of ‘novel bat coronavirus’ was published just last year. Titled ‘Discovery and Characterization of Novel Bat Coronavirus Lineages from Kazakhstan,’ focused on ‘the bat fauna of central Asia, which link China to eastern Europe’ and the novel bat coronavirus lineages discovered during the study were found to be ‘closely related to bat coronaviruses from China, France, Spain, and South Africa, suggesting that co-circulation of coronaviruses is common in multiple bat species with overlapping geographical distributions.’ In other words, the coronaviruses discovered in this study were identified in bat populations that migrate between China and Kazakhstan, among other countries, and is closely related to bat coronaviruses in several countries, including China. . . .”
3.–Networked with Chinese research facilities in Wuhan. ” . . . . The USAMRIID’s problematic record of safety at such facilities is of particular concern in light of the recent coronavirus outbreak in China. As this report will soon reveal, this is because USAMRIID has a decades-old and close partnership with the University of Wuhan’s Institute of Medical Virology, which is located in the epicenter of the current outbreak. . . . Duke University is also jointly partnered with China’s Wuhan University, which is based in the city where the current coronavirus outbreak began, which resulted in the opening of the China-based Duke Kunshan University (DKU) in 2018. Notably, China’s Wuhan University — in addition to its partnership with Duke — also includes a multi-lab Institute of Medical Virology that has worked closely with the US Army Medical Research Institute for Infectious Diseases since the 1980s, according to its website. . . . ”
Into the DNA of both Russian and Chinese populations. ” . . . . Since the Pentagon began ‘redesigning’ its policies and research towards a ‘long war’ with Russia and China, the Russian military has accused the U.S. military of harvesting DNA from Russians as part of a covert bioweapon program, a charge that the Pentagon has adamantly denied. Major General Igor Kirillov, the head of the Russian military’s radiation, chemical and biological protection unit who made these claims, also asserted that the U.S. was developing such weapons in close proximity to Russian and Chinese borders. China has also accused the U.S. military of harvesting DNA from Chinese citizens with ill intentions, such as when 200,000 Chinese farmers were used in 12 genetic experiments without informed consent. Those experiments had been conducted by Harvard researchers as part of a U.S. government-funded project. . . .”
4.–Into “gene-driving”–a biotechnological development that can permanently alter the genetic makeup of entire population groups and lead to the extinction of other groups. ” . . . . Concerns about Pentagon experiments with biological weapons have garnered renewed media attention, particularly after it was revealed in 2017 that DARPA was the top funder of the controversial ‘gene drive’ technology, which has the power to permanently alter the genetics of entire populations while targeting others for extinction. At least two of DARPA’s studies using this controversial technology were classified and ‘focused on the potential military application of gene drive technology and use of gene drives in agriculture,’ according to media reports. The revelation came after an organization called the ETC Group obtained over 1,000 emails on the military’s interest in the technology as part of a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request. Co-director of the ETC Group Jim Thomas said that this technology may be used as a biological weapon: ‘Gene drives are a powerful and dangerous new technology and potential biological weapons could have disastrous impacts on peace, food security and the environment, especially if misused, The fact that gene drive development is now being primarily funded and structured by the US military raises alarming questions about this entire field.’ . . . .”
Into overlapping technologies manifesting philosophies of eugenics and ethnic cleansing. ” . . . . In addition, one preliminary study on the coronavirus responsible for the current outbreak found that the receptor, Angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2), is not only the same as that used by the SARS coronavirus, but that East Asians present a much higher ratio of lung cells that express that receptor than the other ethnicities (Caucasian and African-American) included in the study. . . . the U.S. Air Force published a document entitled ‘Biotechnology: Genetically Engineered Pathogens,’ which contains the following passage: ‘The JASON group, composed of academic scientists, served as technical advisers to the U. S. government. Their study generated six broad classes of genetically engineered pathogens that could pose serious threats to society. These include but are not limited to binary biological weapons, designer genes, gene therapy as a weapon, stealth viruses, host-swapping diseases, and designer diseases (emphasis added).’ . . .”
5.–Into the use of “Insect Allies” to supposedly provide crops with protection against pests and disease–a technological program critics have charged masks an offensive biological warfare manifestation. ” . . . . The most recent example of this involved DARPA’s “Insect Allies” program, which officially “aims to protect the U.S. agricultural food supply by delivering protective genes to plants via insects, which are responsible for the transmission of most plant viruses” and to ensure “food security in the event of a major threat,” according to both DARPA and media reports. However, a group of well-respected, independent scientists revealed in a scathing analysis of the program that, far from a ‘defensive’ research project, the Insect Allies program was aimed at creating and delivering ‘new class of biological weapon.’ The scientists, writing in the journal Science and led by Richard Guy Reeves, from the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Biology in Germany, warned that DARPA’s program — which uses insects as the vehicle for as horizontal environmental genetic alteration agents (HEGAAS) — revealed ‘an intention to develop a means of delivery of HEGAAs for offensive purposes (emphasis added).’ . . .”
6.–Ostensibly aimed at preventing pandemics but–very possibly–masking preparations for offensive biological warfare projects. ” . . . . Many of these recent research projects are related to DARPA’s Preventing Emerging Pathogenic Threats, or PREEMPT program, which was officially announced in April 2018. PREEMPT focuses specifically on animal reservoirs of disease, specifically bats, and DARPA even noted in its press release in the program that it ‘is aware of biosafety and biosecurity sensitivities that could arise’ due to the nature of the research. . . . In addition, while both DARPA’s PREEMPT program and the Pentagon’s open interest in bats as bioweapons were announced in 2018, the U.S. military — specifically the Department of Defense’s Cooperative Threat Reduction Program — began funding research involving bats and deadly pathogens, including the coronaviruses MERS and SARS, a year prior in 2017. . . .”
7.–That is heavily networked with the U.S. health and medical infrastructures. ” . . . . The second pharmaceutical company that was selected by CEPI to develop a vaccine for the new coronavirus is Moderna Inc., which will develop a vaccine for the novel coronavirus of concern in collaboration with the U.S. NIH and which will be funded entirely by CEPI. The vaccine in question, as opposed to Inovio’s DNA vaccine, will be a messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccine. Though different than a DNA vaccine, mRNA vaccines still use genetic material ‘to direct the body’s cells to produce intracellular, membrane or secreted proteins.’ Moderna’s mRNA treatments, including its mRNA vaccines, were largely developed using a $25 million grant from DARPA and it often touts is strategic alliance with DARPA in press releases. . . .”
8.–That is heavily networked with firms chosen to develop vaccines for the Covid-19. ” . . . . the very companies recently chosen to develop a vaccine to combat the coronavirus outbreak are themselves strategic allies of DARPA. . . . For instance, the top funders of Inovio Pharmaceuticals include both DARPA and the Pentagon’s Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) and the company has received millions in dollars in grants from DARPA, including a $45 million grant to develop a vaccine for Ebola. Inovio specializes in the creation of DNA immunotherapies and DNA vaccines, which contain genetically engineered DNA that causes the cells of the recipient to produce an antigen and can permanently alter a person’s DNA. Inovio previously developed a DNA vaccine for the Zika virus, but — to date — no DNA vaccine has been approved for use in humans in the United States. Inovio was also recently awarded over $8 million from the U.S. military to develop a small, portable intradermal device for delivering DNA vaccines jointly developed by Inovio and USAMRIID.”
9.–Into vaccines that have not been used on human beings and that use gene-altering manipulation that alarms critics. ” . . . . Not only that, but these DARPA-backed companies are developing controversial DNA and mRNA vaccines for this particular coronavirus strain, a category of vaccine that has never previously been approved for human use in the United States. . . . Inovio’s collaboration with the U.S. military in regards to DNA vaccines is nothing new, as their past efforts to develop a DNA vaccine for both Ebola and Marburg virus were also part of what Inovio’s CEO Dr. Joseph Kim called its ‘active biodefense program’ that has ‘garnered multiple grants from the Department of Defense, Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA), National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), and other government agencies.’ . . . . ”
10.–Involving the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases, located at Fort Detrick, Maryland, a facility that was closed down in August of 2019 by the CDC for multiple safety violations. ” . . . . The U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases (USAMRIID) facility at Fort Detrick, Maryland — the U.S. military’s lead laboratory for ‘biological defense’ research since the late 1960s — was forced to halt all research it was conducting with a series of deadly pathogens after the CDC found that it lacked ‘sufficient systems in place to decontaminate wastewater’ from its highest-security labs and failure of staff to follow safety procedures, among other lapses. The facility contains both level 3 and level 4 biosafety labs. While it is unknown if experiments involving coronaviruses were ongoing at the time, USAMRIID has recently been involved in research borne out of the Pentagon’s recent concern about the use of bats as bioweapons. . . .”
11.–Into the application of genetic engineering in order to create ethno-specific biological warfare weapons, as discussed by the Project for a New American Century. ” . . . . In what is arguably the think tank’s most controversial document, titled ‘Rebuilding America’s Defenses,’ there are a few passages that openly discuss the utility of bioweapons, including the following sentences: ‘…combat likely will 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.’ . . .”
The program concludes with a summary of six pandemics that struck China within a period of a little less than two years. Are these connected to the many-faceted destabilization of China discussed in past programs and/or the research programs highlighted in the Whitney Webb article?:
. . . . In the past two years (during the trade war) China has suffered several pandemics:
1.–February 15, 2018: H7N4 bird flu. Sickened at least 1,600 people in China and killed more than 600. Many chickens killed. China needs to purchase US poultry products.
2.–June, 2018: H7N9 bird flu. Many chickens killed. China needs to purchase US poultry products.
3.–August, 2018: outbreak of African swine flu. Same strain as Russia, from Georgia. Millions of pigs killed. China needs to purchase US pork products.
4.–May 24, 2019: massive infestation of armyworms in 14 province-level regions in China, which destroy most food crops. Quickly spread to more than 8,500 hectares of China’s grain production. They produce astonishing numbers of eggs. China needs to purchase US agricultural products – corn, soybeans.
5.–December, 2019: Coronavirus appearance puts China’s economy on hold.
6.–January, 2020:China is hit by a “highly pathogenic” strain of bird flu in Hunan province. Many chickens died, many others killed. China needs to purchase US poultry products.
FTR #1118 Update on the Coronavirus Outbreak
As the title indicates, the broadcast updates a number of points of inquiry and analysis concerning the Covid-19 outbreak. Of particular note in this context, is the fact that the CDC shut down the Army’s research facility at Ft. Detrick. In early August of 2019, shortly before the recorded start of the outbreak in Wuhan, China, the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases at that facility was closed down by the CDC due to multiple safety violations. “All research at a Fort Detrick laboratory that handles high-level disease-causing material, such as Ebola, is on hold indefinitely after the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found the organization failed to meet biosafety standards. . . . The CDC sent a cease and desist order in July. After USAMRIID received the order from the CDC, its registration with the Federal Select Agent Program, which oversees disease-causing material use and possession, was suspended. That suspension effectively halted all biological select agents and toxin research at USAMRIID . . . .”
Much of the program centers on an article from Global Research. It is Mr. Emory’s opinion that J. Kyle Bass’s comments (see above) and the State Department crackdown on Chinese media are related to some of the elements of discussion in this article. He had heard allegations for weeks that there was discussion in Chinese media about the virus having originated in the United States. Up until this article came to his attention, he had seen nothing to that effect.
NB: Although Western media and official treatment of Chinese media pronouncements on the coronavirus’s origin being in the U.S. will be dismissed as “fake news,” “propaganda,” etc., the speculation in a major Japanese TV broadcast and the analysis presented in a Taiwanese scientific video presentation are not easily dismissed as “Communist Chinese disinformation.” It is altogether dubious that major Japanese media or Taiwanese scientific presentation would carry water for the Chinese Communist Party.
The article raises a number of points of discussion and analysis, including:
1.–” . . . . A new study by Chinese researchers indicates the novel coronavirus may have begun human-to-human transmission in late November from a place other than the Huanan seafood market in Wuhan. The study published on ChinaXiv, a Chinese open repository for scientific researchers, reveals the new coronavirus was introduced to the seafood market from another location(s), and then spread rapidly from the market due to the large number of close contacts. . . .”
2.–” . . . . Chinese medical authorities – and “intelligence agencies” – then conducted a rapid and wide-ranging search for the origin of the virus, collecting nearly 100 samples of the genome from 12 different countries on 4 continents, identifying all the varieties and mutations. During this research, they determined the virus outbreak had begun much earlier, probably in November, shortly after the Wuhan Military Games. . . . ”
3.–” . . . . They then came to the same independent conclusions as the Japanese researchers – that the virus did not begin in China but was introduced there from the outside. China’s top respiratory specialist Zhong Nanshan said on January 27. ‘Though the COVID-19 was first discovered in China, it does not mean that it originated from China.’ . . . .This of course raises questions as to the actual location of origin. If the authorities pursued their analysis through 100 genome samples from 12 countries, they must have had a compelling reason to be searching for the original source outside China. This would explain why there was such difficulty in locating and identifying a ‘patient zero’. . . .”
4.–” . . . . In February of 2020, the Japanese Asahi news report (print and TV) claimed the coronavirus originated in the US, not in China, and that some (or many) of the 14,000 American deaths attributed to influenza may have in fact have resulted from the coronavirus. (5) . . .”
5.–” . . . . The TV Asahi network presented scientific documentation for their claims, raising the issue that no one would know the cause of death because the US either neglected to test or failed to release the results. Japan avoided the questions of natural vs. man-made and accidental vs. deliberate, simply stating that the virus outbreak may first have occurred in the US. The Western Internet appears to have been scrubbed of this information, but the Chinese media still reference it. . . .”
6.–” . . . . Then, Taiwan ran a TV news program on February,27,(click here to access video (Chinese), that presented diagrams and flow charts suggesting the coronavirus originated in the US. (6) . . . .”
7.–” . . . . The man in the video is a top virologist and pharmacologist who performed a long and detailed search for the source of the virus. He spends the first part of the video explaining the various haplotypes (varieties, if you will), and explains how they are related to each other, how one must have come before another, and how one type derived from another. He explains this is merely elementary science and nothing to do with geopolitical issues, describing how, just as with numbers in order, 3 must always follow 2. . . .”
8.–” . . . . The basic logic is that the geographical location with the greatest diversity of virus strains must be the original source because a single strain cannot emerge from nothing. He demonstrated that only the US has all the five known strains of the virus (while Wuhan and most of China have only one, as do Taiwan and South Korea, Thailand and Vietnam, Singapore, and England, Belgium and Germany), constituting a thesis that the haplotypes in other nations may have originated in the US. . . .”
9.–” . . . . With about 50 nations scattered throughout the world having identified at least one case at the time of writing, it would be very interesting to examine virus samples from each of those nations to determine their location of origin and the worldwide sources and patterns of spread. . . .”
10.–” . . . .The Taiwanese doctor then stated the virus outbreak began earlier than assumed, saying, ‘We must look to September of 2019’. He stated the case in September of 2019 where some Japanese traveled to Hawaii and returned home infected, people who had never been to China. This was two months prior to the infections in China and just after the CDC suddenly and totally shut down the Fort Detrick bio-weapons lab claiming the facilities were insufficient to prevent loss of pathogens. (10) (11) He said he personally investigated those cases very carefully (as did the Japanese virologists who came to the same conclusion).. This might indicate the coronavirus had already spread in the US but where the symptoms were being officially attributed to other diseases, and thus possibly masked. . . .”
11.–” . . . . On February 26, ABC News affiliate KJCT8 News Network reported that a woman recently told the media that her sister died on from coronavirus infection. Montrose, Colorado resident Almeta Stone said, ‘They (the medical staff) kept us informed that it was the flu, and when I got the death certificate, there was a coronavirus in the cause of death.’ . . .”
12.–” . . . . In the past two years (during the trade war) China has suffered several pandemics: A) February 15, 2018: H7N4 bird flu. Sickened at least 1,600 people in China and killed more than 600. Many chickens killed. China needs to purchase US poultry products. B)June, 2018: H7N9 bird flu. Many chickens killed. China needs to purchase US poultry products. C) August, 2018: outbreak of African swine flu. Same strain as Russia, from Georgia. Millions of pigs killed. China needs to purchase US pork products. D)May 24, 2019: massive infestation of armyworms in 14 province-level regions in China, which destroy most food crops. Quickly spread to more than 8,500 hectares of China’s grain production. They produce astonishing numbers of eggs. China needs to purchase US agricultural products – corn, soybeans. E) December, 2019: Coronavirus appearance puts China’s economy on hold. F) January, 2020: China is hit by a ‘highly pathogenic’ strain of bird flu in Hunan province. Many chickens died, many others killed. China needs to purchase US poultry products. . . .”
Program Highlights Include: Further discussion of the State Department’s crackdown on Chinese media outlets; Further discussion of Shincheonji–a South Korean cult that was apparently the vehicle for introducing the virus into that country and which has a branch in Wuhan China; the structural, operational and doctrinal overlap between Shincheonji and the Unificatin Church; Donald Rumsfeld’s position as chairman of the board of directors of Gilead Sciences–at the forefront of Big Pharma’s race to develop countermeasures to the Covid-19 and a major investment target for hedge funds; The presence on Gilead’s board of C. Benno Schmidt, Sr., who helped launch Richard Nixon’s War on Cancer–a cover for the NCI’s Special Viral Cancer Research Program.
FTR #1117 More Than One “Flu” Over the Cuckoo’s Nest
Researchers found that levels of the Covid-19 virus increased soon after symptoms first appeared, with higher amounts in the nose than in the throats, which is also more consistent with influenza than SARS. Of the 18 patients they examined, one had moderate levels in their nose and throat but no symptoms–people who are asymptomatic can still potentially spread the virus. It’s this combination of airborne transmissions and asymptomatic patients who shed the virus that makes this a particularly infectious disease.
This anomalous new ability to infect the upper respiratory tract, of course, brings up the chilling experiments where researchers modified the H5N1 bird flu virus until it was capable of airborne transmissions between ferrets. That’s the same research that was banned by the NIH following the uproar but has subsequently been reallowed in early 2019. That original 2012 study specifically found that it was mutations that gave the virus the ability to infect the upper respiratory tracts of the ferrets that made it an airborne virus. We have yet to year if the SAR-CoV‑2 virus had the same or similar mutations to those that were induced in the H5N1 bird flu virus experiment but it seems likely.
The infectiousness of the SARS-CoV‑2 coronavirus is unprecedented based on this new study. As one immunologist put it, “This virus is clearly much more capable of spreading between humans than any other novel coronavirus we’ve ever seen. This is more akin to the spread of flu”.
In the context of the Covid-19’s flu-like ability to infect the upper respiratory tract, we explore experiments adapting the lethal H5N1 avian flu to ferrets. These experiments were halted in 2014 but subsequently resumed in 2017.
Might some of this experiment have been adapted to the Covid-19?
We explore additional experiments adapting the lethal H5N1 avian flu to ferrets. These experiments were halted in 2014 but subsequently resumed in 2017.
Might some of this experiment have been adapted to the Covid-19?
These experiments were resumed, shortly before the outbreak of Covid-19. Again, might some of the results of the adaptation of the H5N1 avian flu to ferrets have figured in the Covid-19 phenomenon?
Note that many experts were critical of the process.
A report on the adaptation of the A/H5N1 to ferrets notes that Oseltamivir–marketed under the brand-name Tamiflu–was successful in treating the ferrets. That is one of the anti-virals in a drug cocktail used by Thai doctors to successfully treat a Covid-19 sufferer.
In FTR#55, we noted in 1997 that U.S. Army researchers had successfully recovered genetic material from the 1918 influenza epidemic.
As will be seen in future programs, one of the variants of the Covid-19 does indeed behave like the 1918 flu virus. As we will also see in future programs, that virus was resurrected by researchers in 2005.
In the past, we have heard it alleged by credible sources that Germany was behind the 1918 flu epidemic that killed scores of millions worldwide.
From Germany Watch comes another post reinforcing this line of inquiry.
After maintaining that German agents were sabotaging livestock with anthrax, the post discusses British intelligence distillate indicating that, after discovering the particular strain of virulent flu, German agents began deliberately spreading it in the U.S.
NB: We don’t feel that the information from the book Three Wars with Germany confirms the hypothesis that the flu pandemic was a German bio-warfare weapon gone awry beyond the point of debate. It DOES, however, highlight that possibility.
We then tackle the subject of a cult/church that is at the epicenter of a Covid-19 outbreak in South Korea. The overlap between this organization and the Unification Church is discussed in a Food For Thought post. Might this cult have been a vector for introducing the virus into Wuhan?
The fascistic nature of the cult and some of the rituals and beliefs of the organization would render the group and/or some of its members as viable “useful idiots” for manipulation in connection with this outbreak.
The next two points of discussion concern the fact that the current U.S. Ambassador to South Korea was the former head of the United States Pacific Command. We wonder if he might be ONI and/or CIA, and if he might have any connection to the anti-China blitzkrieg and the Covid-19 outbreak?
As the former Commander of the Guantanamo base in Cuba, Admiral Harris certainly did have operational links with the intelligence community.
FTR #1110 Miscellaneous Articles and Updates
As the title indicates, this program presents a potpourri of articles covering a number of topics.
A common thread uniting them is the ongoing New Cold War and elements factoring in the impeachment proceedings underway in Washington.
Reputed evidence of a new “hack” allegedly done by the G.R.U. doesn’t pass the sniffs test.
Factors to be weighed in connection with the latest “hack” of the Ukrainian natural gas company Burisma (on whose board Hunter Biden sits–a fact that has been a focal point of the impeachment proceedings):
1.–Blake Darche, co-founder and Chief Security officer of Area 1, the firm that “detected” the latest “hack” has a strong past association with CrowdStrike, the firm that helped launch the New Cold War propaganda blitz about supposed Russian hacks. Darche was a Principal Consultant at CrowdStrike.
2.–CrowdStrike, in turn, has strong links to the Atlantic Council, one of the think tanks that is part and parcel to the Intermarium Continuity discussed in FTR #‘s 1098, 1099, 1100, 1101. Dmitri Alperovitch, the company’s co-founder and Chief Technology Officer is a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council.
3.–An ironic element of the “analysis” of the hacks attributes the acts to “Fancy Bear” and the G.R.U., based on alleged laziness on the part of the alleged perpetrators of the phishing attack. (Phishing attacks are very easy for a skilled actor to carry out in relative anonymity.) Area 1’s conclusion is based on “pattern recognition,” which is the embodiment of laziness. We are to believe that the G.R.U./Fancy Bear alleged perp used a “cookie cutter” approach.
As we have noted in many previous broadcasts and posts, cyber attacks are easily disguised. Perpetrating a “cyber false flag” operation is disturbingly easy to do. In a world where the verifiably false and physically impossible “controlled demolition”/Truther nonsense has gained traction, cyber false flag ops are all the more threatening and sinister.
Now, we learn that the CIA’s hacking tools are specifically crafted to mask CIA authorship of the attacks. Most significantly, for our purposes, is the fact that the Agency’s hacking tools are engineered in such a way as to permit the authors of the event to represent themselves as Russian.
” . . . . These tools could make it more difficult for anti-virus companies and forensic investigators to attribute hacks to the CIA. Could this call the source of previous hacks into question? It appears that yes, this might be used to disguise the CIA’s own hacks to appear as if they were Russian, Chinese, or from specific other countries. . . . This might allow a malware creator to not only look like they were speaking in Russian or Chinese, rather than in English, but to also look like they tried to hide that they were not speaking English . . . .”
This is of paramount significance in evaluating the increasingly neo-McCarthyite New Cold War propaganda about “Russian interference” in the U.S. election, and Russian authorship of the high-profile hacks.
With Burisma at the center of the impeachment proceedings in Washington, we note some interesting relationships involving Burisma and its board of directors, on which Hunter Biden sits.
Some of the considerations to be weighed in that context
1.–Burisma formed a professional relationship with the Atlantic Council in 2017: ” . . . . In 2017, Burisma announced that it faced no active prosecution cases, then formed a partnership with the Atlantic Council, a US think-tank active in promoting anti-corruption efforts in Ukraine. Burisma donated between $100,000 and $250,000 to the Atlantic Council last year . . . . Karina Zlochevska, Mr. [Burisma founder Mykola] Zlochevsky’s daughter, attended an Atlantic Council roundtable on promoting best business practices as recently as last week. . . .”
2.–The firm had on its board of Burisma of both Aleksander Kwasniewski and Cofer Black. ” . . . .When prosecutors began investigating Burisma’s licenses over self-dealing allegations, Mr Zlochevsky stacked its board with Western luminaries. . . . they included former Polish president Aleksander Kwasniewski, who had visited Ukraine dozens of times as an EU envoy, and . . . . ex-Blackwater director Cofer Black. In Monaco, where he reportedly lives, Mr Zlochevsky jointly organises an annual energy conference with Mr Kwasniewski’s foundation. . . . ”
3.–Kwasniewski was not only the EU’s envoy seeking fulfillment of the EU association agreement, but a key member of Paul Manafort’s Hapsburg Group. The evidence about Manafort working with that assemblage to maneuver Ukraine into the Western orbit is extensive. Some of the relevant programs are: FTR #‘s 1008, 1009 (background about the deep politics surrounding the Hapsburg–U.S. intelligence alliance) and 1022.That the actual Maidan Coup itself was sparked by a provocation featuring the lethal sniping by OUN/B successor elements is persuasive. Some of the relevant programs are: FTR #‘s 982, 1023, 1024.
4.–Kwasniewski’s foundation’s annual energy conferences bring to mind the Three Seas Initiative and the central role of energy in it. The TSI and the role of energy in same is highlighted in the article at the core of FTR #‘s 1098–1101. In this context, note the role of the Atlantic Council in the TSI and its energy component, along with the partnership between Burisma and the Atlantic Council. The TSI and its energy component, in turn, are a fundamental element of the Intermarium Continuity, the military component of which is now being cemented in the Impeachment Circus: ” . . . . Under the mentorship of Jarosław Kaczyński, the new Polish president, Andrzej Duda, elected in 2015, relaunched the idea of a Baltic-Black Sea alliance on the eve of his inauguration under the label of ‘Three Seas Initiative’ (TSI). Originally, the project grew out of a debate sparked by a report co-published by the Atlantic Council and the EU energy lobby group Central Europe Energy Partners (CEEP) with the goal of promoting big Central European companies’ interests in the EU.[116] The report, entitled Completing Europe—From the North-South Corridor to Energy, Transportation, and Telecommunications Union, was co-edited by General James L. Jones, Jr., former Supreme Allied Commander of NATO, U.S. National Security Advisor, and chairman of the Atlantic Council, and Pawel Olechnowicz, CEO of the Polish oil and gas giant Grupa Lotos.[117] It ‘called for the accelerated construction of a North-South Corridor of energy, transportation, and communications links stretching from the Baltic Sea to the Adriatic and Black Seas,’ which at the time was still referred to as the ‘Adriatic-Baltic-Black Sea Initiative.’[118] The report was presented in Brussels in March 2015, where, according to Frederick Kempe, president and CEO of the Atlantic Council, it ‘generated a huge amount of excitement.’ . . . .”
The presence on the Burisma board of Cofer Black “ex”-CIA and the former director of Erik Prince’s Blackwater outfit is VERY important. Erik Prince is the brother of Trump Education Secretary Betsy De Vos and the business partner of Johnson Cho Kun Sun, the Hong Kong-based oligarch who sits on the board of Emerdata, the reincarnated Cambridge Analytica. Both Cofer Black and Aleksander Kwasniewski are in a position to provide detailed intelligence about the operations of Burisma, including any data that the supposed “Russian hack” might reveal.
With the impeachment proceedings now heading toward their most probable conclusion–Trump’s acquittal– and with the incessant babble about the non-existent “Russian interference” in the U.S. election, it is worth contemplating American interference in Russian politics.
Against the background of decades of American-backed and/or initiated coups overthrowing governments around the world, we highlight U.S. support for Boris Yeltsin. Following the NED’s elevation of Nazi-allied fascists in Lithuania and the expansion of that Gehlen/CFF/GOP milieu inside the former Soviet Union courtesy of the Free Congress Foundation, the U.S. hoisted Yeltsin into the driver’s seat of the newly-minted Russia. (One should never forget that Jeffrey Sachs, a key economic adviser to Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez headed the team that sent the Russian economy back to the stone age.)
Key points of consideration:
1.–” . . . . . . . . In late 1991, after the fall of the Soviet Union, Boris Yeltsin won a year of special powers from the Russian Parliament: for one year, he was to be, in effect, the dictator of Russia to facilitate the midwifery of the birth of a democratic Russia. In March of 1992, under pressure from a discontented population, parliament repealed the dictatorial powers it had granted him. Yeltsin responded by declaring a state of emergency, giving himself the repealed dictatorial powers. Russia’s Constitutional Court ruled that Yeltsin was acting outside the constitution. But the US sided – against the Russian people and against the Russian Constitutional Court – with Yeltsin. . . .”
2.–” . . . . Yeltsin dissolved the parliament that had rescinded his powers and abolished the constitution of which he was in violation. In a 636–2 vote, the Russian parliament impeached Yeltsin. But President Bill Clinton again sided with Yeltsin against the Russian people and Russian law, giving him $2.5 billion in aid. . . .”
3.–” . . . . Yeltsin took the money and sent police officers and elite paratroopers to surround the parliament building. Clinton ‘praised the Russian President has (sic) having done ‘quite well’ in managing the standoff with the Russian Parliament,’ as The New York Times reported at the time. Clinton added that he thought ‘the United States and the free world ought to hang in there’ with their support of Yeltsin against his people, their constitution and their courts, and judged Yeltsin to be ‘on the right side of history.’ . . .”
4.–” . . . . On the right side of history and armed with machine guns, Yeltsin’s troops opened fire on the crowd of protesters, killing about 100 people before setting the Russian parliament building on fire. By the time the day was over, Yeltsin’s troops had killed an unconfirmed 500 people and wounded nearly 1,000. Still, Clinton stood with Yeltsin. . . .”
5.–” . . . . In 1996, America would interfere yet again. With elections looming, Yeltsin’s popularity was nonexistent, and his approval rating was at about 6 percent. According to Professor Emeritus of Russian Studies at Princeton, Stephen Cohen, Clinton’s interference in Russian politics, his ‘crusade’ to ‘reform Russia,’ had by now become official policy. And, so, America boldly interfered directly in Russian elections. Three American political consultants, receiving ‘direct assistance from Bill Clinton’s White House,’ secretly ran Yeltsin’s re-election campaign. As Time magazine broke the story, ‘For four months, a group of American political consultants clandestinely participated in guiding Yeltsin’s campaign.’ ‘Funded by the U.S. government,’ Cohen reports, Americans ‘gave money to favored Russian politicians, instructed ministers, drafted legislation and presidential decrees, underwrote textbooks, and served at Yeltsin’s reelection headquarters in 1996.’ . . . .”
6.–” . . . . Then ambassador to Russia Thomas Pickering even pressured an opposing candidate to drop out of the election to improve Yeltsin’s odds of winning. . . .”
7.–” . . . . The US not only helped run Yeltsin’s campaign, they helped pay for it. The US backed a $10.2 billion International Monetary Fund (IMF) loan for Russia, the second-biggest loan the IMF had ever given. The New York Times reported that the loan was ‘expected to be helpful to President Boris N. Yeltsin in the presidential election in June.’ . . .”
Recommended Reading
- Spitfire List is licensed under Creative Commons.
Recent Comments