FTR #1143 The Uyghurs and the Destabilization of China, Part 1
Providing political context for the Covid-19 outbreak, the next three programs explore the propagandizing of the Uighur (also spelled “Uyghur”) population of Xinjiang province. The alleged detention of “millions” of Uighurs in Xinjiang province has been the foundation for U.S. economic sanctions against China. It has been a major propaganda vehicle as well.
(We have followed the Uighurs and the destabilization of China for years, beginning with FTR #348.)
One should not fail to note that the efforts of “Team Uighur” are part of the full court press against China
Like the so-called “pro-democracy” movement in Hong Kong, the organizations that makeup “Team Uighur” are inextricably linked with U.S. intelligence. (We discussed the National Endowment for Democracy’s funding of the “pro-Democracy movement” in Hong Kong in FTR #‘s 1091, 1092 and 1093. NED was founded by William Casey, who was deeply involved with the creation of many of the other U.S. intelligence fronts and affiliates that have generated the Uighur propaganda.)
At a deeper historical level, “Team Uighur” is inextricably linked with the generating forces of international fascism.
The Network of Chinese Human Rights Defenders receives financing from the National Endowment for Democracy. The Jamestown Foundation–another element in “Team Uighur” also has its genesis with William Casey and the Reagan administration. The widely repeated “study” generated by the NCHRD is based on interviews of eight individuals–this in an are with a population of 20 million. ” . . . . In a 2018 report submitted to the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination – often misrepresented in Western media as a UN-authored report – CHRD ‘estimate[d] that roughly one million members of ethnic Uyghurs have been sent to ‘re-education’ detention camps and roughly two million have been forced to attend ‘re-education’ programs in Xinjiang.’ According to CHRD, this figure was ‘[b]ased on interviews and limited data.’ While CHRD states that it interviewed dozens of ethnic Uyghurs in the course of its study, their enormous estimate was ultimately based on interviews with exactly eight Uyghur individuals. . . .”
One of the leading propagandists concerning “mass incarceration of the Uighurs” is Adrian Zenz, a dogmatic End Times Christian, German national and “senior fellow in China studies at the far-right Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation, which was established by the US government in 1983.”
The Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation is an offshoot of the milieu of the OUN/B. ” . . . . an outgrowth of the National Captive Nations Committee, a group founded by Ukrainian nationalist Lev Dobriansky to lobby against any effort for detente with the Soviet Union. Its co-chairman, Yaroslav Stetsko, was a top leader of the fascist OUN‑B militia that fought alongside Nazi Germany during its occupation of Ukraine in World War Two. . . .” A key figure in the Azov Battalion (elements of which were present in Hong Kong) is Roman Zvarych, the personal secretary for Stetsko in the early 1980’s.
” . . . . formerly Yaroslav Stetsko’s private secretary, the U.S.-born Roman Zvarych (1953), represents a younger generation of the Ukrainian émigré community active during the Cold War and a direct link from the ABN to the Azov Battalion. . . . Zvarych participated in the activities of the Anti-Bolshevik Bloc of Nations in the 1980s. . . . In February 2005, after Viktor Yushchenko’s election, Zvarych was appointed Minister of Justice. . . . According to Andriy Biletsky, the first commander of the Azov battalion, a civil paramilitary unit created in the wake of the Euromaidan, Zvarych was head of the headquarters of the Azov Central Committee in 2015 and supported the Azov battalion with ‘volunteers’ and political advice through his Zvarych Foundation. . . .”
Zenz has also generated his figures from highly questionable sources: ” . . . . Like the CHRD, Zenz arrived at his estimate ‘over 1 million’ in a dubious manner. He based it on a single report by Istiqlal TV, a Uyghur exile media organization based in Turkey . . . . Far from an impartial journalistic organization, Istiqlal TV advances the separatist cause while playing host to an assortment of extremist figures. One such character who often appears on Istiqlal TV is Abdulkadir Yapuquan, a reported leader of the East Turkestan Islamic Movement (ETIM), a separatist group that aims to establish an independent homeland in Xinjiang called East Turkestan. . . .”
The “pro-Democracy” movement in Hong Kong also features Ukrainian Nazi elements–part of what we have called the “Earth Island Boogie.”
In numerous programs, we have noted international networking between the Ukrainian Nazi Azov Battalion and elements around the world:
1.–Azov is part of the “Intermarium Revival” that is seen as using Nazification of the Ukraine “pivot point” as a springboard for a global Nazi takeover.
2.–American Nazis and white supremacists are among the elements networking with Azov and then “bringing it all back home” to their native lands.
3.–Azov Battalion and Pravy Sektor (“Right Sector”) elements have decamped to Hong Kong, networking with the so-called “Pro-Democracy” forces and working on behalf of EU NGOs. This was discussed in FTR #1103.
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. . . . ”
Joshua Wong–“boy wonder” and darling of the American MSM–has doubled down on affinity with Ukraine: ” . . . . ‘No matter the differences between Ukraine and Hong Kong, our fights for freedom and democracy are the same,’ Joshua Wong told The Kyiv Post in 2019. ‘[W]e have to learn from Ukrainians… and show solidarity. Ukraine confronted the force of Russia — we are facing the force of Beijing.’ . . . .”
The program concludes with attenuated discussion of Third Reich veteran and CIA officer Ruzi (also “Ruzy”) Nazar. A veteran of the SS Dirlewanger Brigade, Nazar was liaising with the fascist National Action Party (also “National Movement Party”) of Alparslan Turkes at the time its Grey Wolves cadre was involved with shooting the Pope, an act that appears to have been a provocation.
In AFA #‘s 14 and 21, we noted that Nazar represented the Anti Bolshevik Bloc of Nations at the 1984 WACL conference in Dallas, Texas.
FTR #1134 Bio-Psy-Op Apocalypse Now, Part 9: Covid-19 Updates
As indicated by the title of the program, this broadcast updates various articles and book excerpts concerning Covid-19.
A Daily Mail Online [UK] article sets forth two bogus papers contending that the SARS CoV‑2 virus was genetically engineered by the Chinese as a bioweapon in a laboratory and that it “escaped.” Note the championing of one of the papers by a former head of MI6 and the authorship of the second by The Epoch Times, the paper of the Falun Gong cult. Linked to CIA, Steve Bannon’s anti-China milieu and the Trump administration, the organization is a fascist mind control cult discussed in numerous shows, including FTR #‘s 1089 and 1090.
1.–“A former MI6 chief was yesterday accused by Government officials of peddling ‘fanciful claims’ that coronavirus was accidentally created in a Chinese laboratory. British security agencies believe Covid-19 is not a man-made virus and is ‘highly likely’ to have occurred naturally and spread to humans through animals. And Health Secretary Matt Hancock has said there is ‘no evidence’ to back up the theory that it originated in a laboratory. But Sir Richard Dearlove, who was head of the MI6 from 1999 to 2004, cited a recent report claiming the disease was accidentally manufactured by Chinese scientists.
2.–“ ‘I do think that this started as an accident,’ Sir Richard told The Daily Telegraph’s ‘Planet Normal’ podcast. ‘It raises the issue: if China ever were to admit responsibility, does it pay reparations? I think it will make every country in the world rethink how it treats its relationship with China.’ He added: ‘Look at the stories... of attempts by the [Beijing] leadership to lock down any debate about the origins of the pandemic and the way people have been arrested or silenced.’ . . . . The paper – co-authored by Professor Angus Dalgleish, a renowned oncologist and vaccine researcher who works at St George’s Hospital, University of London, and Birger Sorensen, a Norwegian virologist – contains none of the stark allegations that originally stunned its reviewers.
3..–“The initial paper that triggered wild rumours failed stringent tests of verification and is understood to have been rejected in April by eminent international journals such as Nature and the Journal of Virology. Biomedical experts from the Francis Crick Institute and Imperial College London are said to have refuted its conclusions. Then one of the paper’s co-authors, Dr John Fredrik Moxnes, chief scientific adviser to the Norwegian military, asked for his name to be withdrawn. This week, after numerous rewrites, the paper was published by the Quarterly Review of Biophysics Discovery. And those original world-shaking conclusions have now withered to innuendo. No accusation of Chinese manipulation appears. . . .”
4.–”. . . . Back in April, a slickly produced investigative documentary, Tracking Down The Origin Of The Wuhan Coronavirus, was released online. It claimed conclusive proof that the Covid-19 virus had been created as a biological ‘weapon of mass destruction’ in a Chinese lab. . . .”
5.–“At first sight, it seemed a shockingly convincing piece of journalism. On behalf of this newspaper, I cross-checked every claim: The experts it cited and the factual evidence unearthed. I also researched the backgrounds of its makers. I then approached some of the world’s best independent scientific authorities to ask their opinion. They all agreed – this enticingly spicy story just didn’t stand up.”
6.–“It had been produced by a US based anti-Chinese government media organisation called the Epoch Times. Its ‘experts’ were veteran hard-Rightists. Most damningly, its scientific ‘facts’ were twisted out of shape.So much, then, for the Chinese-manufactured coronavirus conspiracy . . .”
Steve Bannon is at the epicenter of the anti-China effort and–to no one’s surprise–never really left the Trump White House.
When assessing Bannon as a political animal, one should never forget that among the important ideological influences on him is Julius Evola, an Italian fascist who found Mussolini too moderate and ultimately took his cues from the Nazi SS, who were financing his work by the end of World War II.
” . . . . Donald Trump’s lightning-rod 2016 campaign boss and former White House chief strategist who was banished from the West Wing in 2017 has quietly crept back into 1600 Pennsylvania Ave., reestablishing ties to staffers, particularly with regard to his pet issues of China and immigration. . . . Another former administration official told The Post that Bannon never really left the White House after he was fired, maintaining contacts and keeping up regular channels of communications with officials there. . . .”
In addition, as discussed in FTR #‘s 1111 and 1112, Bannon is part of a network that includes J. Kyle Bass and Tommy Hicks, Jr. This nexus involves asymmetrical investing with regard to the Hong Kong and Chinese economies and the inter-agency governmental networks involved in both overt and covert anti-China policies implemented by Team Trump. As will be seen below, they also are networking with the mis-named “Scientists to Stop Covid-19.” In that regard, they are also helping steer policy that controls development of treatment and vaccines for Covid-19. The management of drug and vaccine development, in turn, doubles back to market-driving investment dynamics.
An interesting summation of characteristics of a “deliberate” epidemic are evaluated against the finding that New York City was the epicenter of the U.S. Covid-19 outbreak:
Bitten: The Secret History of Lyme Disease and Biological Weapons by Kris Newby; HarperCollins [HC]; Copyright 2019 by Kris Newby; ISBN 9780062896728; p. 185.
Potential epidemiological clues to a deliberate epidemic:
Clue no. 1–A highly unusual event with large numbers of casualties: Check!
Clue no. 2–Higher morbidity or mortality than is expected. Check!
Clue no. 3–Uncommon disease. Check!
Clue no. 4–Point-source outbreak. Check!
Clue no. 5–Multiple epidemics. Check! (Global pandemic)
–Z. F. Dembek, et al., “Discernment Between Deliberate and Natural Infectious Disease Outbreaks”
The prevailing view of the Covid-19 outbreak contends that the American outbreak spread outward from New York City. The strain of SARS CoV‑2 that appeared in New York came, in turn, from Europe.
This doesn’t make sense. There were confirmed cases of the virus on the West Coast that did not come from New York. A European strain of the virus transmitted to New York City would have come in via air. In such an event, there would have been a well-documented outbreak of Covid-19 among flight attendants, who operate in close contact with passengers in cramped circumstances, as well as experiencing jet lag, which compromises the immune system.
Next, we review an aspect of the 2001 anthrax attacks. We highlighted the 2001 anthrax attacks in connection with the Covid-19 outbreak in New York City in FTR #1128.
We note that the Anthrax attacks appear to have operated in overlapping contexts, including justification for the war in Iraq.
The 2001 anthrax attacks appear to have served as a provocation that justified a ten-fold increase in spending for biological warfare development. The number of BSL‑4 labs (having dual civilian and military use) increased from two in 2001, to a dozen in 2007.
This increase occurred while Donald Rumsfeld was George W. Bush’s secretary of defense. He went to that position from being Chairman of the Board of Directors for Gilead Sciences, the manufacturer of remdesivir.
We will delve into the politics of the anthrax attacks in the future.
In the context of the above article, note that the National Institutes of Health have also partnered with CIA and the Pentagon, as underscored by an article about a BSL‑4 lab at Boston University. Note that Europe and the U.S. have twelve BSL4 labs apiece. Taiwan has two. China has one:
1.–As the article notes, as of 2007, the U.S. had “more than a dozen” BSL4 labs–China commissioned its first as of 2017. a tenfold increase in funding for BSL4 labs occurred because of the anthrax attacks of 2001. Those attacks might be seen as something of a provocation, spurring a dramatic increase in “dual use” biowarfare research, under the cover of “legitimate” medical/scientific research. In FTR #1128, we hypothesized about the milieu of Stephen Hatfill and apartheid-linked interests as possible authors of a vectoring of New York City with Sars COV2: ” . . . . Before the anthrax mailings of 2001, the United States had just two BSL4 labs—both within the razor-wire confines of government-owned campuses. Now, thanks to a tenfold increase in funding—from $200 million in 2001 to $2 billion in 2006—more than a dozen such facilities can be found at universities and private companies across the country. . . .”
2.–The Boston University lab exemplifies the Pentagon and CIA presence in BSL‑4 facility “dual use”: ” . . . . But some scientists say that argument obscures the true purpose of the current biodefense boom: to study potential biological weapons. ‘The university portrays it as an emerging infectious disease lab,’ says David Ozonoff, a Boston University epidemiologist whose office is right across the street from the new BSL4 facility. ‘But they are talking about studying things like small pox and inhalation anthrax, which pose no public health threat other than as bioweapons.’ . . . The original NIH mandate for the lab indicated that many groups—including the CIA and Department of Defense—would be allowed to use the lab for their own research, the nature of which BU might have little control over. . . .”
Pivoting to discussion and review of the political, financial and corporate connections to the development of medicinal treatments for, and vaccines to prevent, Covid-19, we recap details relevant to the extraordinary timing of a 4/29 announcement of favorable results for a trial of remdesivir. That announcement drove equities markets higher and was beneficial to the stock of Gilead Sciences.
We present a Stat News article on the internal deliberations behind the decisions to modify the NIAID study. Of particular significance is the DSMB deliberation. Note the timeline of the DSMB deliberation, combined with the announcement on 4/29 that drove the markets higher.
1.–The decision was made to cut it short before the question of remdesivir’s impact on mortality could be answered: ” . . . .The National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases has described to STAT in new detail how it made its fateful decision: to start giving remdesivir to patients who had been assigned to receive a placebo in the study, essentially limiting researchers’ ability to collect more data about whether the drug saves lives — something the study, called ACTT‑1, suggests but does not prove. In the trial, 8% of the participants given remdesivir died, compared with 11.6% of the placebo group, a difference that was not statistically significant. A top NIAID official said he had no regrets about the decision. ‘There certainly was unanimity within the institute that this was the right thing to do,’ said H. Clifford Lane, NIAID’s clinical director. . . .”
2.–In addition, patients scheduled to receive placebo received remdesivir, instead. ” . . . . Steven Nissen, a veteran trialist and cardiologist at the Cleveland Clinic, disagreed that giving placebo patients remdesivir was the right call. ‘I believe it is in society’s best interest to determine whether remdesivir can reduce mortality, and with the release of this information doing a placebo-controlled trial to determine if there is a mortality benefit will be very difficult,’ he said. ‘The question is: Was there a route, or is there a route, to determine if the drug can prevent death?’ The decision is ‘a lost opportunity,’ he said. . . .”
3.–Steven Nissen was not alone in his criticism of the NIAID’s decision. ” . . . .Peter Bach, the director of the Center for Health Policy and Outcomes at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, agreed with Nissen. ‘The core understanding of clinical research participation and clinical research conduct is we run the trial rigorously to provide the most accurate information about the right treatment,’ he said. And that answer, he argued, should ideally have determined whether remdesivir saves lives. The reason we have shut our whole society down, Bach said, is not to prevent Covid-19 patients from spending a few more days in the hospital. It is to prevent patients from dying. ‘Mortality is the right endpoint,’ he said. . . .”
4.–Not only was the administration of remdesivir instead of placebo prioritized, but the NIAID study itself was attenuated! ” . . . . But the change in the study’s main goal also changed the way the study would be analyzed. Now, the NIAID decided, the analysis would be calculated when 400 patients out of the 1,063 patients the study enrolled had recovered. If remdesivir turned out to be much more effective than expected, ‘interim’ analyses would be conducted at a third and two-thirds that number.The job of reviewing these analyses would fall to a committee of outside experts on what is known as an independent data and safety monitoring board, or DSMB. . . .”
5.–The performance of the DSMB for the remdesivir study is noteworthy: ” . . . . But the DSMB for the remdesivir study did not ever meet for an interim efficacy analysis, Lane said. All patients had been enrolled by April 20. The data for a DSMB meeting was cut off on April 22. The DSMB met and, on April 27, it made a recommendation to the NIAID. . . .”
The DSMB meeting on 4/27 determined the switch from placebo to remdesivir. Of paramount importance is the fact that this was JUST BEFORE the 4/29 announcement that drove the markets higher and the same day on which key Trump aide–and former Gilead Sciences lobbyist Joe Grogan resigned! ” . . . . . That decision, Lane said, led the NIAID to conclude that patients who had been given placebo should be offered remdesivir, something that started happening after April 28. . . .”
6.–Dr. Ethan Weiss gave an accurate evaluation of the NIAID study: ” . . . . ‘We’ve squandered an incredible opportunity to do good science,’ [Dr. Ethan] Weiss said. ‘If we could ever go back and do something all over, it would be the infrastructure to actually learn something. Because we’re not learning enough.’ . . . .”
The remarkable handling of the NIAID study, the timing of the announcement of the altogether limited success of the attenuated trial and the rise in equities as a result of the announcement may be best understood in the context of the role played in Trump pandemic decision-making by an elite group of billionaires and scientists–including convicted felon Michael Milken (the “junk bond king”).
1.–” . . . . Calling themselves ‘Scientists to Stop COVID-19,’ the collection of top researchers, billionaires and industry captains will act as an ‘ad hoc review board’ for the torrent of coronavirus research, ‘weeding out’ flawed data before it reaches policymakers, the Wall Street Journal reported on Monday. They are also acting as a go-between for pharmaceutical companies seeking to build a communication channel with Trump administration officials. The group . . . . has advised Nick Ayers, an aide to Vice President Mike Pence, as well as other agency heads, in the past month. Pence is heading up the White House coronavirus task force. . . .”
2.–” . . . The brainy bunch is led by Thomas Cahill, a 33-year-old doctor who became a venture capitalist . . . . Cahill’s clout comes from building connections through his investment firm, Newpath Partners, with Silicon Valley’s Peter Thiel, the founder of PayPal, and billionaire businessmen Jim Palotta and Michael Milken. . . .”
Note that Peter Thiel played a dominant role in bankrolling Newpath Partners, and the other financial angel who elevated Cahill–Brian Sheth–introduced him to Tommy Hicks, Jr., the co-chairman of the RNC. In FTR #‘s 1111 and 1112, we looked at Hicks’ networking with Steve Bannon associate J. Kyle Bass, as well as his role in the inter-agency networks driving the anti-China effort.
” . . . . At the helm of the effort: The 33-year-old and very-much-under-the-radar venture capitalist Tom Cahill, who leads life sciences-focused Newpath Partners. Cahill completed his M.D. and PhD at Duke University a mere two years ago before landing at blue-chip investment firm Raptor Group through a friend. He went on to found Newpath with some $125 million after impressing well-connected names like venture capitalist Peter Thiel and Vista Equity Partners co-founder Brian Sheth. . . . It was through Sheth, for example, that Scientists to Stop Covid-19 connected with the co-chairman of the Republican National Committee, Thomas Hicks Jr. . . .”
The federal government’s extreme focus on remdesivir has been shaped, in large measure, by the influence of “Scientists to Stop COVID-19”:
1.–“Scientists to Stop Covid-19” is shepherding remdesivir: ” . . . . Scientists to Stop COVID-19 recommends that in this phase, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) should work to coordinate with Gilead pharmaceuticals to focus on expediting the results of clinical trials of remdesivir, a drug identified as a potential treatment for COVID-19. The group also recommends administering doses of the drug to patients in an early stage of infection, and notes remdesivir will essentially be a placeholder until a more effective treatment is produced.
2.–The group is doing so by attenuating the regulatory process for coronavirus drugs: “Government entities and agencies appear to adhere to the recommendations outlined by the group, with the Journal reporting that the FDA and the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) have implemented some of the suggestions, namely relaxing drug manufacturer regulations and requirements for potential coronavirus treatment drugs. . . .”
We conclude discussion of the remdesivir machinations with a piece about the timing of the announcement of Grogan’s departure.
” . . . . Grogan has served as the director of the White House Domestic Policy Council since February 2019, overseeing a broad array of policy issues including health care and regulation. . . . Grogan was one of the original members of the White House coronavirus task force launched in late January. . . . Grogan worked as a lobbyist for drug company Gilead Sciences before joining the Trump administration. . . .”
The departure was announced in the Wall Street Journal on the morning of Wednesday, April 29, the same day we got our first public reports of the NIAID clinical trial of remdesivir that was positive enough to show it shortened the time to recovery and the same day the FDA granted remdesivir emergency use status.
Note, again, the timing of the DSMB’s actions, as well as the influence of “Scientists to Stop Covid-19.”
In FTR #1130, we noted that Moncef Slaoui–formerly in charge of product development for Moderna–was chosen to head Trump’s “Operation Warp Speed.” He will be working with Four-Star General Gustave Perna, chosen by Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Mark Milley.
Even after agreeing to sell his Moderna stock, Moncef Slaoui’s investments raise alarming questions–note that he is a “venture capitalist” and a longtime former executive at Glaxo-Smithkline:
The circumstances of his appointment will permit him to avoid scrutiny: ” . . . . In agreeing to accept the position, Dr. Slaoui did not come on board as a government employee. Instead, he is on a contract, receiving $1 for his service. That leaves him exempt from federal disclosure rules that would require him to list his outside positions, stock holdings and other potential conflicts. And the contract position is not subject to the same conflict-of-interest laws and regulations that executive branch employees must follow. . . .”
He will retain a great deal of Glaxo-Smithkline stock: ” . . . . He did not say how much his GSK shares were worth. When he left the company in 2017, he held about [500,000 in Western Print Edition] 240,000 shares and share equivalents, according to the drug company’s annual report and an analysis by the executive compensation firm Equilar. . . .”
Further analysis of Slaoui’s position deepens concern about the integrity of the process: ” . . . . ‘This is basically absurd,’ said Virginia Canter, who is chief ethics counsel for Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington. ‘It allows for no public scrutiny of his conflicts of interest.’ Ms. Canter also said federal law barred government contractors from supervising government employees. . . . Ms. Canter, a former ethics lawyer in the Obama and Clinton administrations, the Securities and Exchange Commission and other agencies, pointed out that GSK’s vaccine candidate with Sanofi could wind up competing with other manufacturers vying for government approval and support. ‘If he retains stock in companies that are investing in the development of a vaccine, and he’s involved in overseeing this process to select the safest vaccine to combat Covid-19, regardless of how wonderful a person he is, we can’t be confident of the integrity of any process in which he is involved,’ Ms. Canter said.In addition, his affiliation with Medicxi could complicate matters: Two of its investors are GSK and a division of Johnson & Johnson, which is also developing a potential vaccine. . . .”
Next, we turn to Moderna’s animal trial for the messenger RNA vaccine it is developing. There are several considerations to be weighed in connection with the Moderna vaccine.
1.–Again, the chairman of Trump’s “Warp Speed” vaccine development program–Moncef Slaoui–was in charge of Moderna’s product development operation.
2.–Moderna’s trial with mice was positive with regard to generating antibody levels high enough to prevent ADE.
3.–Antibody Dependent Enhancement (ADE), is a phenomena where low levels of ineffective antibodies latch onto the virus and exacerbate an overactive immune response that leads to the deadliest symptoms likes cytokine-storms. This danger was seen with SARS and attempts to create a SARS vaccine so it’s a reasonable fear with SARS-CoV‑2.
4.–The Phase III (human) trial is going to be started in July, involving 30,000 people. Alarmingly, those 30,000 people will all be receiving the exact same dosage, 100 micrograms, and that means the phase III trial won’t be testing sub-optimal dosages. The big Phase III trial won’t be testing for ADE in humans.
5.–We may have a nightmare situation where political pressure gives undo weight to animal safety results, leapfrogging over the necessity of testing for side effects.
6.–The animal trials have been severely criticized: ” . . . . ‘This is the barest beginning of preliminary information,’ said Dr. Gregory Poland, an immunologist and vaccine researcher at the Mayo Clinic who has seen the paper, which has yet to undergo peer-review. Poland said the paper was incomplete, disorganized and the numbers of animals tested were small. . . . Poland, who was not involved with the research, said the paper leaves out ‘important parameters’ that could help scientists judge the work. . . .”
7.–We MIGHT create a vaccine that protects those who get a strong immune response while endangering those with sub-protective responses–a “eugenic” vaccine.
8.–The animal trials have been severely criticized: ” . . . . ‘This is the barest beginning of preliminary information,’ said Dr. Gregory Poland, an immunologist and vaccine researcher at the Mayo Clinic who has seen the paper, which has yet to undergo peer-review. Poland said the paper was incomplete, disorganized and the numbers of animals tested were small. . . . Poland, who was not involved with the research, said the paper leaves out ‘important parameters’ that could help scientists judge the work. . . .”
9.–The phase II clinical trials on humans are still underway and won’t be completed before November. Phase III is going to be getting underway in July. The Human clinical trials are already underway at the same time the animal safety trials have yet to be completed.
10.–Side effects can take a while to manifest.
We provided detailed critical comments on Moderna’s Phase I trial in FTR #1132.
We conclude with a New York Times article sets forth a “Vaccine October Surprise” scenario for this fall.
” . . . . In a desperate search for a boost, he could release a coronavirus vaccine that has not been shown to be safe and effective as an October surprise. Oct. 23, 2020, 9 a.m., with 10 days before the election, Fox New releases a poll showing President Trump trailing Joe Biden by eight percentage points. Oct. 23, 2020, 3 p.m., at a hastily convened news conference, President Trump announces that the Food and Drug Administration has just issued an Emergency Use Authorization for a coronavirus vaccine. Mr. Trump declares victory over Covid-19, demands that all businesses reopen immediately and predicts a rapid economic recovery. Given how this president has behaved, this incredibly dangerous scenario is not far-fetched. In a desperate search for a political boost, he could release a coronavirus vaccine before it had been thoroughly tested and shown to be safe and effective. . . .”
FTR #1132 Bio-Psy-Op Apocalypse Now, Part 8: Remdesivir Uber Alles
This broadcast details the process of vetting the anti-Covid-19 drug remdesivir, highlighting the institutional shortcuts taken in testing the product, as well as the dubious nature of the billionaires networking with officials involved in the approval process.
Before analyzing remdesivir, however, we update discussion about the SARS CoV‑2 virus having been engineered, noting joint U.S.-Chinese projects in which bat-borne coronaviruses were genetically engineered. The processes used to modify the viruses would not show any overt evidence of human manipulation.
Most importantly, these projects received financing from institutions with documented links to U.S. intelligence and military interests.
Research into the history of GOF (gain-of-function) work on bat coronaviruses at the Wuhan Institute of Virology indicates multiple areas of U.S. intelligence presence in that work.
It was publicly disclosed in a 2017 paper that the US and China collaborated on “gain-of-function” research on bat coronaviruses to infect humans and that the work received funding from the United States Agency for International Development–a frequent cut-out for the CIA.
In addition, the work was also funded in part by the National Institutes of Health, which have collaborated with both CIA and the Pentagon in BSL‑4 (Bio-Safety-Level 4) projects.
The Wuhan Institute of Virology has also partnered with the USAMRIID since the mid-1980’s.
Important to note is the fact that it was public information that some of this work was done in a biosafety-level 2 laboratory, giving an observer intent on undertaking a biological warfare covert operation against China useful field intelligence about the vulnerability of WIV for such an “op.”
1.–The investigation of infectivity used undetectable methods, negating articles claiming the virus could not have been genetically engineered: ” Evidence has emerged that researchers at the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) in China, working in collaboration with scientists in the USA, have been genetically engineering bat viruses for the past several years to investigate infectivity – using undetectable methods. . . . The evidence rebuts claims by journalists and some scientists that the SARS-CoV‑2 virus responsible for the current COVID-19 pandemic could not have been genetically engineered because it lacks the ‘signs’ or ‘signatures’ that supposedly would be left behind by genetic engineering techniques. . . .”
2.–Dr. Richard Ebright noted that the research was jointly funded by the U.S. and China, that Peter Daszak (about whom we have voiced reservations in the past) was one of the American collaborators. Furthermore, the research was funded in part by USAID, a common U.S. intelligence cut-out. ” . . . . Dr Richard Ebright, an infectious disease expert at Rutgers University (USA), has alerted the public to evidence that WIV and US-based researchers were genetically engineering bat viruses to investigate their ability to infect humans, using commonly used methods that leave no sign or signature of human manipulation. Ebright flagged up a scientific paper published in 2017 by WIV scientists, including Shi Zhengli, the virologist leading the research into bat coronaviruses, working in collaboration with Peter Daszak of the US-based EcoHealth Alliance. Funding was shared between Chinese and US institutions, the latter including the US National Institutes of Health and USAID. The researchers report having conducted virus infectivity experiments where genetic material is combined from different varieties of SARS-related coronaviruses to form novel ‘chimeric’ versions. This formed part of their research into what mutations were needed to allow certain bat coronaviruses to bind to the human ACE2 receptor – a key step in the human infectivity of SARS-CoV‑2. . . .”
3.–Furthermore, the researchers used a type of genetic engineering that leaves no signature of human manipulation: ” . . . . The WIV scientists did this, Ebright points out, ‘using ‘seamless ligation’ procedures that leave no signatures of human manipulation’. This is noteworthy because it is a type of genetic engineering that Andersen and his team excluded from their investigation into whether SARS-CoV‑2 could have been engineered – and it was in use at the very lab that is the prime suspect for a lab escape. . . .”
4.–In addition, Ebright highlights the 2015 work done by Ralph Baric in collaboration with WIV’s Shi Zhengli–a project we have discussed at length in the past: ” . . . . A group of scientists from the University of North Carolina in the USA, with the WIV’s Shi Zhengli as a collaborator, published a study in 2015 describing similar experiments involving chimeric coronaviruses, which were also created using standard undetectable genetic engineering techniques. . . .”
5.–Ebright also cites work done in a bio-safety level 2 laboratory. : ” . . . . Ebright points out that the paper states, ‘All work with the infectious virus was performed under biosafety level 2 conditions’. This level is suitable for work involving agents of only ‘moderate potential hazard to personnel and the environment’. . . .But they are not at fault in failing to use BSL‑4 for this work, as SARS coronaviruses are not aerosol-transmitted. The work does, however, fall under biosafety level 3, which is for work involving microbes that can cause serious and potentially lethal disease via inhalation. . . .”
6.–Dr. Jonathan Latham underscored the reservations expressed by many concerning “gain-of-function” experiments on these kinds of coronaviruses: ” . . . . The bioscientist Dr Jonathan Latham criticised the kind of research on bat coronaviruses that has been taking place in Wuhan and the USA as ‘providing an evolutionary opportunity’ for such viruses ‘to jump into humans’. Latham, who has a doctorate in virology, argues that this kind of work is simply ‘providing opportunities for contamination events and leakages from labs, which happen on a routine basis’. . . .”
U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Disease–located at Ft. Detrick and closed by the CDC for safety violations in August, 2019.
Note, again, that the whole world was informed back in 2017 that dangerous research involving the creation of bat coronaviruses to infect humans was being carried out in China. Note again, that the research was funded in part by the US, including USAID–a frequent U.S. intelligence cut-out; the NIH–which has actively collaborated with both CIA and Pentagon. The WIV has also partnered with the USAMRIID.
Flash forward a couple of years and we have a nightmare virus that initially appeared to pop up nearby the WIV, with the Trump administration aggressively pushing the idea that it escaped from that lab.
In that context, we note the following:
1.–In 2017, China got approval for its first BSL‑4 lab in Wuhan, the first of several planned BSL‑4 labs. “A laboratory in Wuhan is on the cusp of being cleared to work with the world’s most dangerous pathogens. The move is part of a plan to build between five and seven biosafety level‑4 (BSL‑4) labs across the Chinese mainland by 2025, and has generated much excitement, as well as some concerns. . . . Some scientists outside China worry about pathogens escaping, and the addition of a biological dimension to geopolitical tensions between China and other nations. . . .”
2.–As will be seen below, the proliferation of BSL‑4 labs has sparked worries about “dual use” technology: ” . . . . The expansion of BSL-4-lab networks in the United States and Europe over the past 15 years — with more than a dozen now in operation or under construction in each region — also met with resistance, including questions about the need for so many facilities. . . .”
3.–The above-mentioned Richard Ebright notes that the proliferation of BSL‑4 labs will spur suspicion of “dual use” technology, in which ostensible medical research masks biological warfare research: ” . . . . But Ebright is not convinced of the need for more than one BSL‑4 lab in mainland China. He suspects that the expansion there is a reaction to the networks in the United States and Europe, which he says are also unwarranted. He adds that governments will assume that such excess capacity is for the potential development of bioweapons. ‘These facilities are inherently dual use,’ he says. . . .”
In the context of the above articles, note that the National Institutes of Health have also partnered with CIA and the Pentagon, as underscored by an article about a BSL‑4 lab at Boston University. Note that the U.S. and Europe have twelve BSL4 labs apiece, Taiwan has two, while China has one:
1.–As the article notes, as of 2007, the U.S. had “more than a dozen” BSL4 labs–China commissioned its first as of 2017. a tenfold increase in funding for BSL4 labs occurred because of the anthrax attacks of 2001. Those attacks might be seen as something of a provocation, spurring a dramatic increase in “dual use” biowarfare research, under the cover of “legitimate” medical/scientific research. In FTR #1128, we hypothesized about the milieu of Stephen Hatfill and apartheid-linked interests as possible authors of a vectoring of New York City with Sars COV2: ” . . . . Before the anthrax mailings of 2001, the United States had just two BSL4 labs—both within the razor-wire confines of government-owned campuses. Now, thanks to a tenfold increase in funding—from $200 million in 2001 to $2 billion in 2006—more than a dozen such facilities can be found at universities and private companies across the country. . . .”
2.–The Boston University lab exemplifies the Pentagon and CIA presence in BSL‑4 facility “dual use”: ” . . . . But some scientists say that argument obscures the true purpose of the current biodefense boom: to study potential biological weapons. ‘The university portrays it as an emerging infectious disease lab,’ says David Ozonoff, a Boston University epidemiologist whose office is right across the street from the new BSL4 facility. ‘But they are talking about studying things like small pox and inhalation anthrax, which pose no public health threat other than as bioweapons.’ . . . The original NIH mandate for the lab indicated that many groups—including the CIA and Department of Defense—would be allowed to use the lab for their own research, the nature of which BU might have little control over. . . .”
Note, also that:
1.–The WIV has partnered with the U.S. Army’s Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases, located at Ft. Detrick.
2.–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 . . . .”
Following the update on the WIV and BSL‑4 laboratories, we pivot to analysis of the elevation of remdesivir as the “go-to” treatment du jour for Covid-19. Of paramount importance is the remarkable timeline: The DSMB (data safety and monitoring board) ” . . . . the DSMB for the remdesivir study did not ever meet for an interim efficacy analysis, Lane said. All patients had been enrolled by April 20. The data for a DSMB meeting was cut off on April 22. The DSMB met and, on April 27, it made a recommendation to the NIAID. . . . That decision, Lane said, led the NIAID to conclude that patients who had been given placebo should be offered remdesivir, something that started happening after April 28. . . .”
As will be seen, it was on 4/29 that Joe Grogan resigned. (See below.)
When positive news on a NIAID study on the drug remdesivir were released–on 4/29–it drove broad gains in the stock market. In FTR #1131, we noted that disclosures concerning positive news about Moderna’s experimental Covid-19 vaccine also proved to be a similar driver of the stock market, as well as of Moderna’s stock.
Discussion of the hard details of several remdesivir trials begins with discussion of an NIAID trial that helped move the markets, as seen above. The trial was a modest success, indicating that recovery for recently infected patients was about 31% faster than for placebo. There was no significant statistical difference in mortality–the most important measure of effectiveness according to many experts.
” . . . . During an appearance alongside President Trump in the Oval Office, Anthony Fauci, the director of NIAID, part of the National Institutes of Health, said the data are a ‘very important proof of concept’ and that there was reason for optimism. He cautioned the data were not a ‘knockout.’ At the same time, the study achieved its primary goal, which was to improve the time to recovery, which was reduced by four days for patients on remdesivir. The preliminary data showed that the time to recovery was 11 days on remdesivir compared to 15 days for placebo, a 31% decrease. The mortality rate for the remdesivir group was 8%, compared to 11.6% for the placebo group; that mortality difference was not statistically significant. . . .”
Next we present a Stat News article on the internal deliberations behind the decisions to modify the NIAID study. Of particular significance is the DSMB deliberation. Note the timeline of the DSMB deliberation, combined with the announcement on 4/29 that drove the markets higher.
1.–The decision was made to cut it short before the question of remdesivir’s impact on mortality could be answered: ” . . . .The National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases has described to STAT in new detail how it made its fateful decision: to start giving remdesivir to patients who had been assigned to receive a placebo in the study, essentially limiting researchers’ ability to collect more data about whether the drug saves lives — something the study, called ACTT‑1, suggests but does not prove. In the trial, 8% of the participants given remdesivir died, compared with 11.6% of the placebo group, a difference that was not statistically significant. A top NIAID official said he had no regrets about the decision. ‘There certainly was unanimity within the institute that this was the right thing to do,’ said H. Clifford Lane, NIAID’s clinical director. . . .”
2.–In addition, patients scheduled to receive placebo received remdesivir, instead. ” . . . . Steven Nissen, a veteran trialist and cardiologist at the Cleveland Clinic, disagreed that giving placebo patients remdesivir was the right call. ‘I believe it is in society’s best interest to determine whether remdesivir can reduce mortality, and with the release of this information doing a placebo-controlled trial to determine if there is a mortality benefit will be very difficult,’ he said. ‘The question is: Was there a route, or is there a route, to determine if the drug can prevent death?’ The decision is ‘a lost opportunity,’ he said. . . .”
3.–Steven Nissen was not alone in his criticism of the NIAID’s decision. ” . . . .Peter Bach, the director of the Center for Health Policy and Outcomes at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, agreed with Nissen. ‘The core understanding of clinical research participation and clinical research conduct is we run the trial rigorously to provide the most accurate information about the right treatment,’ he said. And that answer, he argued, should ideally have determined whether remdesivir saves lives. The reason we have shut our whole society down, Bach said, is not to prevent Covid-19 patients from spending a few more days in the hospital. It is to prevent patients from dying. ‘Mortality is the right endpoint,’ he said. . . .”
4.–Not only was the administration of remdesivir instead of placebo prioritized, but the NIAID study itself was attenuated! ” . . . . But the change in the study’s main goal also changed the way the study would be analyzed. Now, the NIAID decided, the analysis would be calculated when 400 patients out of the 1,063 patients the study enrolled had recovered. If remdesivir turned out to be much more effective than expected, ‘interim’ analyses would be conducted at a third and two-thirds that number.The job of reviewing these analyses would fall to a committee of outside experts on what is known as an independent data and safety monitoring board, or DSMB. . . .”
5.–The performance of the DSMB for the remdesivir study is noteworthy: ” . . . . But the DSMB for the remdesivir study did not ever meet for an interim efficacy analysis, Lane said. All patients had been enrolled by April 20. The data for a DSMB meeting was cut off on April 22. The DSMB met and, on April 27, it made a recommendation to the NIAID. . . .”
6.–The DSMB meeting on 4/27 determined the switch from placebo to remdesivir. Of paramount importance is the fact that this was JUST BEFORE the 4/29 announcement that drove the markets higher and the same day on which key Trump aide–and former Gilead Sciences lobbyist Joe Grogan resigned! ” . . . . . That decision, Lane said, led the NIAID to conclude that patients who had been given placebo should be offered remdesivir, something that started happening after April 28. . . .”
7.–Dr. Ethan Weiss gave an accurate evaluation of the NIAID study: ” . . . . ‘We’ve squandered an incredible opportunity to do good science,’ [Dr. Ethan] Weiss said. ‘If we could ever go back and do something all over, it would be the infrastructure to actually learn something. Because we’re not learning enough.’ . . . .”
Next, we analyze a STAT News excerpt that goes into more of the concerns about the Gilead study design.
The Gilead study was designed without any control group, so the question of how much remdesivir actually helps sick patients (or doesn’t help) can’t be definitively answered by that study.
The article also gives Gilead’s explanation for why they left out a control group: due to the limited supplies of the drug the company decided to prioritize on producing more of the drug itself rather than a placebo control. It’s an explanation that only makes sense if producing placebo doses was somehow a significant technical challenge, which seems dubious.
Due to a lack of a control group, the study instead focuses on answering the question of whether or not the recovery times for patients differs between groups receiving a 10-day course of the drug vs a 5‑day course. The patients were severely ill but not on ventilators when enrolled in the study (so the patients that need the drug most weren’t tested). The preliminary results released Wednesday suggest there is no difference between the recovery times for the two groups.
1.–The Gilead study lacked a control group: ” . . . . But outside experts in clinical trial design worry that the results, instead of leading to a clear picture of whether the medicine is effective, will instead muddy the waters further. The main concern, they say, stems from the fact that the Gilead trial expected to read out this week, which was conducted among patients with severe disease, lacks a control group — that is, patients who are randomly assigned to receive the best treatment available, but not remdesivir. As designed, the only randomization is the duration of treatment: either five days or 10 days of drug. Without a true control group of patients, many experts say, it will be difficult to determine whether remdesivir is effective. . . .”
2.–The above-mentioned Steven Nissen summed up the usefulness of the Gilead trial. ” . . . . ‘The overall study itself has little or no scientific value since all patients are receiving the drug,’ said Steven Nissen, the chief academic officer at the Cleveland Clinic and lead investigator of many trials for heart drugs that have been approved by the Food and Drug Administration. ‘The study, as designed, is essentially useless and cannot be used by the FDA for consideration of remdesivir for approval to treat coronavirus,’ Nissen said. . . .”
3.–Gilead’s spokesperson alleged that the company had a limited supply of placebo and remdesivir. ” . . . . ‘In the early stages of the pandemic, we not only had a limited supply of remdesivir but also a limited supply of the matched placebo required for placebo-controlled studies,’ said Amy Flood, a Gilead spokesperson. ‘We chose to prioritize manufacturing active drug over placebo, and we provided our supply of placebo to China and NIAID for their studies of remdesivir.’ . . .”
5.–A number of critics shared Steven Nissen’s opinion about the scientific value of the study. ” . . . . Critics point to Gilead’s decision to compare two groups given remdesivir for either five days or 10 days. The problem with this strategy, they say, is that an ineffective drug that did nothing and a very effective drug that consistently helped patients overcome the virus would look the same in such a study. Only if the 10-day course were more effective, or if it was worse because of side effects, would the study have any clear result. . . .”
6.–Nissen was more optimistic about a second forthcoming Gilead trial. Sloan Kettering’s Peter Bach did not share that optimism. ” . . . .Yet another trial in less sick patients, also run by Gilead, does have a control group and may give a clearer answer. Nissen sees ‘a reasonable study design.’ But Bach was more critical, saying that even though that study has a control group, the lack of a placebo means the study might not be trustworthy. That’s because its main goal, time to improvement of symptoms, could be affected by the perceptions of clinicians and the patients themselves. Bach said the hospitals conducting the study ‘are easily capable of wrapping syringes in brown paper and blinding the whole thing. I don’t understand why you would run a trial like this.’ . . . .”
Although it was cut short due to the waning of the pandemic in China, a WHO-leaked study was not encouraging with regard to remdesivir’s efficacy as a treatment for Covid-19.
1.–The Chinese study was a ramdomized controlled trial: ” . . . . Encouraging data from patients in that study at the University of Chicago were described by researchers at a virtual town hall and obtained by STAT last week. However, unlike those data, these new results are from a randomized controlled trial, the medical gold standard. . . .”
2.–The Chinese study found that remdesivir was of no value in preventing Covid-19 deaths. As noted above, the effect of the drug on mortality was the main consideration. Our society has not been shut down to afford people shorter stays in the hospital, but to prevent death. ” . . . . According to the summary of the China study, remdesivir was ‘not associated with a difference in time to clinical improvement’ compared to a standard of care control. After one month, it appeared 13.9% of the remdesivir patients had died compared to 12.8% of patients in the control arm. The difference was not statistically significant. . . .”
3.–The Chinese study produced a grim assessment of remdesivir: ” . . . . ‘In this study of hospitalized adult patients with severe COVID-19 that was terminated prematurely, remdesivir was not associated with clinical or virological benefits,’ the summary states. The study was terminated prematurely because it was difficult to enroll patients in China, where the number of Covid-19 cases was decreasing. An outside researcher said that the results mean that any benefit from remdesivir is likely to be small. ‘If there is no benefit to remdesivir in a study this size, this suggests that the overall benefit of remdesivir in this population with advanced infection is likely to be small in the larger Gilead trial,’ said Andrew Hill, senior visiting research fellow at Liverpool University. . . .”
After discussing a number of problems that Gilead Sciences may encounter in the production of significant quantities of remdesivir to be effective, the broadcast concludes with discussion of the inappropriately-named “Scientists to Stop Covid-19.”
The remarkable handling of the NIAID study, the timing of the announcement of the altogether limited success of the attenuated trial, and the rise in equities as a result of the announcement may be best understood in the context of the role played in Trump pandemic decision-making by an elite group of billionaires and scientists–including Peter Thiel and convicted felon Michael Milken (the “junk bond king”).
1.–” . . . . Calling themselves ‘Scientists to Stop COVID-19,’ the collection of top researchers, billionaires and industry captains will act as an ‘ad hoc review board’ for the torrent of coronavirus research, ‘weeding out’ flawed data before it reaches policymakers, the Wall Street Journal reported on Monday. They are also acting as a go-between for pharmaceutical companies seeking to build a communication channel with Trump administration officials. The group . . . . has advised Nick Ayers, an aide to Vice President Mike Pence, as well as other agency heads, in the past month. Pence is heading up the White House coronavirus task force. . . .”
2.–” . . . The brainy bunch is led by Thomas Cahill, a 33-year-old doctor who became a venture capitalist . . . . Cahill’s clout comes from building connections through his investment firm, Newpath Partners, with Silicon Valley’s Peter Thiel, the founder of PayPal, and billionaire businessmen Jim Palotta and Michael Milken. . . .”
Note that Thiel played a dominant role in bankrolling Newpath Partners, and the other financial angel who elevated Cahill–Brian Sheth–introduced him to Tommy Hicks, Jr., the co-chairman of the RNC. In FTR #‘s 1111 and 1112, we looked at Hicks’ networking with Steve Bannon associate J. Kyle Bass, as well as his role in the inter-agency networks driving the anti-China effort.
1.–” . . . . At the helm of the effort: The 33-year-old and very-much-under-the-radar venture capitalist Tom Cahill, who leads life sciences-focused Newpath Partners. Cahill completed his M.D. and PhD at Duke University a mere two years ago before landing at blue-chip investment firm Raptor Group through a friend. He went on to found Newpath with some $125 million after impressing well-connected names like venture capitalist Peter Thiel and Vista Equity Partners co-founder Brian Sheth. . . . It was through Sheth, for example, that Scientists to Stop Covid-19 connected with the co-chairman of the Republican National Committee, Thomas Hicks Jr. . . .”
The federal government’s extreme focus on remdesivir has been shaped, in large measure, by the influence of “Scientists to Stop COVID-19”:
1.–“Scientists to Stop Covid-19” is shepherding remdesivir: ” . . . . Scientists to Stop COVID-19 recommends that in this phase, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) should work to coordinate with Gilead pharmaceuticals to focus on expediting the results of clinical trials of remdesivir, a drug identified as a potential treatment for COVID-19. The group also recommends administering doses of the drug to patients in an early stage of infection, and notes remdesivir will essentially be a placeholder until a more effective treatment is produced.
2.–The group is doing so by attenuating the regulatory process for coronavirus drugs: “Government entities and agencies appear to adhere to the recommendations outlined by the group, with the Journal reporting that the FDA and the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) have implemented some of the suggestions, namely relaxing drug manufacturer regulations and requirements for potential coronavirus treatment drugs. . . .”
We conclude with a piece about the announcement of Grogan’s departure.
” . . . . Grogan has served as the director of the White House Domestic Policy Council since February 2019, overseeing a broad array of policy issues including health care and regulation. . . . Grogan was one of the original members of the White House coronavirus task force launched in late January. . . . Grogan worked as a lobbyist for drug company Gilead Sciences before joining the Trump administration. . . .”
The departure was announced in the Wall Street Journal on the morning of Wednesday, April 29, the same day we got our first public reports of the NIAID clinical trial of remdesivir that was positive enough to show it shortened the time to recovery and the same day the FDA granted remdesivir emergency use status.
Note, again, the timing of the DSMB’s actions, as well as the imfluence of “Scientists to Stop Covid-19.”
Supplement to “The Eugenic Virus”
In FTR #1127, we highlighted one of the multi-dimensional facets of the Covid-19 phenomenon–how the pandemic is fulfilling a eugenic agenda across many social strata and around the globe. Former German finance minister Wolfgang Schauble–the “Austerity Czar” of the EU–has enunciated the eugenic philosophy of Covid-19 policy. Schauble pursued a Social Darwinian policy following the 2008 financial collapse: ” . . . During the international financial crisis, when Schäuble was Germany’s Minister of Finance, his EU counterparts trembled: Schäuble wanted to force them to adapt harsh austerity measures. Because the foreseeable social consequences would cost lives, Schäuble’s tactics seemed to scare Europe with ‘traumatic effects’ and gave it a lesson in German economic ethics: Teutonic brutality and at all costs. ‘Terrifying,’ was the assessment the US Treasury Secretary made following his conversation with Schäuble. Paris and Madrid were also apprehensive; Athens called Schäuble an ‘arsonist,’ on a rampage through Europe. . . .” Schauble is now one of the most important figures in German government. He has expressed socio-economic policy with regard to treating those with Covid-19: ” . . . . Schäuble has elaborated in 2020 on what he had already made clear in 2012, during the international financial crisis: ‘If I hear that everything else must take a back seat to the preservation of life, I must say that this, in such unequivocalness, is not right.’ Protection of human life does not have an ‘absolute priority in our Basic Law.’ Death is coming sooner or later anyway. ‘We are all going to die.’ . . . . Schäuble’s statements are exemplary and are of ‘national significance’ declared the German Ethics Council. The council is government financed and prioritizes ‘economic rights.’ They should ‘not be unconditionally subordinated’ to the protection of human life. There is a sort of rivalry of values. If the value of life would have priority, ‘freedom’ would suffer, according to the unanimous judgment of the ethics department of the German Economic Institute (IW). . . . In fact, the government’s obligation to the constitution’s highest value — the protection of life — must be relativized, just as Schäuble is doing, confirm the majority of Germany’s government leaders. . . . a fellow Green municipal politician speaks in plain operational terms; ‘Let me tell you quite bluntly: We may be saving people in Germany, who, because of their age or serious previous medical conditions, may, be dead anyway in a half a year.’ . . . .”
FTR #1127 Bio-Psy-Op Apocalypse Now, Part 3–The Eugenic Virus
This program examines one of the multi-layered effects of the Covid-19 “bio-psy-op.” We stress that the demarcation of these layers is for cognitive purposes–to enhance understanding. The layers are part of a unified whole.
In this broadcast, we focus on the eugenic effects of the virus. We have covered eugenics in many broadcasts over the decades. A few of those: FTR #‘s 1075, 1029, 908, 909, 32, 1013. FTR #1013 is of particular importance, as Trump has used the Covid-19 outbreak to halt immigration into the U.S.
Before delving into the eugenics manifestations of the Covid-19 outbreak, we highlight some of the recent developments in the pandemic:
1.–A recent report, based on random testing, indicated that up to one fifth of New Yorkers may have been infected by the virus. If accurate, this is an important piece of information, indicating that, from an epidemiological standpoint, the virus did NOT originate in China.
2.–We strongly suspect that New York was deliberately vectored by fascist elements associated with the Trump administration at one level, and the Underground Reich at another. This methodology would not be unprecedented: “. . . . In the summer of 1966, Special Operations men walked into three New York City subway stations and tossed lightbulbs filled with Bacillus subtilis, a benign bacteria, onto the tracks. The subway trains pushed the germs through the entire system and theoretically killed over a million passengers. . . .”
3.–We note increased finger-pointing at, scapegoating of, China for the pandemic, on the part of Britain, Germany and France, in addition to Trump and elements of the intelligence community: ” . . . .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. . . . 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. . . 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.’ . . . . ”
4.–We also note a disturbing aspect of the symptoms of a cross-vectored, genetically-engineered virus that is the precipitating event for the Nazi takover in the US in Serpent’s Walk: ” . . . . Pacov‑1 produces only a mild, flu-like infection that disappears within a day or two. Public health authorities would overlook it, never consider it a serious epidemic, and even if they did they’d have to look carefully to isolate it. Once a victim is over the ‘flu,’ Pacov‑1 becomes dormant and almost undetectable. A month or two later, you send in the second stage: Pacov‑2 is also a virus, just as contagious as the first, and just as harmless by itself. It reacts with Pacov‑1 to produce a powerful coagulant. . . . you die within three minutes. . . .”
5.–The coagulating pathology produced by Pacov‑1 and Pacov‑2 in Serpent’s Walk is unnervingly similar to one of the many symptoms of Covid-19 infection: ” . . . . Doctors in hot spots across the globe have begun to report an unexpected prevalence of blood clotting among COVID cases, in what could pose a perfect storm of potentially fatal risk factors. . . . . . . It’s growing so common with severe COVID cases, doctors are recognizing it as a new pattern of clotting called COVID-19-associated coagulopathy, or CAC, which is notably associated with high inflammatory markers in the blood, like D‑dimer and fibrinogen. . . . ‘In the beginning of the outbreak, we started only giving them medicine to prevent clots. We saw that it wasn’t enough,’ Dr. Cristina Abad, an anesthesiologist at Hospital Clínicos San Carlos in Madrid, told ABC News. ‘They started having pulmonary embolisms, so we started [full] anticoagulation on everyone.’ . . .”
Eugenics, in its practice, might best be described as a pseudo-scientific doctrine attributing features of racial, ethnic and socio-economic prejudice to empirical scientific fact. ” . . . Eugenics is a set of beliefs and practices that aim to improve the genetic quality of a human population,[4][5] typically by excluding people and groups judged to be inferior, and promoting those judged to be superior. . . . Many countries enacted[49] various eugenics policies, including: genetic screenings, birth control, promoting differential birth rates, marriage restrictions, segregation (both racial segregation and sequestering the mentally ill), compulsory sterilization, forced abortions or forced pregnancies, ultimately culminating in genocide. . . .”
Discussion of the eugenic aspects of the Covid-19 phenomenon include:
1.–De facto rationing of health care during the pandemic in such a way as to potentially lethally discriminate against those with disabilities.
2.–Infection and death rates disproportionately high among populations enduring the economic and physiological affliction deriving from prejudice and social darwinistic doctrine: African-Americans, people who work in low-paying jobs that require close human contact and living in conditions that do not permit social distancing.
3.–The economically degrading effect of GOP fiscal policy with regard to public transportation during the pandemic.
4.–New York City has been stigmatized during the pandemic, as has New York State. With large Jewish, African-American and Latino populations, a tradition of liberal politics, generous municipal union contracts, a free city university program, New York has long been viewed as “Jew York City” by fascist elements. Governors, as well as Trump himself, have proposed quarantining New York City and New Jersey. This further underscores the above speculation concerning the rate of infection in New York City. ” . . . . As President Trump put it in his short-lived bid to ‘QUARANTINE’ New York, New Jersey and Connecticut, ‘Some people would like to see New York quarantined because it’s a hot spot’ — the implication being that if New Yorkers could only be kept where they are, with checkpoints and guards if need be, Covid-19 could be stopped from spreading elsewhere in the country. Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida set up checkpoints to stop cars with New York or Louisiana license plates, so that state troopers can warn drivers to self-quarantine or face 60 days in jail — even as he hesitated to put any social distancing in place or close the beaches for spring break. Instead of admitting the danger of community spread in Florida, the governor framed the problem as one of outsiders bringing germs in. Governors in Maryland and other states warned anyone arriving from the New York City area to isolate themselves. On Twitter, Covid-19 has taken on a new sobriquet: the ‘Cuomovirus.’ . . .”
Critical observations by Wolfgang Schauble, the German/EU “Austerity Czar” who wrought so much suffering following the 2008 economic collapse has clearly enunciated the functional and philosophical essence of “corporatist” and eugenic doctrine.
This, too, is reflected in the Trumpian “LIBERATE MICHIGAN etc.”
Some background on Schauble’s outlook: ” . . . . Hardly a German government representative is more notorious than Wolfgang Schäuble — worldwide. During the international financial crisis, when Schäuble was Germany’s Minister of Finance, his EU counterparts trembled: Schäuble wanted to force them to adapt harsh austerity measures. Because the foreseeable social consequences would cost lives, Schäuble’s tactics seemed to scare Europe with ‘traumatic effects’ and gave it a lesson in German economic ethics: Teutonic brutality and at all costs. ‘Terrifying,’ was the assessment the US Treasury Secretary made following his conversation with Schäuble. Paris and Madrid were also apprehensive; Athens called Schäuble an ‘arsonist,’ on a rampage through Europe. Schäuble has since climbed higher on the government ladder. Schäuble now ranks second, after the President, in the Federal Republic of Germany’s protocolary system. . . . .”
After the onset of the Covid-19 pandemic, he has redoubled his “Teutonic brutality:” ” . . . . In the midst of the Corona crisis, Schäuble initiated an interview, considered to be an unofficial guideline for the German state’s life and death decisions. Its tenor deserves attention, even beyond Germany’s borders.
“Should people have to die, because they are deprived of state resources, essential for the economic cycle, such as currently during the Corona crisis? Does the protection of human life have absolute priority in state policy? In the interview, Schäuble has elaborated in 2020 on what he had already made clear in 2012, during the international financial crisis: ‘If I hear that everything else must take a back seat to the preservation of life, I must say that this, in such unequivocalness, is not right.’ Protection of human life does not have an ‘absolute priority in our Basic Law.’ Death is coming sooner or later anyway. ‘We are all going to die.’ (April 26, 2020)
“Schäuble’s statements are exemplary and are of ‘national significance’ declared the German Ethics Council. The council is government financed and prioritizes ‘economic rights.’ They should ‘not be unconditionally subordinated’ to the protection of human life. There is a sort of rivalry of values. If the value of life would have priority, ‘freedom’ would suffer, according to the unanimous judgment of the ethics department of the German Economic Institute (IW). From the standpoint of German constitutional law, according to a former judge on the constitutional court, ‘the state’s efficiency’ would encounter its limits, if life were given top priority, where ‘everything else must lag arbitrarily far behind.’
“In fact, the government’s obligation to the constitution’s highest value — the protection of life — must be relativized, just as Schäuble is doing, confirm the majority of Germany’s government leaders. Prominent voices from the parliamentary opposition parties are also in agreement that the protection of human life, as the primary legitimized duty of the state is a ‘question of assessment.’ From this the FDP draws the conclusion: ‘therefore, please reopen the businesses.’ ‘Enable production.’ In harmony with Germany’s export economy lobbyists and the President of the Bundestag, the chair of the Greens is also one of the relativizers. He finds himself in an alleged ‘dilemma,’ when he thinks of the protection of life during the Corona crisis, while a fellow Green municipal politician speaks in plain operational terms; ‘Let me tell you quite bluntly: We may be saving people in Germany, who, because of their age or serious previous medical conditions, may, be dead anyway in a half a year.’ . . . .”
The broadcast concludes with an overview of New York Times headlines, illustrating various aspects of the socio-economic fallout of the Covid-19 outbreak, victimizing lower income people, reducing income and earning ability, educational opportunity, adversely affecting access to food and auguring catastrophe for Third World populations:
1.–“Colleges Running Out of Cash Worry Students Will Vanish, Too” by Anemona Hartocollis; The New York Times; 4/16/2020; pp. A1-A-15 [Western Edition].
2.–“Outbreak Strains States’ Finances” by Mary Williams Walsh; The New York Times; 4/16/2020; pp. B1-B6 [Western Edition].
3.–” ‘This Is Going to Kill Small-Town America’ ” by David Gelles: The New York Times; 4/16/2020; pp. B1-B5 [Western Edition].
4.–The New York Times [Western Edition] headline for 4/16/2020 said it all, as far as the fortunes of retail outlets. “Sales at U.S. Stores Hit ‘Catastrophic’ Depths” by Sapna Maheshwari and Ben Casselman; The New York Times; 4/16/2020.
5.– “Evidence of Virus Effect on Economy Grows More Ominous” [AP]; The New York Times; 4/15/2020.
6.– “135 Million Face Starvation. That Could Double” by Abdi Latif Dahir; The New York Times; 4/23/2020; pp. A1-A6; [Western Edition].
7.– “This Pandemic Is Bringing Another” by Nicholas Kristof; The New York Times; 4/23/2020; p. A23 [Op-ed–Western Edition].
8.– “Covid-19 Threatens Global Safety Net” Editorial; The New York Times; 4/23/2020; p. A22 [Western Edition].
9.–“How Government ‘Failed the Elderly’ ” Letter to the Editor; The New York Times; 4/23/2020; p. A22 [Western Edition].
10.– “A Limit on Trump’s Immigration Power” by Jennifer M. Chacon and Erwin Chermerinsky; The New York Times; 4/23/2020; p. A23 [op-ed–Western Edition].
11.– ” ‘The Food Supply Chain Is Breaking.’ Tyson Foods Warns of Meat Shortage as Plants Close Due to Covid-19” by Sanya Mansoor [Time] Yahoo News; 4/26/2020.
As noted in the program, the eugenic aspects of the pandemic and effects on the economically and socially disadvantaged inside and outside of the U.S. are inextricable with the weal-concentrating aspects of the pandemic. This will be the focus of our next program:
1.–“Banks Steered Richest Clients To Federal Aid” by Emily Flitter and Stacy Cowley; The New York Times; 4/23/2020; pp. A1-A14 [Western Edition].
2.–“Millions In Relief For Backer Of Resorts” by Jeanna Smialek, Jim Tankersley and Alan Rappeport; The New York Times; 4/23/2020; pp. B1-B5 [Western Edition].
Preview of “Walkin’ the Coronavirus”
In Serpent’s Walk–which we have discussed for decades–the SS go underground (which they did), buy into the opinion-forming media (which they did) and, infiltrate the military (which they have done), and, after a terrorist attack by genetically-engineered viruses decimates large parts of the United States, martial law is declared and the Nazis take over. NB: we do not know if “cross-vectoring” is occurring with the Covid-19 virus, however that is something to be contemplated and researched. From “Serpent’s Walk: ” . . . . ‘Pacov consists of two separate re-workings of two DNA chains of existing viruses. It’s a piggy-back weapon, a two-stage operation. You send in the first stage. The vectors . . . agents of transmission . . . for Pacov‑1 are extensive. It travels through the air, the water, or directly from person-to-person and is highly contagious. It spreads for hundreds of miles, if conditions are optimal. Pacov‑1 produces only a mild, flu-like infection that disappears within a day or two. Public health authorities would overlook it, never consider it a serious epidemic, and even if they did they’d have to look carefully to isolate it. Once a victim is over the ‘flu,’ Pacov‑1 becomes dormant and almost undetectable. A month or two later, you send in the second stage: Pacov‑2 is also a virus, just as contagious as the first, and just as harmless by itself. It reacts with Pacov‑1 to produce a powerful coagulant. . . . you die within three minutes. No warning, no vaccine, no cure. Those not exposed to both stages remain unharmed. . . . Pacov‑2 goes inert, like Pacov‑1 within a week or two. Then you get your victim’s country, all his property, in undamaged condition. . . . and a lot of corpses to bury.’ . . . .” We note that, although a “coagulant” is not causing the phenomenon, blood clots are indeed one of the many symptoms of the Covid-19: ” . . . . Doctors in hot spots across the globe have begun to report an unexpected prevalence of blood clotting among COVID cases, in what could pose a perfect storm of potentially fatal risk factors. . . . It’s growing so common with severe COVID cases, doctors are recognizing it as a new pattern of clotting called COVID-19-associated coagulopathy, or CAC, which is notably associated with high inflammatory markers in the blood, like D‑dimer and fibrinogen. . . . ‘In the beginning of the outbreak, we started only giving them medicine to prevent clots. We saw that it wasn’t enough,’ Dr. Cristina Abad, an anesthesiologist at Hospital Clínicos San Carlos in Madrid, told ABC News. ‘They started having pulmonary embolisms, so we started [full] anticoagulation on everyone.’ . . .”
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 #1126 Bio-Psy-Op Apocalypse Now, Part 2: The Democracy-Killing Virus
We begin a series of programs highlighting various aspects of the “three-dimensional chess” aspect of the Covid-19 “bio-psy-op” we feel is underway. Actually six or seven dimensional chess might be a better way of expressing this analytical concept.
It is of paramount importance for listeners/readers to understand that the conceptual breakdown is for cognitive clarity only. The bio-psy-op” is multi-dimensional in its entirety and must be understood to be a type of “fascist/totalitarian lasagna” with many layers to be consumed.
In this program, we present ways in which the Covid-19 outbreak is subverting democracy, both inside and outside of the United States.
Although he has only flirted with exercising them, to date, Trump does indeed have some emergency powers that can be invoked to further his agenda” ” . . . . The most notable aspect of presidential emergency action documents might be their extreme secrecy. It’s not uncommon for the government to classify its plans or activities in the area of national security. . . . By contrast, we know of no evidence that the executive branch has ever consulted with Congress — or even informed any of its members — regarding the contents of presidential emergency action documents. . . . That is a dangerous state of affairs. The coronavirus pandemic is fast becoming the most serious crisis to face this country since World War II. And it is happening under the watch of a president who has claimed that Article II of the Constitution gives him ‘the right to do whatever I want.’ It is not far-fetched to think that we might see the deployment of these documents for the first time and that they will assert presidential powers beyond those granted by Congress or recognized by the courts as flowing from the Constitution. . . .”
Next, we add that the Bio-Psy-Op Apocalypse is spawning totalitarian manifestations–not surprisingly–at the Department of Justice headed by “ex” CIA officer William Barr. ” . . . . The request raised eyebrows because of its potential implications for habeas corpus — the constitutional right to appear before a judge after arrest and seek release. ‘Not only would it be a violation of that, but it says ‘affecting pre-arrest,’” said Norman L. Reimer, executive director of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers. ‘So that means you could be arrested and never brought before a judge until they decide that the emergency or the civil disobedience is over. I find it absolutely terrifying. Especially in a time of emergency, we should be very careful about granting new powers to the government.’ . . .”
It will come as no surprise to veteran listeners, the Pentagon has contingency plans for varying degrees of governmental and/or civic disability. ” . . . . But Coronavirus is also new territory, where the military itself is vulnerable and the disaster scenarios being contemplated — including the possibility of widespread domestic violence as a result of food shortages — are forcing planners to look at what are called ‘extraordinary circumstances’. Above-Top Secret contingency plans already exist for what the military is supposed to do if all the Constitutional successors are incapacitated. Standby orders were issued more than three weeks ago to ready these plans, not just to protect Washington but also to prepare for the possibility of some form of martial law. . . .”
The military’s contingency plans have been partially activated: ” . . . . While being hit with coronavirus at rates equivalent to the civilian population, the U.S. military has activated its ‘defense support of civil authorities’ apparatus, establishing liaisons in all 50 states, activating units and command posts, and moving forces to provide medical, transportation, logistics, and communications support in New York and Washington states. Lt. Gen. Laura Richardson, the command of Army North (ARNORTH), has requested and received approval for the deployment of ground units in response to the now declared national emergency. . . .”
We note, in passing, that, although not in effect at this point, discussion of “martial law” are far more than just social media fodder, to coin a term. ” . . . . Because of so many rumors flying in social media, the Pentagon established a ‘rumor control’ website to beat down stories of military-imposed quarantines and even martial law. And it said it was going to limit details of both the specific numbers of coronavirus cases and operational details. . . .”
Martial law discussion has been spurred by, among other things, Trump’s ruminations about what he can and will do: “. . . . Earlier Saturday, Mr. Trump said that he is considering declaring an ‘enforceable’ quarantine affecting some residents of the New York metropolitan area, possibly including New Jersey and Connecticut. He called the region a ‘hot spot’ of the coronavirus outbreak sweeping the country. . . . Mr. Trump reiterated in his remarks before the send off of the USNS Comfort that he was considering a quarantine of the area. The Comfort is a naval hospital boat which is carrying over 1,000 beds and 1,200 medical personnel to New York City. . . . Using active duty troops to enforce a quarantine would require the president to suspend the Posse Comitatus Act, which forbids the use of the armed services for law enforcement. . . .”
Trump has plenty of company: ” . . . . In Hungary, a new law has granted Prime Minister Viktor Orban the power to sidestep Parliament and suspend existing laws. Mr. Orban, who declared a state of emergency this month, now has the sole power to end the emergency. Parliament, where two-thirds of the seats are controlled by his party, approved the legislation on Monday. . . .‘The draft law is alarming,’ said Daniel Karsai, a lawyer in Budapest who said the new legislation had created ‘a big fear’ among Hungarians that ‘the Orban administration will be a real dictatorship.’ . . .”
Orban’s Hungary has been joined by, among others, the long-standing British democracy: ” . . . . some of the provisions . . . . will give the government unchecked control. The legislation gives sweeping powers to border agents and the police, which could lead to indefinite detention and reinforce ‘hostile environment’ policies against immigrants, critics said. ‘Each clause could have had months of debate, and instead it’s all being debated in a few days,’ said Adam Wagner, a lawyer who advises a parliamentary committee on human rights. . . . ‘These are eye-watering powers that would have not been really imaginable in peacetime in this country before,’ said Silkie Carlo, the director of Big Brother Watch, a rights group. She called the measures ‘draconian.’ . . . .”
Privacy is being dramatically curtailed under cover of combatting the virus: ” . . . . As Thomas Gaulkin of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists noted earlier this month, many Americans— often fierce in their objections to perceived government overreach into their lives—might normally object to dystopian images of flying robots policing lockdowns. But these, of course, are not normal times. ‘If drones do begin to hover over U.S. streets to help control this pandemic,’ Gaulkin wrote, ‘it will be yet another visible reminder that we’ve entered a public health Twilight Zone where Americans have no better option than to embrace what was once only imaginable, and never real.’ . . . ”
The alpha predator of the electronic surveillance landscape is Peter Thiel’s Palantir. They have landed two key government contracts in connection with the Covid-19 outbreak:” . . . . Palantir, the $20 billion-valued Palo Alto tech company backed by Facebook-funder Peter Thiel, has been handed a $17.3 million contract with one of the leading health bodies leading the charge against COVID-19. It’s the biggest contract handed to a Silicon Valley company to assist America’s COVID-19 response, according to Forbes’ review of public contracts, and comes as other Californian giants like Apple and Google try to figure out how best to help governments fight the deadly virus. . . . The money, from the federal government’s COVID-19 relief fund, is for Palantir Gotham licenses, according to a contract record reviewed by Forbes. That technology is designed to draw in data from myriad sources and, regardless of what form or size, turn the information into a coherent whole. The ‘platform’ is customized for each client, so it meets with their mission needs, according to Palantir. . . . Palantir Gotham is slightly different to Foundry, a newer product that’s aimed more at general users rather than data science whizzes, with more automation than Gotham. As Forbes previously reported, Foundry is being used by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to ingest information from all manner of hospitals across America to see where best to provide more or less resource. . . . Palantir is now working with at least 12 governments on their responses to coronavirus, according to two sources with knowledge of its COVID-19 work. That includes the U.K.’s National Health Service, which is using Foundry for similar purposes as the CDC. . . .”
Exemplifying the multi-dimensional chess scenario in connection with the “bio-psy-op” is the GOP’s plan to use the Covid-19 outbreak to scapegoat China and tar the Democrats and Joe Biden with the same brush. Of particular note in this regard is the Steve Bannon‑J. Kyle Bass-Tommy Hicks, Jr. triumvirate discussed in–among other programs–FTR #‘s 1111 and 1112.
At the epicenter of the anti-China effort, Bannon is networked with Bass, who is asymmetrically invested with regard to the Hong Kong and Chinese economies. Hicks, in turn, is a co-investor with Bass, co-chairman of the RNC, and one of the prime movers of the interagency governmental networks involved in the anti-China destabilization operation. This networked relationship affords investors like Bass and Hicks the ultimate position from which to profit from “insider” information.
The synthesis of covert operations and electoral politics reminds us of the 1952 election, in which Arthur Bliss Lane occupied a key position in the Crusade For Freedom, as well as the GOP. (We discussed this in AFA #37, and utilized information from, among other sources, Blowback by Christopher Simpson.
Exemplary, as well, of the bio-psy-op as synthesis of covert operation and political crusading is the GOP’s cynical manipulation of emergency appropriations to achieve their longstanding objective of crippling state and local governments, as well as driving the Postal Service into bankruptcy. Privatizing postal service has been a right-wing/GOP objective for a long time. ” . . . . Everyone, and I mean everyone, knows what is really happening: McConnell is trying to get more money for businesses while continuing to shortchange state and local governments. After all, “starve the beast” — forcing governments to cut services by depriving them of resources — has been Republican strategy for decades. This is just more of the same. . . . Oh, and Trump personally has ruled out aid for the Postal Service. . . .”
FTR #1125 Three-Dimensional Chess and the Covid-19 Outbreak: A Structural Overview
“A nation of sheep will beget a government of wolves.”–Edward R. Murrow
This program is an overview of a number of overlapping considerations in the Covid-19 outbreak, which Mr. Emory calls a “Bio-Psy-Op.” These overlapping areas will be presented in a series of programs: FTR #1126 Bio-Psy-Op Apocalypse Now, Part 2: The Democracy-Killing Virus; FTR #1127 Bio-Psy-Op Apocalypse Now, Part 3: The Eugenic Virus; FTR #1128 Bio-Psy-Op Apocalypse Now, Part 4: The Wealth-Concentrating Virus; FTR #1129 Bio-Psy-Op Apocalypse Now, Part 5: Walkin’ the Coronavirus; FTR #1130 Bio-Psy-Op Apocalypse Now, Part 6: Context–The China-Killing Virus; FTR #1131 Bio-Psy-Op Apocalypse, Part 7: Pinchback’s Perspective and FTR #1132 Bio-Psy-Op Apocalypse Now, Part 8: The Nazi Virus.
Before discussing the Covid-19 “op,” per se, we memorialized the brilliant Kevin Coogan, author of “Dreamer of the Day: Francis Parker Yockey and the Postwar Fascist International,” as well as numerous articles. Kevin passed away on 2/27/2020 in New York City. We do not know the cause. Kevin was a brilliant writer and analyst and will be sorely missed.
In For The Record #233, we examined Kevin’s analysis of “The Order,” a fascist/mystical concept that was formulated, in part by fascist mystic Julius Evola. Evola was a dominant philosophical and ideological influence on Steve Bannon, at the epicenter of the anti-China effort. (Mr. Emory misspoke himself–the program is FTR #233, not #312.)
The concept of three-dimensional chess derives from the old “Star Trek” television series, in which the officers played a variation of chess that involved playing on three different levels. Understanding the “Bio-Psy-Op” similarly involves thinking and awareness on at least three levels.
An op-ed column in The New York Times by Bret Stephens goes to the essence of this “bio-psy-op.” ” . . . . The only certainty is that, in the midst of a crisis, politicians are rarely penalized for predicting the worst possible outcome. If it comes to pass, they seem prophetic. If it doesn’t, they take credit for averting catastrophe. In the meantime, they seek to enhance their powers. . . . we might face not a recession but a full-blown depression, which would be financially ruinous for hundreds of millions and have its own disastrous knock-on effects in mental, emotional, and physical health, including for the elderly and sick who already face the greatest risks from the virus. . . .”
Key points of discussion and analysis, which will be developed at much greater length and in much greater detail in the series of programs noted above, including some of the articles which will figure into the analysis:
1.–Exemplifying the profound psychological aspects of the Covid-19 Psy-Op is the phenomenon of the hoarding of toilet paper. Mr. Emory views this as a deep Freudian/anal response to feelings of helplessness on the part of citizens. Toilet paper is of no help against the virus, but is symptomatic of a deep-seated personality dynamic seeking to manifest some measure of social control. This was the subject of a recent New Yorker piece. ” . . . . ‘Controlling cleanliness around B.M.s is the earliest way the child asserts control,’ Andrea Greenman, the president of the Contemporary Freudian Society, said. ‘The fact that now we are all presumably losing control creates a regressive push to a very early time. So, I guess that translates in the unconscious to ‘If I have a lifelong supply of toilet paper, I’ll never be out of control, never be a helpless, dirty child again.’ ’ . . . .”
2.–FTR #1126 Bio-Psy-Op Apocalypse Now, Part 2: The Democracy-Killing Virus: The Covid-19 “op” is leading to the attenuation or elimination of democracy all over the world. In addition to draconian powers proposed by “ex” CIA officer and Attorney General William Barr, Trump has boasted about powers granted to him “that people don’t even know about.” Abroad, fascists and autocrats from Viktor Orban to Narendra Modi are using the Covid-19 outbreak to cement control. Even Great Britain has manifested emergency powers that one critic termed “Eye-Watering.” Civil liberties are taking a beating, with “Pandemic Surveillance” enabling a massive erosion of privacy that is unlikely to abate. There are questions about whether the elections will be held in November. (“Trump Has Emergency Powers We Aren’t Allowed to Know About” by Elizabeth Gotein and Andrew Boyle; The New York Times; 4/10/2020.; “DOJ seeks new emergency powers amid coronavirus pandemic” by Betsy Woodruff Swan; Politico; 03/21/2020; “Exclusive: Inside the Military’s Top Secret Plans If the Coronavirus Cripples Government” by William M. Arkin; Newsweek; 3/18/2020; “Exclusive: U.S. Military Activates Its Never-Before-Used Federal Response to Combat Coronavirus Outbreak” by William M. Arkin; Newsweek; 2/27/2020.; “For Autocrats and Others, Coronavirus Is a Chance to Grab Even More Power” by Selam Gebrikadan; The New York Times; 3/30/2020.; “Media Dissent Fades as Modi Tightens Grip” by Vindu Goel and Jeffrey Gettleman;The New York Times; 4/3/2020.; “Coronavirus Surveillance Is Entering Dystopian Territory” by Eric Lutz; Vanity Fair; 4/9/2020.
3.–FTR #1127 Bio-Psy-Op Apocalypse Now, Part 3: The Eugenic Virus: The disproportionate damage being inflicted by the pandemic on minorities–African-Americans and Latinos in particular, has received considerable discussion. Economically disadvantaged to a considerable extent and subject to the physiological, psychological and behavioral liabilities stemming from that state of affairs, they are more vulnerable to the ravages of the virus. In addition, “social-distancing” is a luxury that many poor people can not afford. Another major consideration concerns the rationing of health care. People with disabilities are afraid they will be shunted “to the back of the line” when it comes time for them to receive proper treatment. The elderly are falling ill and dying all over the world. (“People with Disabilities Are Afraid They Will Be Discriminated Against Because of Coronavirus” by Rick Jervais; USA Today; 3/26/2020.; “Who Should Be Saved First? Experts Offer Medical Guidance” by Austin Frakt; The New York Times; 3/24/2020.; “Early Data Shows African Americans Contracting and Dying of Coronavirus at an Alarming Rate” by Akilah Johnson and Talia Buford; ProPublica; 4/3/2020.; “Social Distancing Is A Privilege” by Charles Blow; The New York Times; 4/5/2020. ; “Scapegoating New York Means Ignoring Its Desperate Need” by Kim Phillips-Fein; The New York Times; 4/5/2020.
4.–FTR #1128 Bio-Psy-Op Apocalypse Now, Part 4: The Wealth-Concentrating Virus: In FTR #‘s 1111 and 1112, among other programs, we spoke of the networking and investing of Steve Bannon, J. Kyle Bass and Tommy Hicks, Jr. Bass, you will recall, is asymmetrically invested with regard to the economies in Hong Kong and China. He has certainly made money, as have many others. With the Federal Reserve estimating unemployment at rates that may reach 32% and economist Paul Krugman opining that this downturn will be three to five times as bad as the 2008 financial collapse, those who do have money will be able to buy up assets at pennies on the dollar. An article in The Guardian discusses hedge fund returns of as much as 4,000+ percent for some firms. The possibility of “insider knowledge” of the coming pandemic suggests itself. It should be noted that J. Kyle Bass made his fortune betting against the subprime housing market. In this program, we will discuss his role in helping to bring down Bear Stearns in the 2008 collapse. A former employee of that ill-fated company, Bass leaked damaging information about Bear Stearns to a Wall Street Journal reporter, thereby precipitating the collapse of the firm. (“Coronavirus job losses could total 47 million, unemployment rate may hit 32%, Fed estimates” by Jeff Cox; CNBC; 03/30/2020; “Hedge funds ‘raking in billions’ during coronavirus crisis” by Rupert Neate Wealth and Jasper Jolly; The Guardian; 04/09/2020.; “WSJ: ‘Twas Kyle Bass that Killed Bear Stearns” by Thornton McEnery; Dealbreaker.com; 3/29/2016 [Updated on 1/14/2019.]; “Nassim Taleb-Advised Universa Tail Fund Returned 3,600% in March” by Erik Schatzker; Bloomberg; 04/08/2020; “How A Goat Farmer Built A Doomsday Machine That Just Booked A 4,144% Return” by Antoine Gara; Forbes; 04/13/2020.
5.–FTR #1129 Bio-Psy-Op Apocalypse Now, Part 5: Walkin’ The Coronavirus: In the Nazi tract Serpent’s Walk–which we have discussed for decades–the SS go underground (which they did), buy into the opinion-forming media (which they did) and, infiltrate the military (which they have done), and, after a terrorist attack by genetically-engineered viruses decimates large parts of the United States, martial law is declared and the Nazis take over. From Serpent’s Walk: “. . . . ‘Yes. Well. ‘Pacov’ stands for ‘Pandemic Communicable Virus,’ one of the uglier results of military experimentation with recombinant DNA. Do you know what that is?’. . . . ‘Very well, let me tell you in layman’s terms.’ Mulder extended a hand to shush Wrench, who had started to speak. ‘Pacov consists of two separate re-workings of two DNA chains of existing viruses. It’s a piggy-back weapon, a two-stage operation. You send in the first stage. The vectors . . . agents of transmission . . . for Pacov‑1 are extensive. It travels through the air, the water, or directly from person-to-person and is highly contagious. It spreads for hundreds of miles, if conditions are optimal. Pacov‑1 produces only a mild, flu-like infection that disappears within a day or two. Public health authorities would overlook it, never consider it a serious epidemic, and even if they did they’d have to look carefully to isolate it. Once a victim is over the ‘flu,’ Pacov‑1 becomes dormant and almost undetectable. A month or two later, you send in the second stage: Pacov‑2 is also a virus, just as contagious as the first, and just as harmless by itself. It reacts with Pacov‑1 to produce a powerful coagulant. . . . you die within three minutes. No warning, no vaccine, no cure. Those not exposed to both stages remain unharmed. . . . Pacov‑2 goes inert, like Pacov‑1 within a week or two. Then you get your victim’s country, all his property, in undamaged condition. . . . and a lot of corpses to bury.’ . . . .”
6.–FTR #1130: Bio-Psy-Op Apocalypse Now, Part 6: Context–the China-Killing Virus: Analyzes the Covid-19 outbreak in the context of the anti-China, full-court press, highlighted in, among other, programs, FTR #‘s 1089 through 1095, 1103, 1104, 1105. (“Unleash the Privateers” by Colonel Mark Cancion (USMC—Retired) and Brandon Schwartz; U.S. Naval Institute Magazine; April 2020 [Vol. 146/2/1,406; “Inside the World Uyghur Congress: The US-backed right-wing regime change network seeking the ‘fall of China’” by Ajit Singh; The Gray Zone; 03/05/2020; “Coronavirus Alarm Blends Yellow Peril and Red Scare” by Joshua Cho; Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting; 3/6/2020.)
7.–FTR #1131 Bio-Psy-Op Apocalypse, Part 7: Pinchback’s Perspective: ” . . . .Baragona was a Nazi from Fort Sill. . . . Garrison also obtained a transcript of a letter written by Ferrie to Baragona. Next to Baragona’s name, Garrison wrote: ‘Note Baragona is important.’ The letter had been sent to Garrison by Glenn Pinchback, and a carbon copy was sent to Mendel Rivers, a congressman from Georgia. (Pinchback worked in the Operations Command at Fort Sill, where he intercepted mail.) In the letter, Ferrie shared his dream of the re-unification of Germany and living in a world where all the currency was in Deutschmarks. Pinchback’s summation of the letter described a ‘Neo-Nazi plot to enslave America in the name of anti-Communism,’ and ‘a neo-Nazi plot gargantuan in scope.’ The Ferrie letter spoke of the need to kill all the Kennedys and Martin Luther King, Jr. . . . Pinchback also reportedly obtained a letter from David Ferrie to Baragona confessing his role in the assassination of Robert Gehrig, who was a Nazi and Fort Sill soldier. . . .”
8.–FTR #1132 Bio-Psy-Op Apocalypse Now, Part 8: The Nazi Virus: This program will synthesize the various aspects of the “Bio-Psy-Op Apocalypse Now” series, demonstrating how the various conceptual components set forth herein constitute a Nazi “Full-Spectrum Dominance.”
FROM THE LECTURE SERIES
The Political Implications of the UFO Phenomenon and the "ET" Myth Exposes U.S. intelligence influence behind the "brothers from space" industry. Read more »- Spitfire List is licensed under Creative Commons.
Recent Comments