Continuing coverage of the Covid-19 pandemic–almost certainly a biological warfare project crafted by the U.S. national security establishment–the broadcast centers on the dual function of “epidemic prevention” and “epidemic causation” and supplementing a Charles Blow op-ed piece in “The New York Times.”
Building on the concept (discussed many times in the past) that the difference between “offensive” and “defensive” biological warfare research is academic, we note that credentialed observers have cited Pentagon “vaccine” research as a cover for offensive BW research. In addition, we observe that numerous, overlapping programs ostensibly aimed at “preventing” epidemics may well mask efforts at generating them.
One of the most notorious and advanced biological warfare programs in history was Japan’s Unit 731, melded into the U.S. biological warfare program at the end of World War II. The program was officially labeled: “the Epidemic Prevention and Water Purification Department of the Kwantung Army.”
Revisiting the consummately important Whitney Webb article about Pentagon research into bat-borne coronaviruses, we note:
1.–The DARPA research is ostensibly aimed at preventing pandemics but–very possibly–masking preparations for offensive biological warfare projects.
2.–The Pentagon is researching “gene-driving”–a biotechnological development that can permanently alter the genetic makeup of entire population groups and lead to the extinction of other groups.
3.–The Pentagon research is heavily networked with companies using DNA and mRNA vaccines for Covid-19.
The fundamental point of analysis and discussion in this program, and the next, concerns the use of “Epidemic Prevention” to mask exterminationist offensive biological warfare programs to entrench, expand or introduce a white-supremacist/First World Domination dynamic in the U.S. and abroad.
Is this the legacy of Unit 731, nominally an “Epidemic Prevention” program?!
A column by Charles Blow correctly notes that the right-wing is working to “lock-in” power. Blow’s observation is far more important when the context is expanded to include the full-court press against China and the effects of Covid-19 in the U.S.
Not a superpower at this point in time, China has made rapid, remarkable progress:
1.–In 1981, 88% of the Chinese population lived in poverty. That was down to 0.7% in 2015.
2.–The Chinese middle class was 4% of their population in 2002. By 2018, that was up to 31% of their population.
3.–In 2000, just 2% of the Chinese population had access to the internet. That was up to 29% by 2009.
With the stunning progress made by China, in combination with their enormous population, the nation will be a major power in the future.
Because they are not white and because their system of state capitalism is at loggerheads with the neo-liberal dogma to which the West is enthrall, that country will be brought to heel. The anti-China push by the West is fundamentally white supremacist in nature.
Pursuant to discussion of the Charles Blow column, Mr. Emory reads the headlines and bylines from a number of New York Times articles underscoring how the pandemic is working against two trends that Blow cites as inimical to continued GOP control.
The pandemic is badly damaging the fortunes of urban centers and education, both at the public school and university levels. In that regard, the pandemic is accomplishing what the Charles Blow column enunciates.
Some interesting points raised by Dr. Daniel R. Lucey are particularly important in light of the information we have developed in the past about gain of function experiments.
Lucey’s points of inquiry–although not discussed in this article–are particularly important when considered in conjunction with the joint U.S./Chinese program to investigate bat-borne coronaviruses, a program whose American funding apparatus involved USAID, a frequent front for CIA operations.
The gain of function experiments we discussed in FTR #’s 1116, 1117 and 1121 involving adapting the H5N1 avian flu virus to ferrets is worth contemplating in the context of information indicating that the SARS Cov-2 virus is particularly infective for ferrets.
Was part of the modified H5N1 flu virus adapted to SARS Cov-2?
Another subject worth contemplating concerns Gilead Sciences, Tamiflu and the prognostications concerning a “twindemic” this fall, with influenza and Covid-19 combining to overwhelm the health system.
Might we see an enhanced H5N1 avian influenza this fall, providing enormous profits to Gilead Sciences, which, as we saw in FTR #1138, made an enormous amount of money (for itself and former Chairman of the Board Donald Rumsfeld) developing Tamiflu to negate the possibility of an H5N1 pandemic?
A key factor spurring our suspicion concerning genetic-engineering of one or more variant of the Covid-19 virus concerns a 2015 Gain-of-Function experiment performed by Ralph Baric, employed in a joint U.S./Chinese experiment partly financed by USAID (a front for CIA activity in the past) and NIH (used by both CIA and the Pentagon in the past). In that project, Baric: ” . . . . published a study on his team’s efforts to engineer a virus with the surface protein of the SHC014 coronavirus, found in horseshoe bats in China, and the backbone of one that causes human-like severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) in mice. The hybrid virus could infect human airway cells and caused disease in mice. . . . The results demonstrate the ability of the SHC014 surface protein to bind and infect human cells, validating concerns that this virus—or other coronaviruses found in bat species—may be capable of making the leap to people without first evolving in an intermediate host . . .”
Of more than passing interest is the disclosure that the project on bat-borne coronaviruses conducted in the Wuhan laboratory was a joint U.S./Chinese project, and that Ralph Baric was a key American partner in the project.
This is the undertaking about which we have reported and discussed extensively in the past! ” . . . . One of Dr Shi’s co-authors on that paper, Professor Ralph Baric from North Carolina University, said in an interview with ‘Science Daily’ at the time: ‘This virus is highly pathogenic and treatments developed against the original SARS virus in 2002 and the ZMapp drugs used to fight ebola fail to neutralise and control this particular virus.’ . . . .”
