|
They had already alerted the FBI and MI5.
At that point in the trajectory of events, intelligence services on both sides of the Atlantic had been put on notice.
Anthony Fauci also received confirmation that money from the National Institutes of Health had been channeled to the offending lab in Wuhan, which meant that his career was on the line.
Working at a furious pace, the famed "Proximal Origin" paper was produced in record time. It concluded that there was no lab leak.
In a remarkable series of revelations this week, we've learned that the CIA was involved in trying to make payments to those authors (thank you whistleblower), plus it appears that,
Suddenly we get some possible clarity in what has otherwise been a very blurry picture.
The anomaly that has heretofore cried out for explanation is how it is that Fauci changed his mind so dramatically and precisely on the merit of lockdowns for the virus.
That day was February 27, 2020, the same day that the New York Times joined with alarmist propaganda from its lead virus reporter Donald G. McNeil.
On February 26, Fauci was writing:
The next day, February 27, Fauci wrote actress Morgan Fairchild - likely the most high-profile influencer he knew from the firmament - that,
To be sure, twenty-plus days had passed between the time Fauci alerted intelligence and when he decided to become the voice for lockdowns.
We don't know the exact date of the meetings with the CIA. But generally until now, most of February 2020 has been a blur in terms of the timeline. Something was going on but we hadn't known just what.
Let's distinguish between a proximate and distal cause of the lockdowns.
The proximate cause is the fear of a lab leak and an aping of the Wuhan strategy of keeping everyone in their homes to stop the spread. They might have believed this would work, based on the legend of how SARS-1 was controlled.
The CIA had dealings with Wuhan and so did Fauci. They both had an interest in denying the lab leak and stopping the spread. The WHO gave them cover.
The distal reasons are more complicated. What stands out here is the possibility of a quid pro quo.
The CIA pays scientists to say there was no lab leak and otherwise instructs its kept media sources (New York Times) to call the lab leak a conspiracy theory of the far right.
Every measure would be deployed to keep Fauci off the hot seat for his funding of the Wuhan lab. But this cooperation would need to come at a price. Fauci would need to participate in a real-life version of the germ games (Event 201 and Crimson Contagion).
It would be the biggest role of Fauci's long career.
He would need to throw out his principles and medical knowledge of, for example, natural immunity and standard epidemiology concerning the spread of viruses and mitigation strategies.
The old pandemic playbook would need to be shredded in favor of lockdown theory as invented in 2005 and then tried in Wuhan.
The WHO could be relied upon to say that this strategy worked.
Fauci would need to be on TV daily to somehow persuade Americans to give up their precious rights and liberties. This would need to go on for a long time, maybe all the way to the election, however implausible this sounds.
He would need to push the vaccine for which he had already made a deal with Moderna in late January.
Above all else, he would need to convince Trump to go along. That was the hardest part.
They considered Trump's weaknesses. He was a germaphobe so that's good. He hated Chinese imports so it was merely a matter of describing the virus this way. But he also has a well-known weakness for deferring to highly competent and articulate professional women.
That's where the highly reliable Deborah Birx comes in:
What does the CIA get out of this?
The vast intelligence community would have to be put in charge of the pandemic response as the rule maker, the lead agency. Its outposts such as CISA would handle labor-related issues and use its contacts in social media to curate the public mind.
This would allow the intelligence community finally to crack down on information flows that had begun 20 years earlier that they had heretofore failed to manage.
The CIA would hobble and hamstring the US president, whom they hated. And importantly, there was his China problem. He had wrecked relations through his tariff wars.
So far as they were concerned, this was treason because he did it all on his own.
This man was completely out of control. He needed to be put in his place. To convince the president to destroy the US economy with his own hand would be the ultimate coup de grace for the CIA.
A lockdown would restart trade with China.
It did in fact achieve that...
How would Fauci and the CIA convince Trump to lock down and restart trade with China?
By exploiting these weaknesses and others too:
Then they would push Trump to buy the much-needed personal protective equipment from China.
They finally got their way:
The press conference of March 16, especially those magical 70 seconds in which Fauci read the words mandating lockdowns because Birx turned out to be too squeamish, was the great turning point.
A few days later, Trump was on the phone with Xi asking for equipment.
In addition, such a lockdown would greatly please the digital tech industry, which would experience a huge boost in demand, plus large corporations like Amazon and WalMart, which would stay open as their competitors were closed.
Finally, it would be a massive subsidy to pharma and especially the mRNA platform technology itself, which would enjoy the credit for ending the pandemic.
If this whole scenario is true, it means that all along Fauci was merely playing a role, a front man for much deeper interests and priorities in the CIA-led intelligence community.
This broad outline makes sense of,
There are still many more details to know, but these new fragments of new information take our understanding in a new and more coherent direction.
From AIDS to VAIDS, they want you dead.
Do NOT comply.
|
