By all accounts, the past few years have witnessed an unrivaled series of shocking revelations. But amongst them all, one stands out like a beacon, demanding attention: the intricate and unsettling ties between some of the world’s most influential organizations and their role in the so-called PSYOP-19 “pandemic.”
Let’s delve deep and expose the connections that have long been whispered about but rarely discussed in broad daylight. As the world grappled with a rapidly spreading virus, our attention was diverted. But those who dared to peek behind the curtain saw a web of deceit, spun by none other than the DoD, Pentagon, UN, WHO, the philanthropic foundations of Rockefeller and Gates, and the CCP’s Wuhan Institute of Virology, amongst others. And let’s not forget the CIA, whose involvement has raised more than just eyebrows.
It wasn’t a mere accident or a simple oversight. The narrative of a “lab leak” seems almost naive in retrospect. The truth, as many insiders have attested, is far more calculated. This was a deliberate act, complete with bioweapon injections designed to deliver devastating consequences. And as the story unfolds, a familiar name reappears, lurking in the shadows: Dr. Mengele 2.0. His surreptitious activities within the federal spy agency raise questions that demand answers.
Jeremy Farrar, in his book “Spike: The Virus Vs. The People – the Inside Story,” paints a grim picture of those early days. His descriptions of late-night calls and the weight of a looming international emergency provide a firsthand account of the tension and fear that dominated discussions. Farrar, along with a select group that included Eddie Holmes, Kristian Anderson, and the ever-controversial Tony Fauci, were privy to information that had the potential to upend global stability.
The intrigue doesn’t end there. As the world debated the virus’s origins, intelligence agencies from both the US and UK were already in the loop. And as fingers pointed to the Wuhan lab, another startling revelation emerged: money from the National Institutes of Health had found its way to this very lab. With Fauci’s career teetering, a document surfaced—the “Proximal Origin” paper, which emphatically denied any lab leak.
But the twists in this labyrinthine tale only intensified. Recent disclosures have shed light on the CIA’s role in this grand design. There were attempts to make payments to the authors of the “Proximal Origin” paper, with insiders stepping forward to blow the whistle. Adding to the drama, there are now murmurs of Fauci’s clandestine visits to the CIA’s headquarters, raising more questions about the depth of this collaboration.
The Unveiling of a Hidden Playbook: Fauci, CIA, and the Lockdown Paradigm
Enter Dr. Fauci – a name that has become synonymous with the virus response. For most, he’s been the voice of reason, guiding America through one of its most challenging health crises. Yet, like an optical illusion, the clearer picture only emerges when you step back and view things from a broader perspective.
February 27, 2020, marks a significant pivot in Fauci’s stance. Prior to this day, he encouraged a level-headed approach to the pandemic, comparing it to the everyday risks we face. But then, seemingly overnight, his tone shifted. He began advocating for stringent measures like social distancing and teleworking. Why? What catalyzed this drastic change?
Interestingly, this shift coincided with a surge in alarmist reports from media giants, most notably, the New York Times. Their lead virus reporter, Donald G. McNeil, was at the forefront, pushing narratives that swayed public perception. But why?
To understand the intricacies, we need to differentiate between the proximate and distal causes for these lockdowns. At face value, the lockdowns were a reactionary measure to the looming threat of a pandemic, mirroring the Wuhan strategy. But dig a little deeper, and the plot thickens.
Rumors abound about the CIA’s involvement with Wuhan and their vested interest in downplaying any potential lab leak. Fauci, too, has ties to Wuhan. Both parties, it seems, were keen on keeping the lab leak theory under wraps, with the World Health Organization providing the necessary cover.
As we untangle this web, a potential quid pro quo scenario emerges. Imagine a world where the CIA pays scientists to downplay the lab leak theory, guiding media outlets like the New York Times to dismiss such ideas as mere far-right fantasies. In exchange, Fauci, with his esteemed reputation, would have to spearhead a lockdown initiative, echoing Wuhan’s strategy and persuading Americans to relinquish their freedoms.
It sounds far-fetched, right? But consider the evidence. Fauci’s sudden advocacy for a vaccine, specifically Moderna, with whom he had struck a deal in late January. His relentless media appearances, aimed at swaying public opinion. The most challenging task? Persuading then-President Trump to endorse these measures. A germaphobe at heart, Trump’s vulnerabilities were exploited, with the articulate and competent Deborah Birx playing a pivotal role in this persuasion campaign.
But what would the CIA gain from this? Power. Control. Influence. By spearheading the pandemic response, the intelligence community would gain unparalleled control over the narrative, curating public opinion through social media and other channels. This was their chance to reign in the uncontrollable flow of information that had been eluding them for decades.
Moreover, Trump, with his erratic decisions and tenuous relationship with China, was a thorn in their side. What better way to rein him in than to have him inadvertently sabotage the US economy? With the lockdowns in place, trade relations with China could be mended, and the CIA would have achieved its multifaceted objectives.
The Masterstroke: Manipulating a President
Every leader, no matter how influential, has a set of soft spots, and President Trump was no exception. His notable germaphobia and respect for professional women were just the tip of the iceberg. The real keys to manipulating Trump were deeply rooted in his persona: his significant vulnerability to flattery, his insatiable hunger for unparalleled power, and his desire to emulate global leaders, such as Xi Jinping. What if these very chinks in his armor were methodically exploited by Fauci and the CIA to guide him down a preordained path?
Picture the scene. As the ominous shadow of the pandemic loomed large, the intelligence community, along with Fauci, would have been meticulously crafting their strategy. Their goal was clear: to ensure Trump endorsed lockdowns and crucially, to reignite trade ties with China. But how? By skilfully playing into Trump’s known proclivities.
Understanding Trump’s business acumen was crucial. In the face of the pandemic, PPE was akin to gold. As the demand in the U.S. healthcare system skyrocketed, the urgency for vast quantities of PPE became undeniable. And who was poised to deliver at such short notice? China. By underscoring this pivotal detail, the CIA and Fauci could subtly push Trump toward their desired outcome: reviving trade, particularly for these essential supplies, with China.
By the time mid-March rolled around, the concerted efforts of the intelligence community began to show results. Whether it was the compelling arguments they presented or the sheer pressure of the escalating crisis, Trump began to yield. The watershed moment came during the press conference on March 16. With Fauci at the helm, and perhaps with Dr. Birx too apprehensive to take the lead, the announcement of the impending lockdowns was made—a proclamation that would indelibly mark the nation’s pandemic trajectory.
In the days that followed, Trump, now seemingly on board with this new direction, reached out to Xi Jinping, aiming to procure the essential equipment required to tackle the virus. But the narrative extends beyond just PPE.
The lockdowns, though crippling for many, served as a windfall for certain industries. The digital transformation witnessed an explosive surge, propelling the tech sector to unprecedented heights. Industry titans like Amazon and Walmart emerged as dominant forces, capitalizing on the lockdowns while their smaller counterparts faltered. Additionally, the pharmaceutical realm was poised to reap massive benefits, especially with the meteoric rise of mRNA vaccine technology. All these developments hint at a possibility that Fauci might have been more than a mere public health figure. Could he have been a well-placed puppet, representing a grander scheme orchestrated by the CIA and the intelligence world at large?
Connecting these dots paints a potentially revealing picture. The abrupt shift in Fauci’s stance, its timing, and the ensuing sequence of events appear to seamlessly blend into a vast, intricate mosaic of geopolitics, commercial interests, and power struggles.
This perspective, while enlightening, leaves many stones unturned. The vast expanse of these covert operations remains shrouded in mystery. Yet, with every shard of information that comes to light, we edge closer to unmasking the covert forces that might have shaped those critical moments in history.