Editor’s note: I recently posted an article by Daniel Barge on the candidacy of Éric Zemmour, foregrounded by some comments by me based on excerpts from Guillaume Durocher’s work on Zemmour posted in TOO  in 2015. Guillaume, who now writes for The Unz Review (alas!), has written a new article on Zemmour (“a polarizing but popular figure as there is great untapped demand among audiences for patriotic rhetoric”) (“The Zemmour Phenomenon: Can France’s Tucker Carlson Retake France for Patriots?“). I excerpt it here. Durocher’s take is that Zemmour views are shaped by his perception of France as a haven for Jews and that, as someone whose family left Algeria when the French abandoned their colony, he is quite aware of the fate of Jews in an Islamized country.

… Zemmour has successfully built up his profile on the right-wing edge of the media system. He long worked for the conservative newspaper Le Figaro and broke through on TV talk shows in which he was noted for his criticism of feminism and professional “anti-racist” activism. He has been periodically fired by certain media for going ‘too far.’ He has also often been dragged into court by said “anti-racist” lobby groups – while he has generally been vindicated, he twice was found guilty of “inciting racial hatred.” In the end, Zemmour has been able to flourish despite these setbacks, keeping gainful employment in a critical section of the French media and continuing to reach his audience. …

Zemmour’s ideas: The defense of French interests, including the native French

Regarding Zemmour’s political ideas, the best place to start for English-speakers is probably the recent interview he gave to a Hungarian think-tank, on the occasion of Prime Minister Viktor Orbán’s Fourth Demographic Summit. (This event, focused on opposing immigration and supporting European families and fertility, was itself very noteworthy and included the participation of the prime ministers of Czechia, Serbia, and Slovenia.)

In the interview, Zemmour explicitly mentions France’s white identity with a suitable quote from General Charles de Gaulle, who said that the French were “a European people of white race, Greek and Latin culture, and Christian religion.” Both add that while some non-Whites and Muslims may become French citizens, the nation would lose her identity if these groups ceased to be “a small minority.” In the French media, few have been as explicit as Zemmour in denouncing the ills of Afro-Islamic immigration and the results in terms of criminality, welfare abuse, and day-to-day Islamization.

…

In Zemmour’s politics, France is the be-all-end-all. He is enamored with the nation who gave citizenship to the Jews during the French Revolution, enabling his own people to flourish, and with the glory that France was able to achieve under great leaders such as Napoleon Bonaparte and Charles de Gaulle.

Zemmour’s dissident critics: A tool of the globalist oligarchy?

Zemmour has plenty of critics, including among patriotic dissidents. One such critic is the anti-Zionist civic nationalist Alain Soral, who asks: Why is Zemmour “allowed” to speak in the media in the way he does? Jean-Marie Le Pen, who has long made similar comments, enjoyed no such privilege but was viciously demonized. Is Zemmour not allowed to rise because, wittingly or not, he serves the interests of the global oligarchy which wishes to see France weakened, paralyzed, and bled by fatal internal conflict, namely the ethno-religious civil war which Zemmour is effectively promoting?

I personally do not find the Soralian critique convincing. He fails to recognize the fact that there are differing factions within the French and global oligarchies. Indeed, Donald Trump was able to win the U.S. presidency precisely by exploiting these divisions. He governed with the support of ultra-Zionists who won a great deal for Israel. America won a bit too, though admittedly much less, with drastic reductions in border crossings and refugee settlements.

…

It is true that Zemmour’s rhetoric is ambiguous. At times, he speaks of “assimilating” foreigners into France, such as by a recent proposal to require newborns to be given traditional French names. At others, he speaks of France’s white identity and of potential civil war between the natives and the Muslims.

Assimilation is a non-starter in a country where around one fifth of newborns are Muslim and one third are non-European. I do not however think “racial civil war” will be occurring in France at least within the next 10-15 years. And even if it did, the fact is that at this stage the Europeans would easily win.

Zemmour’s Jewish identity: rationally pro-French?

There is no downplaying Zemmour’s Jewish identity, right down to his Gargamelian phenotype. Indeed he regularly goes to a conservative synagogue – which probably gives him some subcultural and social autonomy to take taboo permissions within the Parisian politico-media set. He is not among the neoconservatives who have pushed for France to undertake endless wars against the Islamic world on behalf of Israel. Indeed, Zemmour rarely mentions Israel and, in writing though not to my knowledge on television, he has criticized France’s Jewish lobbying organization, the CRIF for being “a State within the State.”

Zemmour arguably has good reason to be a pro-French Jew. His ancestors were Sephardic Jews in Algeria who had been blessed with French citizenship with the Crémieux Decree of 1870 (itself passed by a French Jew during the chaos of the Franco-Prussian War). This unlocked great opportunities for Algerian Jewry, who had previously been subalterns to the local Muslims.

Zemmour’s parents left Algeria for France during the Arabs’ war for independence in the 1950s, no doubt sensing that their time was up. In 1962, Algeria’s 1 million European settlers and most Jews fled the country, knowing that the Arabs would prepare a grisly fate for them if they did not (“the suitcase or the coffin” was the slogan of the day). …

Thus, Zemmour’s French nationalism would be motivated by a rational ethnic calculation: contra the anti-French propaganda of Bernard-Henri Lévy and company, modern France has objectively treated its Jews well on the whole. “As happy as God in France” is a traditional Jewish saying. The French are obviously more tolerant of the Jews than are Blacks and especially Muslims. What will happen to the Jews once France has an Afro-Islamic majority? Over the past decade, terrorist attacks by Muslims have become a banal occurrence in France, killing hundreds upon hundreds with knives, bombs, and charging vehicles.

Zemmour Can Win

I cannot say if Zemmour’s campaign is serious or merely an umpteenth conservative/populist grift operation. Indeed, Zemmour has timed his crypto-campaign with the release of his latest book, La France n’a pas dit son dernier mot (France Has Not Spoken Her Last), a diary of his conversations with French media and political figures since 2006.

What I can say is that a Zemmour victory is by no means impossible. Plenty of celebrity outsiders have been able to convert their media clout into political power: I think of Beppe Grillo in Italy, Donald Trump in America, or Vladimir Zelensky in Ukraine.

…

Admittedly, there is a chance that so many right-wing candidates (Zemmour, Marine Le Pen, and a conservative) are fielded that none of them breaks through to the second round. So far, polls show a right-candidate breaking through. This would become a very serious risk if the far-left, Socialists, and Greens agree to a common candidate – but this seems quite unlikely given the monumental egos involved. …

Can Zemmour Govern?

I am more skeptical about Zemmour’s ability to govern. After all, being an effective “media-troll” does not require the same skill set as does governing a country, as Trump learned to his chagrin. Still, there are reasons to be more optimistic. Political and media power is far more concentrated in European countries than they are in the United States.

Viktor Orbán in Hungary has been able to push a patriotic agenda in Hungary with little effective pushback. In Italy, Matteo Salvini was able to rise to astonishing levels of popularity when he, as Interior Minister, blocked the arrivals of illegal immigrants in the south of the country. Salvini’s successes were only scuppered by the “populist” Five-Star Movement’s collusion with the Italian Establishment. (While the complexities of Italian politics are far beyond the scope of this article, I would say: keep an eye on Italy, the country is perfectly likely to flip sooner or later, with the next elections planned for 2023.)

At this stage, Zemmour’s crypto-campaign has served to have taboo patriotic and pro-French messages penetrate the country’s political discourse in a way unprecedented since the days of Jean-Marie Le Pen. The dynamics of Zemmour’s career and campaign are distinctly Trumpian. Marine Le Pen has solidified her position in the French political landscape by carefully reeling in “excesses” and effectively being house-trained by the legacy media. Zemmour by contrast has developed his position and prospered by always pushing the envelope in a way which the rest of the media could not deal with – except by giving him more prominence by denouncing him and trying to shut him down.

“There is no power relation without the correlative constitution of a field of knowledge, nor any knowledge that does not presuppose and constitute at the same time power relations.  A despot may otherwise constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly by the chain of their own ideas. … On the soft fibers of the brain is founded the unshakable base of the soundest of Empires.” Michel Foucault, Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison

“They seldom desire anything unless it belongs to others. The result is the encroachment of one group upon the territory of another. For knowing their own inferiority, they would only be too glad to have equality.” Plato, Gorgias

Though some would like to believe that it is impossible for the modern world to fall back into the Homeric ‘imbecility of infancy,’ and though they scoff at the idea that one might ‘claim to amuse grown men by the same fictions that would have charmed children,’ they know that in reality adulthood slips easily back to infancy’s grip.  (La Motte, Discours 22–23, in The Shock of the Ancient, L. F. Norman)

FIRST, IT MAY BE HELPFUL TO ASK: WHO ISN’T RUNNING THE WHITE HOUSE?  It clearly is not Joseph Biden.  He obviously meets the 25th Amendment test of incapacity, and could rather easily be removed under organized congressional opposition.  Why he is not, is a fascinating question.

Second, it may be helpful to ask: why was a White House stage set crafted and installed in the old executive building across the street?  This provides two strong clues: one, it allows for technically enhanced prompting, control, digital enhancement and scripting.  And two, it symbolically establishes the fact that Biden is not the actual president occupying the actual White House, and is being sidelined.  For those who can remember Star Trek’s original episode, “Patterns of Force,” where a drugged figurehead president was installed behind a carefully organized broadcast room, while his handlers from the “Party” actually controlled the State, this dramatically shows the nature of the White House proxy control program, and its inherent basis in deception.

The drugged and controlled president in Patterns of Force

The scripted and controlled president in 2021

New TV “set” of a “White House” underscores contempt for the American public

It may also be helpful to consider that the biosecurity construct that has dominated civil society since early 2020 is anchored in two primary motivations—one ideological, the other psychological, and both are centered in fundamental human biology: population, and centralized health care.  Both of these objectives find their power, and their implementation, in top-down state authoritarianism.  Such political psychology must also flow from a certain sociopathology, and that must flow from hatred and revenge.

In my view this defines the clinical profile of both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, the actual occupiers of the current executive office (it also invokes a key animating factor of race.  All three factors—population, medical control, and race—must also together operate from deception, and a manufactured political program, hence the fundamental purpose of Covid).

The Obama-Clinton syndicate, through division and fear, offer to a frightened public the opportunity for salvation, and paternal protection that reaches deep into the childhood mind still accessible in the adult. The progressive political class offers up the government, the centralized authority of right thinking, and utopian visions of “equity.”  It is vitally centered in and draws its strength from faction, dissension, conflict, and most of all, division.  Division is its source of power; its only means of creating its role, and its authority.  The real source of authentic power—the cooperation and purposeful living of enlightened independent, self-directed, liberated men and women, is its enemy: hate must create more hate until hate and fear is all there is, and with it, a permanent state of social tension and social control.

And it’s effective. Consider the U.K.:

According to an Ipsos MORI poll conducted in July, an impressive 27 percent of Britons want to impose a government-mandated nationwide curfew of 10 PM—not then in force—“until the pandemic was under control worldwide,” which might be years from now. A not-inconsiderable 19 percent would impose such a curfew “permanently, regardless of the risk from Covid-19.” Presumably, these are people who don’t get out much. While 64 percent want Britain’s mask mandate in shops and on public transport to remain a legal requirement for the duration of the global pandemic, an astounding 51 percent want to be masked by law, forever.

There’s more: some 35 percent want to confine any Briton who returns from a foreign country, vaccinated or not, to a ten-day home quarantine—permanently, Covid or no Covid. A full 46 percent would require a vaccine passport in order to travel abroad—permanently, Covid or no Covid. So young people today would still be flashing that QR code on whatever passes for smartphones in 2095, though they might have trouble displaying the device to a flight attendant while bracing on their walkers. Likewise, the 36 percent who want to be required to check in at pubs and restaurants with a National Health Service contact-tracing app forever. A goodly 34 percent want social distancing in “theatres, pubs and sports grounds,” regardless of any risk of Covid, forever. A truly astonishing 26 percent of Britons would summarily close all casinos and nightclubs forever. Are these just a bunch of fogies who don’t go clubbing anyway? No. In the 16-to-24 age bracket, the proportion of Brits who want to convert Ronnie Scott’s jazz club in London’s Soho into a community lending library, even after Covid is a distant memory, soars to a staggering 40 percent.

Far from yearning for their historic liberties as “free-born Englishmen,” eight out of ten of the British, according to a Southbank/Kingston University survey, were “anxious” about lifting any of their benevolent government’s copious pandemic restrictions. I’m not sure that you can call it Stockholm syndrome when captives don’t fall in love with their captors but with the state of captivity itself.

It is a political agenda for power, control, domination, and authority.  It rests on hysteria and even “blood lust” for revenge, and especially, for merely taking the property of others (the “1619 Program” for example). In this regard, despite the instincts that our adult minds generally have for a calmer assessment based in rational engagement, this political deception (and some of its ancillary components, including Black Lives Matter, Antifa and Critical Race Theory, among others) is part of a dangerous threat to the West and all its people.  This does not mean a suppression of free speech or limits to the full exercise of political discourse.  It does mean facing squarely, an organized assault on higher-order aspirations and integrity that must constantly be summoned, as a unified nation, rather than passively accommodating a dishonest faction of special interests that have as their aims and designs the literal dismantling of the inherent foundation of what remains the most successful experiment in human liberty: America^[1]

A message of revenge, hate, retribution—and control.

At a practical level, the Obama-Clinton agenda doesn’t have only contempt for White America: the entire world and all its races and cultures are included as past or present victims of Whites.  There is otherwise no coherent “White guilt” or White shame concept: the enslavement of people was (and still is in many regions), a central characteristic of the entire global race, and it is embedded centrally within its cultural traditions, practices and social psychology, with all other features of a world cultural anthropology. Except that modern America is, precisely because of her freedoms, generosity and riches, including in trust and forbearance, the target for racial political agitation and the extortion—agitation and extorsion that define the current organized racial political agenda and its larger designs in what amounts to tribalism in property, power, and control.

A  deal to share the executive office has been effected: secure in their deception

Some may recall the “deal” that was struck in Obama’s first run for president (in a well-covered “secret meeting) with the then-opposing Clinton team: they dropped their pretenses, and joined forces.  Indeed, Hillary, in an unprecedented move, dropped her campaign entirely, and joined Obama to promote him. The deal was a quid pro quo where HRC backed his bid in exchange for the Secretary of State position (and her data “server” crime reflected her actual activities in using her office to broker favors, deals and raise money, with a president and ex-president controlling an “above-the-law status” that led to the FBI backing down in its investigation). The plan was simple: she would help seat him as president, and then they would “swap” seats after his terms, and he would guarantee her presidency. Then Obama would possibly be nominated for a seat on the Supreme Court. Indeed, the Supreme Court configuration is a primary goal of the DNC: and its goals is not merely to expand it, but “color” it especially, and to do so by fundamentally altering the entire process, configuration and rules of the Court itself, through the pretext of a bi-partisan commission (which as its turns out, it made up predominantly of Obama allies, and headed by his former advisor, Bob Bauer at NYU Law.

The Obama-Clinton plan was audacious, but was frustrated (or delayed) by Trump; hence the desperate measures to impeach him, along with a highly planned election steal (organized by the Obama and Clinton Foundations), that directed fraudulent voting law changes by the Perkins Coie “Political Law” practice—whose lead partner in the voter fraud operation, was recently indicted).  In my view there was a planned activation of the Covid-19 program, was long incubated as a back-up, fail-safe political weapon with carefully administered “gain of function” work between the US and (apparently) China, overseen by the Obama administration.  This explains the 4-year program to remove Trump: it didn’t just come out of nowhere—it was manufactured and directed—by Clinton and Obama, and their foundations, investors and backers.  Ron Klain runs the day-to-day at the White House, along with Susan Rice (Obama’s direct link) but they both work for higher powers than the enfeebled Biden.  Rice especially, is Obama’s guarantee of policy continuity in domestic affairs, which are being consolidated into national security, under her direct actions. Indeed, “racial equity” across all government departments is her priority.  Some have called the appointment of so many Obama officials, as the “Obama reunion.”  Indeed, Rice has been dubbed the “shadow president.”  And of course, when such assertions are made or intimated (including by Fox news: “Fox News pushes conspiracy Barack Obama secretly running Biden administration,” March 2021), the Left will claim conspiracy theory, which often tells you, that you’ve made the opposition uncomfortable.

Two become one

Both Obama and HRC are obsessed with medical centralization and control (recall her prior frustrated effort to nationalize it as First Lady, or “Hillarycare”—which became Obamacare). Both fancy themselves intellectuals; both hate middle America; both harbor cultural Marxist obsessions with power; both are willing to engage in mass incarceration, extortion, and blackmail. They also have the power base of two ex-presidencies, and a carefully tended international favor bank through the State department (which now runs all executive office foreign policy, and US military ideological purging operations).

Biden will almost certainly be “removed” within the next 12 months, and is already being physically isolated.  VP Harris will take his place under the same level of control, but with a fascinating symbiosis of her two actual masters: the merging of the Black with the female into a new symbol of ideological consolidation.

The deception is complete

[1] It is interesting to consider in what ways the destabilization of Haiti (the former slave mecca, French Saint-Domingue) is a modern-day orchestrated “uprising” and revolt, resulting in mass-immigration to the United States, through the southern border.  As the U.S. has a long history of reaching into foreign nations for its own political objectives, it is not inconceivable in my experience, that the extremism of the current White House, Senate and State Department, centered in a universal racial retribution construct and in broader cultural Marxism, views the Haitian “caravans” created by effective forced eviction, as a social justice retribution act of slave repatriation, and as a blanket reparations program.  The core ideology of cultural Marxism which defines the executive office and is reinforced by its network of private foundations, is precisely the intellectual analogue of the 2020 summer riots, and indeed defines the larger organization from which all its programs emanate: It rests on fraud, violence and chaos that is used to force a social re-engineering, in a top-down strategy that works through institutions of the state.  This is exactly the risk that Thomas Jefferson faced, and the same risk he and his peers feared, and predicted: a war that turns into a cause that results in a nation “torn asunder” by violence.  The psychological nature of “radical abolitionism” versus planful nation building, appears today as a similar dichotomy in the current political economy.  See https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/19/world/americas/us-haitian-deportation.html

Go to Part 1.

Klaus Schwab’s Network

At the conclusion of my last piece, I left off with a quote from Henry Kissinger; fitting, then, that we should begin here with Kissinger confidant and associate Klaus Schwab, the founder and Executive Chairman of the World Economic Forum, spearheading the Great Reset. Schwab has been an associate of the Kissinger’s (also a Davos participant) since his time at Harvard in the mid-1960s. Schwab’s work sits at the nexus of much of the transhumanist-globalist Hivemind activity and its future direction, and it is worth looking more deeply at Schwab, the World Economic Forum, and the tentacle-like connections that span the globe with the aim of totally enveloping it.

Schwab was from 1993–1995 a member of the UN High-Level Advisory Board on Sustainable Development and from 1996–1998 Vice-Chairman of the UN Committee for Development Planning. He holds honorary professorships with the China Foreign Affairs University and Ben-Gurion University in Israel; in 2004 Schwab was awarded $1 million from the Dan David Prize in Israel as a Present laureate for leadership in “changing our world.” This money was used to launch the Forum of Young Global Leaders. Other Dan David Prize winners include World Economic Forum Board of Trustees members Yo-Yo Ma and Al Gore, as well as individuals such as MIT professor of artificial intelligence Marvin Minsky (b. 1927–d. 2016) and 2012 Future winners for Genome Research J. Craig Venter, Eric Lander (the MIT/Harvard Broad Institute), and David Botstein (taught at MIT, is the Chief Scientific Officer at Google’s “anti-aging” startup Calico).

Venter studied mRNA and the human genome while with the National Institutes of Health[1] and eventually left for Celera Genomics, which was essentially in competition with the Human Genome Project for the complete mapping of the human genome. In 2005, Venter co-founded a firm dedicated to using modified microorganisms to produce “clean fuels” and biochemicals called Synthetic Genomics. In 2010, a team led by Venter inserted artificial genetic material which was chemically printed, synthesized, and assembled into cells that were then able to become colonies. This “synthetic life”

was done by synthesizing a very long DNA molecule containing an entire bacterium genome, and introducing this into another cell, analogous to the accomplishment of Eckard Wimmer’s group, who synthesized and ligated an RNA virus genome and “booted” it in cell lysate. The single-celled organism contains four “watermarks” written into its DNA to identify it as synthetic and to help trace its descendants.[2]

RNA viruses include things like COVID-19; viruses with RNA as their genetic material which also include DNA intermediates in their replication cycle are called retroviruses, of which HIV is the most well-known. Given the over-arching desire among the “elites” to track humanity through mass surveillance, hack humanity through psychology/propaganda (see Edward Bernays for example), and track and hack humanity directly through biology—and among the transhumanists more specifically in attempting to defy aging and frankly nature in its entirety—these connections are quite important. We can also see that the architecture and network of neo-liberal globalism have proven fertile ground for the wide dissemination of the techno- and bio-tyranny we see unfolding before us, often using the language of liberalism to cloak its intent. Indeed, it would appear that the Left appears more willing to sign on through this particular guise, but this instinct is not limited to the Left.

Returning to Schwab and showing his more “conventional” globalist bona fides, he is also a former Steering Committee member for the Bilderberg Group alongside individuals such as Henry Kissinger, Larry Summers, and Jeffrey Epstein associate George J. Mitchell. Epstein’s extensive ties to institutions such as MIT and Summers’s former employer Harvard (in addition to the “special connection” Summers and Epstein shared) are well-documented, as was his central position as a facilitator for the vital connections that form so much of the transhumanist infrastructure, very likely as an intermediary for the Israeli Mossad.

In-Q-Tel and the CIA

A complete picture of the interconnections among this web of players is unknown, but, if we can already highlight significant connections, then surely there are many more behind the scenes. In-Q-Tel bears scrutiny because it is an agency of the U.S. government. Basically In-Q-Tel is the CIA’s venture capital arm. According to former CIA Director George Tenet:

We [the CIA] decided to use our limited dollars to leverage technology developed elsewhere. In 1999 we chartered … In-Q-Tel. … While we pay the bills, In-Q-Tel is independent of CIA. CIA identifies pressing problems, and In-Q-Tel provides the technology to address them. The In-Q-Tel alliance has put the Agency back at the leading edge of technology.[3]

Facebook in its nascent stages (summer 2004) received funding from Peter Thiel’s Clarium Capital. Major funding followed to the tune of $12.7 million from Thiel and Accel Partners in May 2005 and $27.5 million from Thiel, Accel, and Greylock Partners in April 2006. What do these funding sources have in common? As Jody Chudley writes:

Just for fun, I searched for each of those investors and In-Q-Tel at the same time. Here is what I found:

Peter Thiel — Took In-Q-Tel funding for his startup firm Palantir somewhere around 2004.

Accel Partners — In 2004, Accel partner James Breyer sat on the board of directors of military defense contractor BBN with In-Q-Tel’s CEO Gilman Louie.

Greylock Partners — Howard Cox, the head of Greylock, served directly on In-Q-Tel’s board of directors.[4]

In 2004, Google acquired Keyhole, which had been contracted by In-Q-Tel and is now known as Google Earth. In 2010, Google and In-Q-Tel made a joint investment in a company called Recorded Future, which provides services related to predictive event planning, cyber security, and other processing and analysis services based on machine learning. In 2019, venture capital and private equity firm Insight Partners, which has made investments in companies like Twitter and Tumblr (a major vehicle for recruitment of minors for transgender groomers), acquired Recorded Future. Noah Schachtmann described Recorded Future as “a company that strips out from web pages the sort of who, what, when, where, why — sort of who’s involved … where are they going, what kind of events are they going to.” “We can assemble actual real-time dossiers on people,” co-founder Christopher Ahlberg says.

Yes, there is some superficial plausible deniability here, but let’s be real. With CIA funding and people like Tenet and former CIA Deputy Director for Intelligence and President and Vice Chairman of Kissinger Associates Jami Miscik (who is also a Board member of the Council on Foreign Relations) on the Board of Trustees, how independent is In-Q-Tel really? Regardless of whether it is or is not actually carrying out direct orders from the CIA, the links with both the agency and other major globalist network hubs—especially in context—are plenty damning and do much to illustrate what’s going on here, namely in these instances that technology is not an aid for people or a way to make life easier, but rather a way to track and trace them in real time. Nothing moves without the intermediary, as it were. Further, predictive planning allows for the anticipation of human actions, particularly resistance to this agenda. It is security, sure, but security for the vast bureaucratic apparatus and its shadowy machinations.

Artificial intelligence is in many ways the key to the globalist Panopticon, beyond being a sort of deity in its own right for the transhumanists. So it’s interesting that In-Q-Tel President and CEO Chris Darby is also on the National Security Commission for Artificial Intelligence. 2020 investments by In-Q-Tel include Morpheus Space (“disrupting the NewSpace industry by introducing Agile Constellations, a fusion between cutting edge propulsion and AI”), AI.Reverie (“A leading provider of synthetic data to train machine learning algorithms”), and Snorkel AI (based out of Palo Alto). Other major recent investments include all kinds of data storage, sensor network, micro surveillance, and quantum computing start-ups. One of the premier investments on the quantum computing side is D-Wave Systems based out of British Columbia, Canada. Major customers include Google, NASA, the Los Alamos National Lab, Lockheed Martin, and the University of Southern California. We also see investments such as Algorithmic (“Infrastructure for deploying and scaling AI/ML models”) and at least eighteen biotechnology start-ups such as Microchip Biotechnologies and Boreal Genomics (DNA fingerprints).

In-Q-Tel made a major investment in a company called Digital Reasoning in 2010. Digital Reasoning signed a contract with the National Ground Intelligence Center of the US Army Intelligence and Security Command in 2004 for the use of its Synthesys software, which has been used in Afghanistan to track combatants. I wonder if it will be used for the same on the new “domestic terrorists” complaining about Critical Race Theory being taught in schools in the United States? Major investors in the company also include BNP Paribas, Barclays, and Goldman Sachs. Steven A. Cohen’s Point72 Asset Management is one of the major firms that uses the Synthesys software in the private sector, primarily to scan internal e-mails between employees for “unfamiliar patterns” and “unusual behavior.”

You Must Get the Vaccine!

Indeed, Point72 also retained the services of Peter Thiel’s Palantir Technologies in 2014 for “a new tool for compliance and surveillance.” Palantir has not only also received financial backing from In-Q-Tel, but its clients past and present include the CIA directly, the DHS, NSA, CDC, FBI, and the Air Force, as well as the UK’s NHS for COVID-19-related tracking (ostensibly)—the same UK where the minister responsible for the COVID-19 “vaccine” rollout, Nadhim Zahawi, stated that:

Google, Facebook and Twitter should do more to fact-check opposing views of vaccines. Asked by the BBC if there would be an immunity passport, Zahawi said a person’s COVID-19 vaccine status might be included in a phone app that would inform local doctors of a person’s status. “But also I think you’d probably find that restaurants and bars and cinemas and other venues, sports venues, will probably also use that system as they’ve done with the app,” Zahawi told the BBC. [This is already being done in Los Angeles.] “The sort of pressure will come both ways: from service providers — who will say ‘look, demonstrate to us that you have been vaccinated’ — but also we will make the technology as easy and accessible as possible.” Asked if it would become virtually impossible to do anything without the vaccine, Zahawi said: “I think people have to make a decision but I think you’ll probably find many service providers will want to engage in this in the way they did with the app.”[5]

In other words, even if it isn’t mandated de jure, it will be de facto, with existence within the system made impossible for those who decline to be injected with the “vaccine”—or for anyone who runs afoul of the regime or who has a low social credit score for that matter.

Already in early December 2020 companies were publicly considering the idea that employees who refused the vaccine could be terminated; labor and employment attorneys such as Rogge Dunn stated that, “Under the law, an employer can force an employee to get vaccinated, and if they don’t, fire them.” While there may be the possibility of temporary exemptions, this will eventually no longer be an option. Indeed, this policy has already been enacted in many jurisdictions.

This naturally begs the question why—why are they so eager to get this shot into people’s arms? Matt Taibbi recently noted that Merck’s new drug molnupiravir was initially greeted with enthusiasm as a new treatment for Covid. However, “it took less than 24 hours for the drug — barely tested, let alone released yet — to be accused of prolonging the pandemic. By the 3rd day, mentions of molnupiravir in news reports nearly all came affixed to stern reminders of its place beneath vaccines in the medical hierarchy.” Treatments be damned. Get vaccinated!

The question of why elites are so intent on everyone getting vaccinated is one that we will continue to consider. Although I do not pretend to have all the answers, I will endeavor to present the evidence and connections that will help illustrate at minimum the global systems all working in concert to some terrible end. We may also make educated suppositions based on the evidence presented and forthcoming, and will continue to do so as this series of articles progresses, but a quick word: the reader will not grasp the totality of the issue let alone its rough outlines if they remain tethered to one “pet issue” or aspect of what we’ll call for shorthand globalism. Very clearly there is, as with the other arms of this agenda from “multi-culturalism” to transgenderism and transhumanism, an outsized Jewish footprint, but there are many non-Jews involved as well—our new technocratic elite. The reasons for this have been explored at great length at TOO, and also incorporate a more metaphysical dimension—a dimension that may well be at the heart of the entire project.

In-Q-Tel and the Internet of Things (IoT)

Now we return to the thickening plot: two more In-Q-Tel investments include Nozomi Networks and Nanosys, a nanotechnology company that designs, develops, and manufactures quantum dot materials. Regarding the former, the following is from a July 14, 2020 Nozomi press release published on their website:

Despite one of the worst economic crises in decades, the company experienced 20% growth in bookings and 66% growth in revenue year-over-year, welcoming In-Q-Tel and Telefónica as strategic investors and adding Deloitte, NTT, Orange and T-Systems to its growing list of global partners … Nozomi Networks Labs also launched a special initiative to help the security community fight COVID-19-related cyber threats. “COVID-19 has accelerated IT/OT [i.e., information technology and operational technology] convergence, created new customer requirements and increased market demands for our solutions,” said Nozomi Networks CEO Edgard Capdevielle. … “We’re stronger than ever and ready to take OT and IoT [internet of things] security to the next level.”

IoT is the internet of things, a major fixation of Schwab and the World Economic Forum. In short, it is the vast network of physical objects embedded with the requisite technology and software to plug in to the internet and coordinate and exchange data, basically what Elon Musk’s Neuralink wants to put in your brain. Essentially, the IoT is any “smart” device/appliance/etc., and will soon be possible to include human beings if the transhumanists have their way. The term ‘internet of things’ owes its origin to Kevin Ashton, co-founder of MIT’s Auto-ID Center. Returning to the Nozomi press release, it clearly shows their connections to the “U.S. intelligence and security communities,” including the Department of Defense:

New customers around the globe [include] key wins at top pharmaceutical manufacturers, transportation companies, electric and water utilities, oil & gas companies and healthcare organizations. “Nozomi Networks’ use of machine learning enables them to provide advanced device identification, behavioral analysis, and anomaly detection capabilities through passive monitoring of IoT and OT networks. This level of visibility is essential for protecting critical infrastructure devices and networks. Their solution is designed to support distributed network architectures and integration with a broad range of security products, making it well suited for deployment into the challenging and diverse operating environments of the U.S. intelligence and defense communities,” [says] Brinda Jadeja, Senior Partner, Investments, In-Q-Tel…We [Nozomi Networks] continue to build our relationship with the Maryland Innovation and Security Institute (MISI). Nozomi Networks is engaged in MISI’s Dreamport U.S. Cyber Command mission accelerator, focused on helping over 300,000 Defense Industrial Base contractors meet new certification requirements to ensure better cybersecurity for the DoD supply chain.

As COVID-19 “necessitated” the need to become more interconnected and digitized, now we are warned of the “unprecedented” and ever-rising cyber-threat, especially to the power grid that serves as the lifeline for contemporary society. Cyber Polygon, part of the World Economic Forum’s Centre for Cybersecurity Platform, declares that “In 2020 the central theme for the Cyber Polygon live stream was the prevention of a ‘digital pandemic’: how to prevent a crisis and to reinforce cybersecurity on all levels”—more predictive programming from these would-be masters of humans and cyberkind. And who would those organizations involved with Cyber Polygon, in addition to the WEF, be? Basically a Who’s Who of globalist elites: INTERPOL, Visa, Banco Santander, Ericsson, IBM, BI.ZONE, Sberbank, Trend Micro, Mobile Telesystems (MTS), and the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN). Partners for the Centre for Cybersecurity Platform more broadly include elites in the corporate, academic, and NGO world: the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, EUROPOL, the University of Oxford, Amazon, Bank of America, BlackRock, the Saudi Arabia National Cybersecurity Authority, PayPal, Mastercard, JP Morgan Chase, Microsoft, Huawei, China Southern Power Grid, China Datang, State Grid Corporation of China, Palantir, and the Israel National Cyber Directorate.

The World Economic Forum: History and Connections

At this juncture, it is worthwhile to take a brief look at the history of the World Economic Forum that has given itself the authority to call for a global Great Reset, which, again, is just a conspiracy theory, and how its existence dovetails with that of the centrally-controlled One Europe bureaucratic state whose people “must learn to be multi-cultural” as per Barbara Lerner Spectre. The WEF’s first iteration was as the European Management Forum, with the first European Management Symposium held in 1971 and attended by numerous Harvard academics and other individuals such as IBM President Jacques Maisonrouge, the Herman Kahn (co-founder of the Hudson Institute, military strategist and systems theorist for the RAND Corporation, a prominent futurist, and considered one of the fathers of scenario planning), and Otto von Habsburg, the last crown prince of the Austro-Hungarian Empire and Vice President (and then President) of the International Paneuropean Union, which published Count Richard von Coudenhove-Kalergi’s manifesto Paneuropa in 1923.

Kalergi—heavily influenced by his marriage to the Jewish actress Ida Roland and a strange worship of Jews—is most known for what is commonly called the Kalergi Plan derived from his 1925 book Practical Idealism, where “Eurasian-Negroids” would replace “the diversity of peoples” with a “diversity of individuals.” An associate of both Winston Churchill and Charles de Gaulle as well, Kalergi had a massive influence on the shaping of Europe’s (mis-)direction in the twentieth and now twenty-first centuries. The European Society Coudenhove-Kalergi awards a prize every two years to major figures who have proven themselves to be committed to Kalergi’s vision, including Angela Merkel, Jean-Claude Juncker, and Ronald Reagan. Kalergi was a major supporter of aspects of the visions of American President Woodrow Wilson and the gay Jewish communist Kurt Hiller. In 1921, he joined a Viennese Masonic lodge and the year following, with Otto von Habsburg, founded the International Paneuropean Union. Next:

According to his autobiography, at the beginning of 1924 his friend Baron Louis de Rothschild introduced him to Max Warburg who offered to finance his movement for the next three years by giving him 60,000 gold marks. Warburg remained sincerely interested in the movement for the remainder of his life and served as an intermediate for Coudenhove-Kalergi with influential Americans such as banker Paul Warburg and financier Bernard Baruch.[6]

Baruch, the Warburgs, and the Rothschilds are of course all Jewish, and once again we see the role of high finance as an inherently destructive force and obstacle to not just the self-preservation of distinct ethnic groups but as we enter the post-COVID world, that of humanity itself.

Schwab’s second Forum meeting in Davos featured former Nazi and NASA rocket scientist Wernher von Braun and “industrial democracy” thinker and activist Charles Levinson, who joined DuPont in 1978. Levinson’s inclusion is especially notable for it marks the beginning of what we might think of as “corporate activism.” The third European Management Symposium in 1973 featured a speech by Italian industrialist Aurelio Peccei summarizing The Limits to Growth, a book echoing the concerns of Thomas Malthus and Peccei’s contemporaries such as Paul Ehrlich, that had been commissioned by the Club of Rome, which he co-founded and served as its first president. The Club was founded at David Rockefeller’s estate in Bellaggio, Italy in 1968. This is the same David Rockefeller who founded the Trilateral Commission with Zbigniew Brzezinski (Board member of the Council on Foreign Relations from 1972–1977) in 1973; Rockefeller was also Chairman of the Board of the Council on Foreign Relations from 1970–1985. We will explore the role of the over-population-cum-climate change ideology more fully in a later article, but it, along with these major NGOs like the Ford and Rockefeller Foundations who have extensively funded it, is yet another key piece of the puzzle.

Along with the Ford Foundation, the Rockefeller Foundation began pumping significant funding into the Council in the late 1930s; additionally, Paul Warburg was a member of the Board from its establishment until 1932. The Warburgs and other major Jewish Wall Street financiers—as well as other major Jewish bankers such as Olof Aschberg—were the primary bankrollers of the Bolsheviks in Russia. Other former Council on Foreign Relations Board members from the past include: George H.W. Bush, Henry Kissinger, Walter Lippmann, Paul Volcker, Allen Dulles, Alan Greenspan, Cyrus Vance, Richard B. “Dick” Cheney, William S. Cohen, Richard C. Holbrooke, Donna Shalala, Robert Zoellick, Madeleine Albright, Tom Brokaw, Colin Powell, Penny Pritzker, and George Soros. Some active members include Lorene Powell Jobs, Larry Fink, and Janet Napolitano. Notable Club of Rome members have included Mikhail Gorbachev, Joe Stiglitz, and Pierre Trudeau.

In addition to the World Economic Forum—whose partners and affiliates include virtually every major player in not just the globalist agenda more broadly but who form the power nucleus of the dominant faction of transhumanists pushing the world in its current awful direction—Klaus Schwab also founded the Schwab Foundation for Social Entrepreneurship, a sister organization of the WEF, along with his wife Hilde. Its awardees have included people like Rob Acker of Salesforce, Helmy Abouleish (“driving a number of initiatives that address major challenges like climate change and food security”), Simon Bakker (Kennemer Foods International), Julie Battilana (Harvard Kennedy School of Government), Eli Beer (United Hatzalah of Israel), Ann Branch (the European Commission), Sasha Chanoff,[7] Salah Goss (Mastercard), Jamie McAuliffe (Aspen Institute), Cynthia McCaffrey (UNICEF China), Christian Seelos (Stanford University), and Jonathan Wong (UNESCAP).

It is the ideology of the aforementioned transhumanists that we will explore in much greater depth next time.

[1] mRNA and the NIH are both vital in understanding the COVID-19 vaccination agenda—the NIH for its role in gain of function research and beyond, and mRNA as the primary vector of delivery in two of the three major “vaccines”—I use the term in quotes as they’re not technically vaccines despite being marketed as such—on offer in the US.

[2] Wikipedia entry for Craig Venter.

[3] Tenet, George, At the Center of the Storm: My Years at the CIA, Harper Press, 1997. p. 26.

[4] Chudley, Jody, “REVEALED: Facebook’s CIA Connections…” March 29, 2018. St. Paul Research.

[5] Reuters Staff (probably AI which generates a lot of these short articles for outlets like Reuters and the Associated Press), “No COVID-19 vaccine, no normal life, UK minister suggests,” November 30, 2020. Reuters.

[6] Wikipedia entry for Richard von Coudenhove-Kalergi.

[7] Per the Schwab Foundation for Social Entrepreneurship: “Sasha Chanoff is the Founder and Executive Director of RefugePoint, and the co-author of the book From Crisis to Calling: Finding Your Moral Center in the Toughest Decisions, with a foreword by David Gergen. He is a recipient of the Charles Bronfman Humanitarian Prize, the Harvard Center for Public Leadership Gleitsman International Activist Award, and is a White House Champion of Change. Sasha has appeared on 60 Minutes and in other US media outlets, and has received social entrepreneur fellowships from the Draper Richards Kaplan Foundation, Ashoka, and Echoing Green. He is a steering committee member of New England International Donors and a founding advisor to The Good Lie Fund.”