This article explores the deep interconnections of the Covid establishment with governments, elite universities, well-funded NGOs, and private corporations, including entities that are enabling governments dedicated to surveillance of  citizens and enforced conformity in attitudes and behavior. These trends are increasingly apparent throughout the West and are particularly welcomed by the political left. As will be seen, there is a prominent role for Jews and Israeli-based entities in all this—not surprising given the emergence of Jews as a global (and globalist) elite. Jews, given their status as an elite and their insecurity based on their perceptions of historical anti-Semitism, tend to oppose populism and to favor top-down elite control—examples are twentieth-century communist governments with Jewish elites enforcing authoritarian, top-down control over the citizenry.

The following is a summary of how this agenda is playing out now within the framework of Western cultures traditionally based on individual freedoms and rights. Quite clearly, the Covid crisis is seen by such elites as a golden opportunity to ratchet up control and conformity in Western societies.

*   *   *

New documents obtained by The Intercept show unequivocally the connection between not just the United States government and the Wuhan Institute of Virology in China, but that of non-governmental organization (NGO) EcoHealth Alliance, which also “used federal money to fund bat coronavirus research at the Chinese laboratory”:

The trove of documents includes two previously unpublished grant proposals that were funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases [NIAID], as well as project updates relating to the EcoHealth Alliance’s research. … One of the grants, titled “Understanding the Risk of Bat Coronavirus Emergence,” outlines an ambitious effort led by EcoHealth Alliance president Peter Daszak to screen thousands of bat samples for novel coronaviruses. … The bat coronavirus grant provided the EcoHealth Alliance with a total of $3.1 million, including $599,000 that the Wuhan Institute of Virology used in part to identify and alter bat coronaviruses likely to infect humans.[1]

In other words, COVID-19 was designed in a lab specifically to infect humans.

Readers are likely well-familiar with the NIAID by now—helmed by Anthony Fauci—but Daszak and the EcoHealth Alliance are probably less familiar.

Daszak, as per the EcoHealth Alliance website, “is a regular advisor to WHO on pathogen prioritization for R&D” among a number of prestigious positions, and “his work has been the focus of extensive media coverage, ranging from press articles in The New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, The Economist, The Washington Post, US News & World Report, and broadcast appearances on 60 Minutes, CNN, ABC, NPR’s Talk of the Nation, Science Friday, and Fresh Air with Terry Gross.” In other words, he’s a big shot in the area of infectious diseases.

Given the police state Australia has now become (and the rest of the globe is fast becoming) under the guise of coronavirus prevention, the fact that the World Health Organization (WHO) has been instrumental in all of this and is also connected to the color-revolution-sponsoring USAID, and with the intersection of big tech and biosurveillance tracking and tracing every little thing, none of this is incidental. The further institutional connections and staff of the EcoHealth Alliance bear this out, which we will see shortly. Further, Daszak was named by the WHO as the sole US representative on a team sent to investigate the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic—which, the propaganda reminds us, did not emerge from a laboratory funded in large part by Daszak’s organization.

Among the EcoHealth Alliance’s partners and those particularly germane to the topic at hand include Johnson & Johnson (which produced one of the leading vaccines for COVID-19 in conjunction with the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority of the US Department of Health and Human Services), the John Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health (“As we look ahead to making COVID-19 vaccines available to children 12 and younger…”), the CDC, the NIH, the New York City Department of Health, and the United Nations’ Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). Johns Hopkins is where COVID-19 infection numbers and the death toll are more often than not sourced by mainstream media; its Center for Health Security was a partner with the World Economic Forum and the Gates Foundation for Event 201, “a high-level pandemic exercise on October 18, 2019, in New York city. The exercise illustrated areas where public/private partnerships will be necessary during the response to a severe pandemic in order to diminish large-scale economic and societal consequences.” Note the date and the subsequent response, both in terms of the Great Reset and Operation Warp Speed with these vaccines being pushed into as many arms as possible in the face of a litany of alternatives, not least of which is natural immunity for a disease with an extremely low mortality rate for those without co-morbidities. In short, they create the problem and then provide the ready-made solution.

It will not surprise you, then, to learn that Scott Dowell, the Gates Foundation’s Deputy Director for Surveillance and Epidemiology, is an advisor for the EcoHealth Alliance. Another advisor is David Heymann, Head of the Centre on Global Health Security at Chatham House, the British equivalent of USAID. Other advisors include the Biosurveillance Coordinator of the CDC and a pair of representatives of the WHO. The Vice Chair of EcoHealth Alliance’s Board of Directors is Carlota Vollhardt, who per the EcoHealth Alliance website, “held positions of increasing responsibility at Pfizer Inc. in global talent, organizational development, and knowledge management as part of the R&D, commercial and corporate divisions.” Pfizer with BioNTech produces yet another of the leading COVID-19 vaccines in the United States, this one of the mRNA variety. NIAID and Moderna co-developed another mRNA vaccine, mRNA-1273, authorized by the FDA and recommended by the CDC.

Pfizer, whose CEO is the Jewish Albert Bourla, reached an agreement in July 2020 with the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the Department of Defense (DoD) for large-scale production and nationwide delivery of 100 million doses of a COVID-19 vaccine in the United States. The agreement also allows the government to acquire an additional 500 million doses. This is the same Pfizer that is alleged to have paid off Nigerian officials in order to accelerate the release of a meningitis drug that ended up killing eleven children. Pfizer had failed to obtain informed consent from the parents, gave fake ethics documents backing the test to the FDA, and, when the FDA opened an investigation into the matter, suddenly called it off shortly thereafter. A former employee alleges that some FDA officials had inside knowledge of what was going on. According to the employee, Dr. Juan Walterspiel, corners were cut because “speed was of the essence and stock options and bonuses at stake.”

Pfizer with partner BioNTech and Moderna, whose Chief Medical Officer Tal Zaks is Israeli, were the two lead horses in rushing a COVID-19 vaccine to market as part of Operation Warp Speed. According to Michael Janofsky:

Zaks received his medical degree and doctorate from Ben Gurion University and served in the Israel Defense Forces as a medic. … Zaks was drawn to Moderna in 2015 by its mission to build a new class of medicine, infusing RNA with a set of instructions that directs cells in the body to make antibodies that prevent or fight disease. … Moderna is part of the Trump administration’s Operation Warp Speed, using nearly $1 billion from the U.S. government’s Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority and working with the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, led by Anthony Fauci. In September, as Moderna’s vaccine success appeared more certain, Zaks and two other researchers — Alexander Gintsburg, director of the Gamaleya Research Institute of Epidemiology and Microbiology in Moscow, and Shmuel Shapira, Director General of the Israel Institute for Biological Research outside Tel Aviv — were named No. 2 on the Jerusalem Post’s list of 50 Most Influential Jews of 2020.[2]

HEMED BEIT, a precursor to the Israel Institute for Biological Research (IIBR), had its genesis as a biological warfare unit. The federal government’s Operation Warp Speed project to hasten development of COVID-19 vaccines awarded Moderna a $1.5 billion contract in August 2020 to deliver 100 million vaccine doses, with a government option to buy up to 400 million more. For 2021, Moderna said it expects to be able to make 500 million to 1 billion doses worldwide. The R&D of the Moderna vaccine was aided by nearly $1 billion in federal funding from the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA).

Moderna claims in its White Paper, “The vaccine mimics natural viral infections in a way that the immune system recognizes. It’s delivered to the muscle and immune cells, which process the nucleotide sequence just as they would do during an infection using viral DNA/mRNA inside the body’s own cells (but safely).” We now know that it does not mimic a natural response. And is it safe? And what if the ruling class decides to inject you with nanotechnology that responds to signals from the suddenly-everywhere 5G towers while they’re at it? What if they are consciously trying to re-program and reengineer you?

It’s not much of a stretch, as World Economic Forum founder Klaus Schwab fantasizes in his book The Fourth Industrial Revolution (its foreword was written by Marc Benioff, the Jewish transgender bankroller, Salesforce founder, Chairman, and CEO, and World Economic Forum Board of Trustee member) about this transhumanist future with a “fusion of technologies across the physical, digital and biological worlds,” with devices becoming “an increasing part of our personal ecosystem, listening to us, anticipating our needs, and helping us when required—even if not asked.” These personal nano networks range from “a smart pill, developed by Proteus Biomedical and Novartis, [that] has a biodegradable digital device attached to it, which transmits data,” to “the first human with fully artificial memory implanted in the brain” and “designer beings.” For Schwab, the increasing velocity of the globalized world is a defining feature of the Fourth Industrial Revolution, a revolution taking place at exponential speed.

You know what else happened at exponential speed? Operation Warp Speed. The concerns over the long-term effects of COVID-19 are warranted, but is there a need to create a global Panopticon for this disease—or any other for that matter? Humanity has always grappled with disease and mortality, and it always will—no amount of transhumanist biotechnological manipulations will ever change that. But that’s not going to stop the people who are committed to pushing the limits of what’s possible and creating “man-made horrors beyond your comprehension.”

Ryan Cross reported in April 2020 for Chemical and Engineering News that, “a virtual meeting in March helmed by the US FDA and the European Medicines Agency concluded that during the pandemic, companies will not have to prove that their vaccines work in animals before beginning human studies.” With this already-questionable (at best) step skipped, the ruling class is preparing for the inevitable adverse reactions as well; the UK’s Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) was “urgently seek[ing] an Artificial Intelligence (AI) software tool to process the expected high volume of Covid-19 vaccine Adverse Drug Reaction (ADRs) and ensure that no details from the ADRs’ reaction test are missed.” The contracted agency, Genpact, is a global professional services firm that, according to its website, runs “thousands of processes primarily for Global Fortune 500 companies. … Combining our expertise in end-to-end operations and our AI-based platform, Genpact Cora, we focus on the details. … Whatever it is, we’ll be there with you – accelerating digital transformation.” Genpact’s industries include private equity, media and entertainment, chemical, aerospace and defense, life sciences, and energy.

Genpact’s clients have included Bayer, McKesson, and the Israeli company SodaStream, whose former CEO Daniel Birnbaum was investigated for insider trading; Birnbaum is at this writing still on the Board of Directors along with Board Chairman Stanley Stern, also on the Board at Foamix Pharmaceuticals (an Israeli-based pharmaceuticals company) and Ekso Bionics Holdings Inc. (“a company that develops and manufactures powered exoskeleton bionic devices that can be strapped on as wearable robots to enhance the strength, mobility, and endurance of soldiers and paraplegics. … At Ekso Bionics, we develop disruptive clinical robotics to tackle loss of mobility and cognition”). Stern was also head of Oppenheimer’s technology investment banking group. Stern and Birnbaum both hold MBAs from Harvard Business School. Joining Stern (who like Michael Bloomberg also spent time with Salomon Brothers) on the Ekso Board is Ted Wang, whose Ekso Bionics website biography reads:

Dr. Wang is the Chief Investment Officer of Puissance Capital Management, a global asset manager founded in 2015 with offices in the U.S. and China. Puissance was the lead investor in Ekso’s recently completed rights offering. Prior to founding Puissance, Dr. Wang was a Partner of Goldman Sachs & Co. in New York. During his 18-year tenure at Goldman Sachs he held many leadership positions including as a member of the Goldman Sachs Risk Committee. Prior to joining Goldman Sachs, he co-founded Xeotron Corp., a company specializing in DNA biochips in Texas.

Nothing to see here, right? For Kelly Servick, regarding Moderna:

Serial entrepreneur Robert Langer of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and Noubar Afeyan, CEO of the venture capital firm Flagship Pioneering, both in Cambridge, saw the makings of a whole new class of drugs—and the idea of Moderna was born. … If you can hack the rules of mRNA, “essentially the entire kingdom of life is available for you to play with,” says Hoge, a physician by training who left a position as a health care analyst to become Moderna’s president in 2012.[3]

Of course the BBC claims that there are no side effects whatsoever associated with mRNA vaccines, and that the microchip-inserting fears of the population are baseless. Unlikely, perhaps, but microchips are already on the market for pets; one company, HomeAgain, states that the “permanent ID can never be removed or become impossible to read”: “Because they use RFID technology, microchips do not require a power source like a GPS. When a microchip scanner is passed over the pet, the microchip gets enough power from the scanner to transmit the microchip’s ID number.” Moderna has collaborated on work with not just the federal government, but Merck and the Gates Foundation[4] along similar lines (from a Moderna website press release):

In January 2016, we entered a global health project framework agreement with the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation to advance mRNA-based development projects for various infectious diseases. The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation has committed up to $20.0 million in grant funding to support our initial project related to the evaluation of antibody combinations in a preclinical setting as well as the conduct of a first-in-human Phase 1 clinical trial of a potential mRNA medicine to help prevent human immunodeficiency virus, or HIV, infections. Follow-on projects which could bring total potential funding under the framework agreement up to $100.0 million (including the HIV antibody project) to support the development of additional mRNA-based projects for various infectious diseases can be proposed and approved until the sixth anniversary of the framework agreement, subject to the terms of the framework agreement, including our obligation to grant to the Bill &Melinda Gates Foundation certain non-exclusive licenses.

Additionally, from the June 2017 White Paper from Moderna entitled “Building the Digital Biotech Company: Why and How Digitization is Mission-Critical for Moderna” (note the use of military language):

The inherent software-like, digital nature of mRNA technology presents the opportunity to build a completely novel type of biopharmaceutical company specifically tailored to explore and exploit the potential of mRNA science. … Our mRNA medicines aren’t small molecules, like traditional pharmaceuticals. And they aren’t biologics (recombinant proteins and monoclonal antibodies), which were the genesis of the biotech industry. Instead, they are sets of instructions – a software-like code – that we deliver to cells in the body.

And what code, what instructions, could this code deliver? Dan Barouch, Director of the Center for Virology and Vaccine Research at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, says, “The COVID crisis is a great opportunity for those technologies to be pushed.” Pushed. Indeed. In addition to working on DNA and mRNA vaccines, Barouch collaborated with Johnson & Johnson and BARDA to develop their adenoviral vector vaccine.

Inovio and its research partner, the Wistar Institute, are major proponents of DNA vaccines; the US Department of Defense provided funding of $11.9 million worth of manufacturing for Inovio’s 2020 trials. The Wistar Institute’s scientists feature ties to the University of California-San Francisco, Harvard Medical School, Boston Children’s Hospital (all of which readers of The Transgender-Industrial Complex will understand its full, grisly significance), East China University of Science and Technology, and the WHO. UCSF, in addition to being a central tumor of transgenderism, is also among the ranks of grantees of the NIH for, as Derrick Broze writes, work focusing “on using artificial intelligence (AI), machine learning, and other methods, combined with smartphone apps, wearable devices, and software ‘that can identify and trace contacts of infected individuals, keep track of verified COVID-19 test results, and monitor the health status of infected and potentially infected individuals.’” The specter of AI and the potential ramifications loom large. For Johnny Vedmore:

A company named Cybereason is here to provide us with a short glimpse of our pending fearful futures. … Cybereason’s CEO and co-founder is an enigmatic former Israeli Intelligence agent Lior Div-Cohen, often simply referred to as Lior Div. Div, an IDF Medal of Honor recipient and former Israeli Unit 8200 member, co-founded Cybereason in 2012 alongside Yossi Naar and Yonatan Striem-Amit, who are also fellow veterans of Israel’s military cybersecurity corps. A scholar from the Academic College of Tel-Aviv, Lior Div afterwards worked as a software engineer for Xacct a network service provider followed by the notorious firm Amdocs, which was accused of eavesdropping on American government officials on behalf of Israel. In between Amdocs and Cybereason, Lior Div was the CEO and co-founder of Israeli cybersecurity firm AlfaTech which is described in its national media as “a cybersecurity services company for Israeli government agencies.” … Through their partnership with Lockheed Martin, Cybereason now has its A.I.-driven cybersecurity software running on some of the U.S. government’s most classified networks, including numerous, critical U.S. military systems. Yet, it’s not only major weapons developers like Lockheed Martin who have invested in this hi-tech cybersecurity platform. Reuters reported in August 2019 that Japanese firm Softbank has invested previously in the company, along with venture capital firms CRV and Spark Capital. Spark Capital’s investment portfolio includes Twitter, Oculus, Wayfair, Coinbase, Plaid, among many other big players. CRV’s investments include Dropbox, Patreon, but also A.I. and machine learning-related enterprises such as Standard Cognition and Dyno Therapeutics. As with Darktrace, Cybereason offers what is described as a next generation antivirus technology which, instead of responding to attacks when detected, will use A.I. and machine learning to see abnormalities to a network’s usual processes in real time. … Cybereason also has links to one of the usual suspects, Brigadier Pinchas Buchris. The former Deputy Commander of an elite IDF operations unit and former Commander of the IDF 8200 Cyber Intelligence Unit, he was also Director General of the Israeli Ministry of Defense, CEO of Oil Refineries Ltd and also serves as an AIPAC board member. This highflying Israeli intelligence operative joined the board of Cybereason shortly after his time spent at Carbyne911. Carbyne, an Israeli 911 call platform which saw initial investment from Jeffrey Epstein, Nicole Junkermann, and Peter Thiel, was founded by Ehud Barak and other ex Israeli intelligence giants. … Carbyne911 have been pushing to be involved in the Covid-19 track and trace apps as well as continuing to try and take over the American emergency services communication infrastructure. … All of these technologies must be thought about, not only in relation to just an election day cyber-attack or a terrorist event, but instead think of this in its original and larger context. The Cambridge mathematicians behind the creation of Darktrace weren’t originally looking to prevent a cyberattack on election day 2020. These highflying math geniuses were trying to create the singularity, the creation of self-learning A.I.[5]

Unsurprisingly, given its role in everything COVID and many other horrors besides, Johns Hopkins offers a master’s degree in Artificial Intelligence, and its Machine Learning program “brings together dozens of faculty from across the university to share research problems and techniques.” The Center for Health Security is housed in the Bloomberg School of Public Health.

Operation Warp Speed awarded contracts to vaccine companies through the defense contractor Advanced Technology International (ATI). Whitney Webb has explored its web of connections.[6]

The Biden administration’s Coronavirus Task Force further institutionalized this agenda. As Derrick Broze writes:

Biden announced that his Coronavirus Task Force would be chaired by former Surgeon General Vivek Murthy, former Food and Drug Administration commissioner David Kessler and Yale University’s Dr. Marcella Nunez-Smith. … At least six members of the 13-member Task Force have worked directly with Gates or the Gates Foundation, while at least 3 others have tangential connections to Gates. Several members also have connections to the Rockefeller Foundation, which is also infamous for shaping international health policy. … [One example is] Dr. Eric Goosby … an infectious disease expert and professor of medicine at the University of California, San Francisco, School of Medicine. During the Clinton administration Goosby was the founding director of the largest federally funded HIV/AIDS program. Goosby was also part of a 25-member commission convened by the Rockefeller Foundation and Boston University which focused on “how global decision-makers can better use burgeoning data on the wide range of factors influencing people’s health.” In 2012, he participated in a panel with Bill Gates as part of the International AIDS Conference. … The presence of counter-terrorism experts, a Council on Foreign Relations fellow, an In-Q-Tel executive, connections to the Gates Foundation and the Rockefeller Foundation are all signs that Joe Biden’s Coronavirus Task Force will carry on the trends started under the Trump administration’s Operation Warp Speed.[7]

The Board of Trustees of In-Q-Tel includes individuals such as former CIA Director George Tenet. In-Q-Tel, according to its website:

The CIA and government agencies, once innovation leaders, recognized they were missing out on the cutting-edge, innovative, and impactful technologies coming out of Silicon Valley and beyond. Combining the security savvy of government with the can-do curiosity of Silicon Valley, In-Q-Tel is born. As technology evolves and government needs transform, IQT established new initiatives that build on its national security mission. IQT Labs explore technology opportunities and solutions to problems that remain unsolved across government, industry, and society yet are critically important for technology adoption and national security. B.Next was founded – and was prescient – in its application of biotechnology to address the national security threat of infectious disease epidemics and pandemics.

Also on In-Q-Tel’s Board is A. B. Krongard (“Israel’s Agent at the CIA”), who may well have been the connection between Erik Prince of Blackwater Security Consulting and the CIA. In 2007 there was controversy over whether Krongard had joined Blackwater as a member of its Advisory Board; he was also mentioned in the 9/11 Commission Report in connection to possible insider trading through trades made by Alex. Brown & Sons, where he was at one time Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board: “A single U.S.-based institutional investor with no conceivable ties to al Qaeda purchased 95 percent of the UAL puts on September 6 (2001) as part of a strategy that also included buying 115,000 shares of American on September 10. Similarly, much of the seemingly suspicious trading on September 10 was traced to a specific U.S.-based options trading newsletter…which recommended these trades.” Krongard was named Executive Director of the CIA in March 2001, having joined the agency in 1998. Why would he buy shares of American Airlines on September 10? What happened the very next day involving American Airlines that killed thousands of Americans, ushered in a massive erosion of civil liberties, and a string of Vietnams-in-the-desert with nations ruined and hundreds of thousands dead?

Krongard is on Apollo Global Management’s Board of Directors with wealthy and powerful Jews Leon Black (co-founder, Chairman, and CEO of Apollo) and New England Patriots football franchise owner Robert Kraft. Black, The New York Times reported, paid Jeffrey Epstein at least $50 million between 2012 and 2017. Krongard’s wife was a senior partner of Apollo Global Management from January 2002 to December 2004. From 1994 to 2000, she served as the Chief Executive Officer of Rothschild Asset Management and as Senior Managing Director for Rothschild North America. Additionally, she served as a director of Rothschild North America, Rothschild Asset Management, Rothschild Asset Management BV, and Rothschild Realty Inc. and as Managing Member of Rothschild Recovery Fund. She served as a director of US Airways Group Inc. from 2003 until its merger with American Airlines. France’s president is former Rothschild banker Emmanuel Macron; it should be noted that above the fierce objections of many, France has introduced a “vaccine passport.”

A.B. Krongard is also an Emeritus Trustee of Johns Hopkins Medicine, as is Sharon Percy Rockefeller. Johns Hopkins Medicine Deputy Director Anita Cicero’s expertise areas according to Johns Hopkins Medicine’s website are: Public health law; epidemic and pandemic preparedness policy; global catastrophic biological risk issues; biosecurity; bio surveillance; and international disease surveillance. Her professional profile informs that “Cicero has also launched a number of initiatives to improve mutual understanding and collaboration with countries including the People’s Republic of China,” and that Cicero’s work as an attorney “required constructive engagement with members of Congress; the World Health Organization; the European Commission; the US Food and Drug Administration; the US Departments of State, Defense, and Health and Human Services; and the Environmental Protection Agency.”

The CEO of Johns Hopkins Medicine, Paul Rothman, attended MIT, accepted a postdoctoral fellowship at Columbia University prior to joining its medical school faculty, and is on the Board of Merck. In a July 2020 interview with The Jerusalem Post, Rothman stated that big data sets assisted by artificial intelligence technologies could help doctors personalize treatments for coronavirus. That same month, the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security published a report entitled “Resetting Our Response: Changes Needed in the US Approach to COVID-19”: “Unlike many countries in the world, the United States is not currently on course to get control of this epidemic. It’s time to reset.” Reset you say? That sounds awfully familiar…

The Rockefeller Foundation, in addition to its role in consolidating control over the global food supply and its other extensive activities contributing to the creation of the One World government—like Johns Hopkins with Event 201 and the like—has been gaming these scenarios out ahead of time; they have been poised to leap for some time. (Also of note: the new head of the CDC, the Jewish Rochelle Walensky, is a Johns Hopkins alumna; readers of The Transgender-Industrial Complex will remember her central role, as transgenderism is a central component and tributary of sorts to transhumanism.) In their May 2010 report with the Global Business Network entitled “Scenarios for the Future of Technology and International Development,”  we see favorable citations of the work of the RAND Corporation, the UN Millennium Project, and the World Bank. Running through potential future scenarios, we see lockstep:

In 2012, the pandemic that the world had been anticipating for years finally hit. Unlike 2009’s H1N1, this new influenza strain originat[ed] from wild geese. … The pandemic…had a deadly effect on economies: international mobility of both people and goods screeched to a halt, debilitating industries like tourism and breaking global supply chains. Even locally, normally bustling shops and office buildings sat empty for months, devoid of both employees and customers.

The pandemic is eerily similar to the work done by the Director of the Center for Emerging Infectious Diseases at the Wuhan Institute of Virology Shi Zhengli in identifying dozens of SARS-like viruses in bat caves,[8] as is the subsequent global response to what has happened with COVID-19. Just a reminder, this is from May 2010. The lockstep scenario continues:

Technology trends and applications we might see: Scanners using advanced functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) technology become the norm at airports and other public areas to detect abnormal behavior that may indicate “antisocial intent.” … Nations create their own independent, regionally defined IT networks, mimicking China’s firewalls. … During the pandemic, national leaders around the world flexed their authority and imposed airtight rules and restrictions, from the mandatory wearing of face masks to body-temperature checks at the entries to communal spaces like train stations and supermarkets. Even after the pandemic faded, this more authoritarian control and oversight of citizens and their activities stuck and even intensified. In order to protect themselves from the spread of increasingly global problems—from pandemics and transnational terrorism to environmental crises and rising poverty—leaders around the world took a firmer grip on power. At first, the notion of a more controlled world gained wide acceptance and approval. Citizens willingly gave up some of their sovereignty—and their privacy—to more paternalistic states in exchange for greater safety and stability…National leaders had more latitude to impose order in the ways they saw fit. In developed countries, this heightened oversight took many forms: biometric IDs for all citizens, for example…China’s investment in Africa expanded as the bargain of new jobs and infrastructure in exchange for access to key minerals or food exports proved agreeable to many governments. Cross-border ties proliferated in the form of official security aid. While the deployment of foreign security teams was welcomed in some of the most dire failed states, one-size-fits-all solutions yielded few positive results.

When we also consider the fact that individuals like Schwab have fantasized about the ability for digital implants to enable the visual cortex to register and thus have access to whatever the database might turn up, including social credit ratings, and that the Chinese company Alibaba has been at the forefront of creating a new digital currency, and that the Chinese government has a social credit score already in place, and that Jack Ma of Alibaba is on Schwab’s World Economic Forum’s (which is spearheading the Great Reset) Board of Trustees—well, can we see where this is going?

---

[1] Lerner, Sharon and Maria Hvistendahl, “New Details Emerge about Coronavirus Research at Chinese Lab,” The Intercept. September 6, 2021.

[2] Janofsky, Michael, “Who is Tal Zaks, developer of Moderna’s COVID-19 vaccine?” November 17, 2020. Forward.

[3] Servick, Kelly, “This mysterious $2 billion biotech is revealing the secrets behind its new drugs and vaccines,” February 1, 2017. Science.

[4] For the record, Bill Gates is now the single-largest private agricultural land holder in the United States of America.

[5] Vedmore, Johnny, “Darktrace and Cybereason: The Intelligence Front Companies Seeking to Subjugate the World with the A.I. Singularity,” November 3, 2020. Unlimited Hangout.

[6] “ATI mostly manages R&D consortia for the Department of Defense. … They also manage the Border Security Technology Consortium (BSTC) for the Department of Homeland Security, primarily surveillance technology companies. … The MTEC [Medical Technology Enterprise Consortium] operating on behalf of the US Army Medical Research and Development Command, aims to “accelerate the development of revolutionary medical solutions,” which include gene editing, nanotechnology, “telehealth solutions,” artificial limbs, and brain implants. They are also currently developing a wearable device that would diagnose individuals with Covid-19 before symptoms appear. The other ATI-managed “health-care” consortium, the MCDC [Medical CBRN Defense Consortium], is focused on “advanced development efforts to support the Department of Defense’s (DoD) medical pharmaceutical and diagnostic requirements to counter Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear (CBRN) threat agents.” They are specifically involved in “enabling prototype technologies for therapeutic medical countermeasures targeting viral, bacterial and biological toxin targets of interest to the DoD,” including the development of vaccines…MCDC members include Emergent Biosolutions as well as DoD/CIA contractor Battelle Memorial Institute, with both of those companies having unsettling ties to the 2001 anthrax attacks. Another member of the MCDC is CIA/NSA contractor Booz Allen Hamilton and weapons manufacturer General Dynamics. MCDC’s membership has expanded significantly following ATI’s acquisition by Analytic Services Inc. (ANSER), the principal sponsor of the Dark Winter bioterror simulation, with eighteen new members added just three months after the acquisition had concluded.” (Webb, Whitney, “Operation Warp Speed Is Using A CIA-Linked Contractor To Keep Covid-19 Vaccine Contracts Secret,” October 6, 2020. The Last American Vagabond.)

[7] Broze, Derrick, “Joe Biden’s Coronavirus Task Force Is A Rockefeller, Council On Foreign Relations, Gates Foundation Swamp, November 10, 2020. The Last American Vagabond.

[8] See the Zhengli-EcoHealth Alliance connection from this 2013 press release.

The Crest of the Peacock (1991) has a beautiful title and an ugly purpose. The book takes that title from a line in an ancient Sanskrit text: “Like the crest of a peacock, like the gem on the head of a snake, so is mathematics at the head of all knowledge.” (p. v) So much for the beauty: now for the ugliness. The subtitle of the book is “Non-European Roots of Mathematics” and it’s one of the earlier entries in what might be called the “Whites Stole Everything” school of anti-Western polemic. There’s the West and the Rest—and the Rest is Best.

Sue’s venomous views

The author of the book, a Keralan Indian called George Gheverghese Joseph, didn’t express himself as crudely as that. But thirty years later the implicit message of his “pioneering book” (back cover) is explicit throughout Western politics, media and education. Whites have perpetually stolen from and exploited the rest of the world. They have no true culture, no distinctive achievements, and so-called Western civilization truly is, as the notorious Jewish writer Susan Sontag so eloquently put it, “the cancer of human history.” Joseph doesn’t have that Jewish hatred for Whites and the Christian West—he says in the introduction that he comes “from a family of Syrian Orthodox Christians” in Kerala (p. xiii)—but he obviously wants to give Whites as little credit for their mathematical achievements as he can. This is a book about mathematics, not linguistics, but when he’s describing pioneers in the decipherment of cuneiform script he gives full names and dates to “George Frederick Grotefend (1775–1853) and Henry Creswicke Rawlinson (1810–95)” (p. 95).

The Crest is Best: George Gheverghese Joseph’s successful anti-White book

Grotefend and Rawlinson were Whites uncovering the greatness of a non-European civilization, so Joseph is happy to acknowledge their “pioneering efforts.” But when he’s discussing the mathematical constant π and the ancient problem of “squaring the circle,” he hides another White pioneer behind the passive voice: “The problem of squaring the circle was finally resolved in 1882 when it was shown to be impossible. … Only in the nineteenth century was it demonstrated that, since squaring the circle is equivalent to constructing a line segment whose length is equal to the product of the square root of π (which is not a constructible quantity) and the radius of the given circle, it cannot be done.” (pp. 188-9)

The contradiction that powers leftism

But who “resolved” that problem? Who “demonstrated” that “it cannot be done”? It was the great German mathematician Ferdinand Lindemann (1852–1939). Joseph doesn’t name him, presumably because he doesn’t want to acknowledge that a White mathematician achieved such an important result. Joseph is a leftist and his concealment of Lindemann’s identity exposes one of the central contradictions of leftism. The ideology claims explicitly to believe in absolute human equality and yet acts on the implicit assumption that Whites are innately vicious and non-Whites innately virtuous. Whites must therefore be denied credit wherever possible, because, unlike non-Whites, they don’t genuinely deserve it.

This contradiction doesn’t weaken leftism: on the contrary, it powers leftism. The explicit claim of human equality gives leftists a sense of self-righteous virtue and superiority over the ignorant racists who reject human equality. At the same time, they use their implicit belief in White evil to indulge their hostility towards or hatred of Whites. For example, the leftist attitude to startling Black achievements in the field of murder and mayhem can be summed up like this: “It may be a Black hand holding the gun, but it’s white racism that pulls the trigger.” In other words, the malevolent agency of Whites explains all apparent non-White misbehaviour.

Stonehenge doesn’t count

Joseph is working in this anti-White tradition when he implicitly promotes the idea that the work of non-Whites explains all apparent White achievement in mathematics. And indeed, we should be happy to acknowledge the genius of non-White mathematicians like the Keralan Madhava of Sangamagramma (c. 1340–c. 1425), who was centuries ahead of European mathematicians in some of his results. But we’ve seen that, even as Joseph is naming and proclaiming such non-White geniuses, he declines to name the White mathematician Lindemann: “The problem of squaring the circle was finally resolved in 1882 when it was shown to be impossible.”

That’s not an oversight: it’s intentional. And he states in a footnote that “we shall not be discussing … the mathematical attainments of the constructors of megalithic monuments, such as Stonehenge in England,” claiming that “it is extremely unlikely that the neolithic lifestyle of the constructors would have generated the demands or supplied the resources required for developing the ‘advanced’ mathematics attributed to them by [some] writers.” (p. 27) That may be so, but the “constructors of megalithic monuments” in Europe prove that the “roots of mathematics” were not entirely “non-European.” By discussing the monuments, Joseph would have undermined his simple theme of the Rest being Better than the West. So he doesn’t discuss them.

The mountains of Central Equatorial Africa

This exclusion is both convenient for Joseph and revealing of his anti-White and anti-Western motives. At the beginning of the book, he proclaims his own belief in the Psychic Unity of Mankind: “there is no reason to believe that early man’s capacity to reason and conceptualize was any different from that of his modern counterpart.” (p. 27) In fact, there’s very good reason to believe that, thanks to different paths of evolution in very different environments, intellectual powers are not distributed evenly among either the races or the sexes. Intellectual achievement certainly hasn’t been distributed evenly, as Joseph’s own book demonstrates. Although leftists greeted The Crest of the Peacock with delight—“A magnificent contribution” said a “peer-reviewed academic journal on contemporary racism and imperialism” called Race & Class—the book doesn’t in fact support the leftist world-view.

According to the publisher’s blurb, Joseph “makes it clear [that] human beings everywhere have been capable of advanced and innovative mathematical thinking.” No, he doesn’t do that, because mathematical achievements have not been scattered at random among the various human races and cultures. He begins his survey with the Ishango Bone, a very interesting prehistoric artefact found “in the mountains of Central Equatorial Africa” (p. 23). Regular and obviously deliberate markings on the bone, which seems to date from about 20,000 BC, do indeed seem to show a lunar calendar and even some understanding of prime numbers. But Joseph is unable to claim that sub-Saharan Blacks were key contributors to the “non-European roots of mathematics.” It would be difficult to do that, because they weren’t.

Ancient Egypt was not a “Black civilization”

And today Blacks are of no importance in STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics). This is a big embarrassment to the left, and Joseph uses one of their main responses: to count ancient Egypt and its awesome civilization as somehow “Black” because Egypt is geographically part of Africa. He announces: “It is important that the African roots of the Egyptian civilization are emphasized so as to counter the still deeply entrenched view that the ancient Egyptians were racially, linguistically and even geographically separated from Africa.” (pp. 57-8)

The “Great Black Briton” Septimius Severus and his family (his son Geta has suffered damnatio memoriae)

The implicit—and bad—reasoning there is that ancient Egypt was in Africa and that Africa is Black, therefore ancient Egypt was a Black civilization. A supercharged version of the same bad reasoning has been used to hail the Roman emperor Septimius Severus (1462–11) as one of “100 Great Black Britons,” because he was born in what is now northern Libya and died in what is now the English city of York. Libya is in Africa, therefore Severus was Black; York is in Britain, therefore Severus was British; and he was a Roman emperor, therefore he was a Great Black Briton. QED!

Backward to Black

Septimius Severus was neither Black nor British, of course. And Greek mathematicians like Euclid and Eratosthenes were not Black either, despite hailing from Alexandria “in Africa” and despite the self-aggrandizing claims of the genuinely Black mathematician Jonathan Farley. As Nassim Talib has pointed out, these ridiculous claims might stop if we replaced the geographic label “North Africa” with the equally legitimate label “South Mediterranean.” The mathematically expert Taleb added: “Too many people think in words.” Joseph isn’t guilty of such explicit misrepresentation in The Crest of the Peacock, but he’s still promoting the idea that ancient Egypt’s geography somehow determined its genetics. In fact, no: ancient Egypt’s genetics were not Black.

But modern Egypt’s genetics are much closer to being so: the admixture of sub-Saharan genes has increased over time. As Egypt’s Blackness rose, its greatness fell. Its leading role in mathematics and its astonishing achievements, like the pyramids, are now long in the past. That’s exactly what one would expect: advanced civilization and technological innovation depend on a critical mass of highly intelligent individuals—what the probably Jewish statistician Griffe du Lion calls “the smart fraction.” The more Black admixture there is in a population, the fewer such individuals there will be and the less capable that population will be of high achievement.

The genius of Persia

The religion of Islam may also have contributed to the intellectual stagnation of once advanced regions like Egypt and Mesopotamia. Consanguineous marriage, which is widely practised by Muslims, both lowers average intelligence and breaks down social cohesion, because it promotes loyalty to families and clans rather than to larger entities. Joseph devotes the final section of his book to a “Prelude to Modern Mathematics: The Arab Contribution,” where he traces the achievements of mathematicians and astronomers working under the “Islamic rule” that stretched “from North Africa in the south to the borders of France in the West, right across Persia and the Central Asian plains to the borders of China in the east, and down to Sind in northern India.” (p. 301)

However, “Arab Contribution” isn’t the right term, because some of the most important figures in the “Prelude to Modern Mathematics” were not Arab but Persian and hence from an area conquered by the Indo-Europeans in the third millennium BC. Joseph discusses giants like Muhammad ibn Musa al-Khwarizmi (c. 780–c. 850), Omar Khayyam (c. 1040–1123), and Jamshid al-Kashi (c. 1380–1429), who were born within the borders of modern Iran (al-Khwarizmi’s name is the source of the term “algorithm” in modern English). Once again we can see intellectual achievement isn’t distributed at random: “Islamic rule” stretched across a vast territory, but some parts of that territory, like Persia and Central Asia, contributed disproportionately to mathematics, astronomy, philosophy and medicine.

Death-deserving heretics

More interestingly still, some of the great mathematicians of the era seem to follow a pattern I’ve discussed before at the Occidental Observer: that of highly-achieving minority sects within under-achieving majorities. In India, the religious sect known as Parsis have made hugely disproportionate contributions to intellectual life and, in the person of Freddy Mercury, to entertainment. Their name literally means “Persians,” because they’re the descendants of Zoroastrians driven out of Persia by Muslim persecution in the seventh and eighth centuries. Muslims have also persecuted the sect to which the great Pakistani scientist Abdus Salam (1926–96) belonged. He won a Nobel Prize for Physics in 1979, the first scientific Nobel ever awarded to a Muslim.

But he isn’t celebrated in his homeland, where it is illegal to refer to him as a Muslim. He belonged to a much-persecuted Muslim sect called the Ahmadis, who are regarded as dangerous and death-deserving heretics by mainstream Sunnis. That pattern of minority and sectarian high achievement also appears in Joseph’s book. Al-Khwarizmi may have been “of Zoroastrian descent” (p. 305), while Thabit ibn Qurra (c. 836–c. 901) belonged to an ancient star-worshipping sect called the Sabaeans, which Joseph says produced other “eminent scholars in mathematics and astronomy.” (pp. 307–8) He mentions these affiliations only in passing and undoubtedly did not regard them as biologically important. After all, how could membership of one religion or another affect one’s mathematical skills for better or worse?

A genuine Jewish genius

Well, very easily, because religious groups that are genetically isolated from the majority can preserve or evolve distinct genes of all kinds, including those that influence intelligence and cognition. Kevin MacDonald has noted of medieval Jewish culture in Europe that “success as a scholar was valuable because it allowed the scholar to contract a desirable marriage, often to a woman from a wealthy family. At the very center of Judaism, therefore, was a set of institutions that would reliably result in eugenic processes related to intelligence and resource acquisition ability.”

Genuine Jewish genius Emmy Noether

It isn’t a coincidence, then, that Emmy Noether (1882–1935), perhaps the best and most important female mathematician in history, was a product of those eugenic processes. In other words, Noether was Jewish, like a vastly disproportionate number of other great mathematicians and physicists. If intellectual ability were distributed at random among human beings, we wouldn’t see patterns like that. Joseph didn’t discuss Jewish mathematicians in his book, because he almost certainly didn’t regard them as non-White and non-European. Accordingly, he wouldn’t have thought them useful for anti-Western propaganda.

Submerged by the West

But he did mention another statistical anomaly: that of two mathematical geniuses from the large, highly populous and very genetically complex region of India. But the geniuses Madhava of Sangamagramma (c. 1340–c. 1425) and Srinivasa Ramanujan (1887–920) defied the demographic odds and were born in nearly the same part of India and into the same Brahmin stratum of society, a stratum often linked to the Indo-European invasion. Joseph says of Madhava that he “possessed extraordinary intuition, making him almost the equal of a more recent intuitive genius, [Ramanujan], who spent his childhood and youth at Kumbakonam, not very far from Madhava’s birthplace.” (p. 293)

He goes on to ask whether Ramanujan drew on “the vestiges of a ‘hidden’ indigenous mathematical tradition which was not submerged by the influx of modern mathematics from the West.” (p. 293) I don’t think Ramanujan did that. Instead, I think he drew on a different kind of tradition: genetics. Madhava and Ramanujan may have owed their shared genius to their shared genetics. The two men were both Hindus, but Hinduism is like an arch beneath which shelter hundreds of sects and thousands or even tens of thousands of micro-sects whose customs and taboos have kept them genetically separate for centuries and more. The famous division of Hindu society into Brahmin, Kshatriya, Vaishya and Sudra, or scholars, warriors, merchants, and labourers, is merely a précis. The social—and genetic—reality is much more complicated than that and the stratifications much more detailed and genetically significant, including a significant influx of  the genes of Indo-European Bronze Age conquerors.

Blank slates and loaded dice

As a believer in the “Blank Slate” theory of human nature, Joseph doesn’t mention genetics in his discussion either of India or of China, which was more fertile ground for the “Non-European Roots of Mathematics.” In other words, while his book supposedly expanded the horizons of intellectual history and enquiry, in fact it shrunk them in typical leftist fashion. Leftists try to reduce the vast and fascinating complexity of human biology and behaviour to a narrow tale of environment and culture. The “Blank Slate” theory of human nature accompanies and complements the “Tumbling Dice” theory of human history. If we’re all the same under the skin, then, as the Jewish scientist Jared Diamond has often claimed, it’s merely chance and fortunes of geography or climate that explain why one group achieves this and another group achieves that. Or fails to achieve it.

But the “Tumbling Dice” theory of history inexorably gives rise to the “Loaded Dice” theory of history, whereby Whites are found guilty of rigging the historic game in their own favour. If the dice weren’t loaded, they would surely tumble sooner or later in favour of Blacks. Century after century, they haven’t done so. Therefore they must be loaded. What else but White racism can explain why Blacks are so successful at crime and so unsuccessful at STEM? And while Whites were unjustly and maliciously treading Blacks into the dirt, they were looting the intellectual treasures of India and China. In short, Western civilization is a fraud and Whites stole everything, lifting themselves up by pushing everyone else down.

Indian numerals, Babylonian timekeeping

As I said at the beginning, Joseph doesn’t put it as crudely as that. Nevertheless, scholarly work like his has fuelled the increasingly rabid anti-White attitudes of the present day, when people are putting it as crudely as that. But those anti-White fanatics are wrong. Whites did not “steal everything” and they have distinctive and admirable achievements of their own. Joseph is right that the West built on and benefited from the genius (and geniuses) of ancient civilizations like Babylonia, Egypt, India and China. For example, we use Arabic numerals, which are really Indian numerals, and we still divide time in the ancient sexagesimal fashion of the Babylonians.

But Western civilization has surpassed its mentors in STEM and reached new heights. Modern mathematics, like the modern science it underpins, is a White Western creation. Whites could very easily make unlimited further progress in mathematics and science without the contribution of high-IQ non-Whites, whether Indians, Chinese or Jews. Indeed, Whites will stop making progress of all kinds if non-Whites do not leave Western societies and allow us to end the worsening anti-White trends in politics and culture.

Insanities, inanities and fatal flaws

The Crest of the Peacock was fuel thirty years ago as those trends began to gain momentum and venom. Yes, in part the book is a fascinating (if wordy) synthesis of some very diverse mathematical history and biography. But its interesting contents and beautiful title belie its ugly purpose. And it has undoubtedly contributed to the slow-motion collapse of standards in STEM that began in the last century. Thanks to the insanities and inanities of Black Lives Matter and its allies, the collapse is losing slowness and gaining motion by the day. The left knows that it can’t raise Blacks to meet high standards, so it has to drop standards to meet the low abilities of Blacks.

That is not a recipe for civilizational success, which is why China is refusing to follow it. But it’s easy for China to refuse to contort and flagellate itself for its sins towards Blacks. Why so? Because China hasn’t opened its borders to the Third World and been massively enriched by Blacks. Or by Indians like George Gheverghese Joseph, who was educated at the English universities of Leicester and Manchester as he researched and wrote his anti-Western book.

If Whites have a fatal flaw, it is not nasty xenophobia but naïve xenophilia. We have been too ready to nurture hostile outsiders and too ready to indulge them as they’ve set about the culture of critique and the dismantling of Western civilization. There is indeed the West and the Rest. But when the Rest flood into the West, the West ceases to be Best. That’s the lesson I draw from The Crest of the Peacock.

The New Bolshevik Branches of the United States of America:  Chief of Staff (Klain), State (Blinken, Sherman, Nuland), Treasury (Yellen), CDC (Walensky), DHS (Mayorkas), Cybersecurity (Neuberger), CIA (Cohen), Council of Economic Advisors (Bernstein), FCC (Rosenworcel), SEC (Gensler), Special Envoy to Monitor and Combat Anti-Semitism (Lipstadt), NSC Border Czar (Jacobson), Council on Gender Policy (Klein), Covid Response (Zients), U. S. Commission on International Religious Freedom (Kleinbaum), U.S. Ambassador to the E.U. (Gitenstein), SGOTUS (Emhoff), Senate (Schumer).

And Meet the New Head of the US Department of Justice: Attorney General Merrick Garfinkle.

The American government is established under both ideological and constructive federalism: most broadly, that means that it has separate branches of government; that those branches are relatively independent; and that a set of rules, laws, or a constitution, establish and maintain such a structure.  Some observers believe, however, that this federalism construct is “imploding” toward its center, into a monolithic, centralized unit.  The classical liberal principles that informed the crafting of the U.S. Constitution, and the form of limited government, with limited, circumscribed powers held at bay in order to leave men and women unburdened, have been eroded, weakened and even explicitly attacked.  This development has become especially pronounced in the last 12 months, but has been creeping toward this arrangement since the Second World War when government, industry, the intelligence sector and finance pushed toward an effective creation of a unified trust.

The exact same phenomenon, animated by additional factors but sharing a common cultural causation, exists in the greater Middle East, as, like the gravity of a black hole, the country of Israel seeks to centralize regional power, resources and command, under its authority: a single, unified “Pan Israel” operated by a permanent Zionist, effectively theocratic authoritarianism.  Like the US, its dominant political trust seeks to deceive, distort, divide and destroy.  It functions from the effort of continuous destabilization, created through routines of deception.  The current Afghanistan operation is another, perhaps near-term final stage in the Global War on Terror (“GWOT”) that has as its underlying purpose a “Middle East transformation” that is centered on the conquest of Iran, the control of regional resources, and the effective control of Russia in a neo-Bolshevik fantasy currently led by the U.S. State Department.

Both the US, and the Pan Israel project, also share a common network of special interests, embedded largely in US institutions.  Their outward ideological posture is that of liberty, freedom, and a fight against terror: it is, in fact, the use of terror to suppress liberty, and centralize authority. Consolidating authority in the U.S. is central to the ability to carry out the final phases of the GWOT.  Capturing the Department of Justice is central to breaking down the checks and balances that would otherwise retard or inhibit such overt consolidation, and where any remnants of federalism must be collapsed. Merrick Garland is the right man for that job.

Jewish organized interests—like all interests that organize for specific objectives—form their network, assets, influence and authority, in institutions.  And quite clearly, it’s much more difficult for a relatively small group of activists to influence policy when the government is dedicated to federalism, with its 50 states and thousands of local jurisdictions such as police departments, than it is to have power centralized in Washington DC. Top-down institutional control at the federal level is key to the special interest interface with, and influence over, American society.  In Garland’s case, nearly his entire career has been within government.  While this is not necessarily unusual in the legal field, it creates a perspective that favors central government—a perspective that sees problems primarily as challenges to governmental authority and that reinforces a culture of government expansion especially through the sprawling administrative state that has characterized U.S. government since the New Deal era of the 1930’s.

While Jewish and other special interest institutional infiltrations of American civil, military and government departments are not new, what is new is a radical shift and even transformation, in the relationship between the President and the branches, departments and agencies, resulting from the installation of a cognitively impaired chief executive in the White House as Commander in Chief.  By eroding and dismantling what firewall or even notional separation and independence of authority, judgment, and operations, that the office of the president has historically provided, it has been subject to what is in effect a complete takeover. When the current acting president is replaced with his Vice President—an individual with more overtly clinical psychological characteristics—the takeover and strategic plans will be consolidated (until it is successfully disbanded by direct election or constitutional removal—which would be challenged under Garland, and another reason the current administration seeks a packed, “super-majority” in the Supreme Court, in order to consolidate judiciary branch power, and reinforce judicial review.  It is important to appreciate that the current administration and its larger network, are almost exclusively from the law sector and law academy.  In their methods and assumptions, it is Justice, the judiciary and the Supreme Court that are the objects of their designs for power and control.  They are not by instinct aligned with congressional, legislative and representative processes, but rather with the use of “lawfare” in a top-down authoritarian construct of centralized federal control).

U.S. presidents have always been dependent to some extent on advisors, staff and inter-branch administrative cooperation.  But now that pretense has been completely dissolved: rather than having to negotiate through the barriers of offices and officials, the White House chief executive is now, not merely influenced or guided, but completely controlled by direct command.  And given that the bureaucrats running the U.S. government are overwhelmingly on the left and thus are sympathetic to the centralization of power (this includes the FBI, the national security apparatus, and the military), the result is the ultimate realization of control of the United States itself.  Indeed, Biden is not merely reliant on his aides and “note cards” for his every function and act, but deeply, desperately dependent on them for his basic daily functions and routines, like an invalid or patient in assisted care.  The White House is now a medical nursing home—or biosecurity prison.

But an additional ring of control surrounds the president and White House, consisting of a syndicate of Foundations that have effective control over the “military-industrial-university” complex, and now, the health agency establishment of the CDC, NHS and UN-related organizations.  Those primary strategic foundations are largely controlled by Jewish interests, but at a heightened level of direct operational and governance authority, largely by financial leverage.  They include the Rockefeller Foundation, the Gates Foundation, the Soros Foundation, and by penetration and control, the Obama Foundation, the Clinton Foundation, and with ties to the UK bio-research Wellcome Trust, among others.

Former Israel prime minister Ariel Sharon is reputed to have once said that “We, the Jewish people, control America, and the Americans know it.”  If they didn’t before, then they should now because the pretense has been removed, and the threat is no longer disguised: it is out there in plain sight, with authoritarian indifference to perception, and in defiance of opposition to the blatant capture of America’s system of government.

The installation of Chicago-born Merrick Garland as Attorney General and head of the U.S. Department of Justice is of great concern, because his bias for a powerful central government, whether constitutional or not, further widens the gap between American citizens and their own government, and between citizens and their enumerated rights; indeed, he appears committed to making government more and more our adversary, instead of our constitutionally circumscribed servant.

There are two elements of Garland’s professional profile that are instructive.  One, while his judicial record appears mixed—merely conventionally liberal, a larger assessment of his opinions and administrative actions, undertaken by faculty at the University of Chicago Law school, Stanford, Harvard and other law schools, shows that he was a “safe” pick due to his Harvard bona fides and his conventional career track; but it also shows that he may be more liberal than generally assumed.  The Wall Street Journal is more assertive, describing how he regularly takes sides with labor unions and government: “His many opinions…defer to administrative agencies and…are a hallmark of his jurisprudence during his nearly 20 years on the D.C. Circuit Court.”  His record clearly shows an instinct for supporting the power of central government via its agencies, and he is thought “safe,” as a government insider.  He is clearly not a champion of states’ rights, nor has he shown any passion for the rights of individual citizens: he will go along to get along; he is a judge who doesn’t rock the boat, and is a reliable servant to government interests.  That may not be new, but it is especially troubling when the separation of powers is especially necessary, and when Justice must be called on to police the government itself.  But even the New York Times expressed concerns from a liberal, human rights perspective, including his embrace of the Global War on Terror (and its infringement of civil liberties) and his position on the Guantanamo prison.

It is his core allegiance to centralized state power that is the main reason for concern regarding his influence and priorities at the Department of Justice.  At a period of extreme government intrusion through the Covid program where constitutional rights are being comprehensively challenged, if not assaulted, Garland’s natural instinct has already been shown to side with government over individuals—that he will support authoritarian control by the state; indeed, his public statements confirm his readiness to do the bidding of the current White House regime concerning the January 6^th prosecution as “white supremacist terror” (where he asserts its primacy in his prosecutorial priorities, but more, it is the centerpiece to his “domestic war on terror”).  This is part of the full panoply of his larger ambitions directed at federal government control over the states and classes of individuals thought to be enemies of the state.

He fully embraces the biosecurity construct of comprehensive authoritarian, top-down state control, and unusual expansion of federal police powers such that the states are overrun with a federal law enforcement web that replaces state-level and local forces (hence the “defund the police” program, which is directed at idling local and state law enforcement, replaced with a unified, politically controlled federal and ultimately even international policing force).  He embraces, in my view, a certain “NKVD” vision of central power, extended across key American institutions.  In this, he also reflects a certain “Bolshevik-like” attitude toward weakening or even dismantling of civil liberties.  Examples include DoJ “guidance” that warns states not to push their investigations into voting fraud too aggressively, and his heavy handed order that Texas not restrict entry of migrants at risk for Covid. Indeed, the White House has just expressed its intent to organize a “whole-of-government effort” to use federal powers against the recent Texas abortion law decision—a decision that will likely further motivate proposals to pack the Supreme Court.

Garland is an “organization man” and a champion of government, not individuals and the people.  And by siding with the White House on voter fraud suppression and the entire Covid biosecurity program, including Covid mandates, he both weakens the checks and balances role of the DOJ, while also ignoring Constitutional law questions concerning efforts to bypass state legislatures, change voting rules in major swing states, and suppressing immigration and subsequent citizenship standards.  In an era of unusual constitutional violation, one after another, he is not a defender of Americans, but rather a bureaucratic apparatchik of what regime holds power, or takes power in whatever way it can, so long as legal accountability is not brought to bear by other branches, or the judiciary.

Little in Garland’s law training or early career would suggest a legal philosophy or jurisprudence of top-down centralized diktat in law and policy, but his career was entirely formed by government service, with little if any private law experience and instincts for traditional private property.  He also fully embraces the Global War on Terror program, and this especially, may be a modern marker of intent and inclination toward a tolerance for near Bolshevik-style government, if the right pretextual narratives are present.  Given his unquestioning acceptance of the entire Covid program, illegal immigration, voter fraud, racial categorization and selective prosecution of American citizens by ideology, one may expect that violations of the Constitution and Constitutional law, may face little if any challenge from his office.  Indeed, he appears to be among the most reliable nodal points of influence and control, in the rapid permeation of authoritarian biosecurity, and the dismantling of individual constitutional protections, and even international human rights law.  This tendency fits well within the constellation of interests that seek to establish a global, transnational legal regime that replaces United States Constitutional sovereignty with a centralized UN-based order. In the same way that Jewish interests have always championed a strong central government in the U.S., those same interests  favor a strong centralized authority at the international level.

Among Garland’s most threatening intellectual vulnerabilities, is his stated obsession with “White supremacy” and his confused conflation of mass media hyperbole (including his stated determination to prosecute the January 6^{th “}insurrection”) as a racial issue, with his emotionalism over “anti-Semitism,” while the southern border of the United States has been opened, and the DOJ abstaining from prosecution of illegal immigration—all positions reflecting the views of mainstream Jewish organizations such as the ADL; indeed Garland and his Justice team are facilitating the diffusion of illegals into the interior of the country.  Together, these ideologies are directing the massive machinery of the Department of Justice, and turning it inward, on the American public, against their interests, and as a direct assault on the American Constitutional order.