Health, Fitness,Dite plan, health tips,athletic club,crunch fitness,fitness studio,lose weight,fitness world,mens health,aerobic,personal trainer,lifetime fitness,nutrition,workout,fitness first,weight loss,how to lose weight,exercise,24 hour fitness,
In an August 31, 2021, substack article,1 Paul Thacker, an investigative reporter and former investigator with the U.S. Senate, reviews evidence he claims shows Dr. Anthony Fauci lied to Congress, an offense punishable by up to five years in prison, provided the false statements are materially relevant and knowingly false.
“A new investigative documentary by the U.K.'s Channel 42 detailed some of the strongest evidence to date that the COVID19 pandemic may have started from a lab leak in Wuhan, China,” Thacker writes.3
“At the very least, the documentary’s interviews with experts and review of documents made explicit how China has misled the world about its research with dangerous pathogens …
The documentary clarified one other point: Anthony Fauci lied before Congress and the American public when he claimed during a congressional hearing that he has not funded gain-of-function research conducted by the Wuhan Institute of Virology …
President Biden has campaigned on honesty and decency. The question now for President Biden is, ‘What will you do with Fauci now that he has broken the law and violated the public trust by lying before Congress?’”
In what appears to be an attempt to extricate himself from blame for the COVID pandemic, Fauci — director of the National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), an arm of the National Institutes for Health (NIH), since 1986 — denied ever having funded gain-of-function research at the WIV or elsewhere when questioned by members of the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee in May 2021.4
According to Thacker, the evidence clearly refutes this. One “smoking gun” is a research article written by WIV scientists titled “Discovery of a Rich Gene Pool of Bat SARS-Related Coronaviruses Provides New Insights Into the Origin of SARS Coronavirus.”5 This research was funded by the NIH and meets the Department of Health and Human Services’ definition of gain-of-function research.6,7
The Channel 4 documentary addressed this paper. When asked whether the NIH ever funded gain-of-function research at the WIV, David Relman, a research physician at Stanford University, replies, “Yes. Indirectly, but yes. How do we know? The paper says, right on the front page, ‘Supported by NIAID, NIH.’” The clip featuring Relman is included below.
As previously reported by the National Review,8 we know the WIV received NIAID/NIH funding to create novel chimeric SARS-related coronaviruses capable of infecting both human cells and lab animals. “Chimeric viruses” refers to artificial man-made viruses, hybrid organisms created through the joining of two or more different organisms.
This is precisely what gain-of-function research is all about. According to a 2016 report9 from the National Science Advisory Board for Biosecurity, “The term ‘gain-of-function’ is generally used to refer to changes resulting in the acquisition of new, or an enhancement of existing, biological phenotypes.”
Fauci now wants to adopt a far narrower definition of gain-of-function research that takes into account the supposed intent behind the research, but that really doesn’t make sense. Just because you don’t set out with intent to harm doesn’t mean your creation can’t cause harm or might inadvertently cause harm.
According to Thacker, “Fauci certainly knew that the WIV he was helping to fund conducted gain-of-function studies, because it has been common knowledge.”10 For example, a year before Fauci was queried by Congress, Newsweek reported that:11
“In 2019, with the backing of NIAID, the National Institutes of Health committed $3.7 million over six years for research that included some gain-of-function work. The program followed another $3.7 million, 5-year project for collecting and studying bat coronaviruses, which ended in 2019, bringing the total to $7.4 million ...
The NIH research consisted of two parts. The first part12 began in 2014 and involved surveillance of bat coronaviruses … The program funded Shi Zheng-Li, a virologist at the Wuhan lab … to investigate and catalogue bat coronaviruses in the wild. This part of the project was completed in 2019.
A second phase13 of the project, beginning that year, included … gain-of-function research for the purpose of understanding how bat coronaviruses could mutate to attack humans. The project was run by EcoHealth Alliance … under the direction of President Peter Daszak … NIH canceled the project … April 24 [2020] …
Many scientists have criticized gain of function research, which involves manipulating viruses in the lab to explore their potential for infecting humans, because it creates a risk of starting a pandemic from accidental release.”
Around that same time, former Acting Director of the CIA Michael Morell told Politico14 that “if the virus leaked from a Wuhan lab, the U.S. would shoulder some of the blame since it funded research at that lab through government grants from 2014 to 2019.”
Mid-January 2021, the U.S. State Department published a fact sheet accusing the Chinese government of being obsessively secretive about gain-of-function research at the WIV, and that it was collaborating with the Chinese military on secret projects.
The fact sheet has since been removed from the State Department’s website, but was reported by a number of outlets at the time. Among them, Life Site News, which wrote:15
“In a ‘Fact Sheet’ posted online … the Department of State (DOS) presented three distinct elements about the origin of the virus, which ‘deserve greater scrutiny’ … The first of the three issues needing further investigation, was the outbreak of illness inside the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV).
The DOS revealed it had ‘reason to believe’ that ‘several researchers inside the WIV became sick in autumn 2019, before the first identified case of the outbreak, with symptoms consistent with both COVID-19 and common seasonal illnesses’ …
Additionally, the DOS noted that researchers in the WIV had been performing experiments on ‘RaTG13, the bat coronavirus identified by the WIV in January 2020 as its closest sample to SARS-CoV-2 (96.2% similar)’ since at least ‘2016.’
The laboratory also ‘has a published record of conducting ‘gain-of-function’ research to engineer chimeric viruses.’ Such research, gain-of-function research, is a kind which ‘improves the ability of a pathogen to cause disease.’”
March 6, 2021, the editorial board of The Washington Post published an article16 calling for an independent investigation into the origin of SARS-CoV-2. In that article, the board pointed out that:
“… a senior researcher at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, Shi Zhengli, was working on ‘gain-of-function’ experiments, which involve modifying viral genomes to give them new properties, including the ability to infect lung cells of laboratory mice that had been genetically modified to respond as human respiratory cells would.”
The board also noted that Shi was “working with bat coronaviruses that were genetically very similar to the one that caused the pandemic.” A few months later, in a June 22, 2021, essay,17 professor Jeffrey Sachs, head of The Lancet’s commission tasked with investigating COVID’s origin, also described how the NIAID has funded gain-of-function research at the WIV:
“It is in fact common knowledge in the U.S. scientific community that NIH has indeed supported genetic recombinant research on SARS-like viruses that many scientists describe as GOFROC [gain-of-function research of concern].
The peer-reviewed scientific literature reports the results of such NIH-supported recombinant genetic research on SARS-like viruses. More specifically, it is clear that the NIH co-funded research at the WIV that deserves scrutiny under the hypothesis of a laboratory-related release of the virus.”
Someone who has taken a particular interest in Fauci’s potential role in this pandemic is Dr. Peter Breggin, a Harvard-trained psychiatrist and former consultant for the National Institute of Mental Health. In October 2020, he published the report18 “Dr. Fauci’s COVID-19 Treachery,” detailing Fauci’s ties to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and its military.
Breggin is convinced Fauci “has been the major force” behind research activities that enabled the CCP to manufacture lethal SARS coronaviruses, which in turn led to the release — whether accidental or not — of SARS-CoV-2 from the WIV.
He claims Fauci has helped the CCP obtain “valuable U.S. patents,” and that he, in collaboration with the CCP and the WHO, initially suppressed the truth about the origins and dangers of the pandemic, thereby enabling the spread of the virus from China to the rest of the world.
Fauci has, and continues to, shield the CCP and himself, Breggin says, by “denying the origin of SARS-CoV-2” and “delaying and thwarting worldwide attempts to deal rationally with the pandemic.”
In the executive summary of the report, Breggin documents 15 questionable activities that Fauci has been engaged in, starting with the fact that he funded dangerous gain-of-function research on bat coronaviruses, both by individual Chinese researchers and the WIV in collaboration with American researchers. This research, Breggin says, allowed the CCP and its military to create their own bioweapons, including SARS-CoV-2.
According to Thacker, “it’s obvious” Fauci “broke the law and misled Congress.” He adds:19
“This is not my personal opinion; I was required to know and enforce the relevant provisions of the law during the three years I ran investigations in the Senate. On two occasions I had to consult with Senate Legal Counsel and then warn people about lying to Congress …
Fauci lied while testifying before Congress. Fauci lied to the American people. Several lines of evidence make this clear. But catching Fauci lying and breaking the law does little good, because the Department of Justice prosecutes people for lying to Congress, and the Department of Justice is run … by the Biden administration. So what is President Biden going to do about this?”
During an appearance on the Hannity Show, July 20, 2021, U.S. Sen. Rand Paul — who has grilled Fauci about his research funding in two separate hearings this year — announced he would indeed ask the DOJ for a criminal referral.20
Paul specifically asked the DOJ to investigate whether Fauci violated 18 U.S. Code § 100121 — which makes it a federal crime to make “any materially false, fictitious or fraudulent statement or representation” as part of “any investigation or review" conducted by Congress — or any other statute. Time will tell if it amounts to anything.
Regardless of what happens to Fauci, at the end of the day, the key issue that needs to be addressed is whether we should allow research that involves making pathogens more dangerous to humans at all, regardless of what the intent behind it might be, or the specific technology used.
Lab leaks have occurred on multiple occasions, so it’s really only a matter of time before something far more devastating than SARS-CoV-2 gets out. World leaders need to realize that funding gain-of-function research is the real threat here, and take action accordingly to forestall another pandemic. As long as researchers are allowed to mutate and create synthetic pathogens, they’re creating the very risk they claim they’re trying to prevent.
This article was previously published on April 8, 2021, and has been updated with new information.
In a March 28, 2021, interview with Fox News' Steve Hilton, former Clinton adviser and author Naomi Wolf warned that mandatory COVID-19 passports will spell the "end of human liberty in the West":1,2
"'Vaccine passport' sounds like a fine thing if you don't understand what those platforms can do," she said. "I'm [the] CEO of a tech company, I understand what these platforms can do. It is not about the vaccine, it's not about the virus, it's about your data.
Once this rolls out, you don't have a choice about being part of the system. What people have to understand is that any other functionality can be loaded onto that platform with no problem at all. It can be merged with your Paypal account, with your digital currency.
Microsoft is already talking about merging it with payment plans. Your network can be sucked up. It geolocates you everywhere you go. Your credit history can be included. All of your medical and health history can be included.
This has already happened in Israel, and six months later, we're hearing from activists that it's a two-tiered society and that basically, activists are ostracized and surveilled continually. It is the end of civil society, and they are trying to roll it out around the world.
It is absolutely so much more than a vaccine pass … I cannot stress enough that it has the power to turn off your life, or to turn on your life, to let you engage in society or be marginalized."
Wolf also points out the horrific history of IBM,3 whose Digital Health Pass will tie our biometric IDs to our health data through its smartphone app. This "health pass" will then grant or deny us access to public spaces and events, based on our vaccination status.
This is essentially the modern-day version of the punch card system — the forerunner to digital entry on computers — that IBM developed for the Nazi regime, which allowed them to create a census of Jews and other undesirables, who could then be identified, tracked and sorted into groups slated for incarceration or extermination.
In no uncertain terms, IBM's technology facilitated the Third Reich's genocide of the Jewish nation, and IBM leadership aided and abetted the Nazi's reign of terror with full knowledge of what it was doing.
While it's hard to understand how a company playing such an integral role in genocide was allowed to survive past the end of the war, it's even harder to fathom why it would be entrusted to create the same kind of system decades later.
You don't need a tinfoil hat to wonder whether IBM might have been purposely chosen for the task of creating a "health pass" system, for the simple reason that the purpose of the system itself is near-identical to that deployed in Nazi Germany. IBM also has a relationship with the CIA,4 which has a history of mind control abuses and assassination programs.5
IBM's connection to the Third Reich is no secret, and IBM has never denied even the most incriminating details of its involvement in the holocaust. In 2001, Edwin Black, a historian and investigative author, published the book "IBM and the Holocaust,"6 in which he detailed the company's pivotal role in this criminal tragedy.
The book was based on documentation obtained from archives in seven different countries. In 2012, Black obtained another cache of correspondence that revealed just how much IBM knew about what was going on in the Nazi concentration camps. In a February 2012 article in HuffPost, Black wrote:7
"Newly-released documents expose more explicitly the details of IBM's pivotal role in the Holocaust — all six phases: identification, expulsion from society, confiscation, ghettoization, deportation, and even extermination.
Moreover, the documents portray with crystal clarity the personal involvement and micro-management of IBM president Thomas J. Watson in the company's co-planning and co-organizing of Hitler's campaign to destroy the Jews …"
The fact that Watson received a 1% commission on all business profits made from the company's business with the Nazis may help explain his eagerness to take on such a hands-on role in this gruesome business. Black continues:
"The new 'expanded edition' [of 'IBM and the Holocaust'] contains 32 pages of never-before-published internal IBM correspondence, State Department and Justice Department memos, and concentration camp documents that graphically chronicle IBM's actions and what they knew during the 12-year Hitler regime …
Among the newly-released documents and archival materials are secret 1941 correspondence setting up the Dutch subsidiary of IBM to work in tandem with the Nazis, company President Thomas Watson's personal approval for the 1939 release of special IBM alphabetizing machines to help organize … the deportation of Polish Jews, as well as the IBM Concentration Camp Codes including IBM's code for death by Gas Chamber.
Among the newly published photos of the punch cards is the one developed for the statistician who reported directly to Himmler and Eichmann."
As explained by Black, the population census and identification of Jews were managed by IBM directly, first at its New York headquarters, and later through subsidiaries in Germany, Poland, Holland, France, Switzerland and other European countries. IBM headquarters also directed the activities of a Dutch subsidiary charged with identifying and liquidating Jews in Holland.
"Particularly powerful are the newly-released copies of the IBM concentration camp codes," Black writes.8 "IBM maintained a customer site … in virtually every concentration camp to sort or process punch cards and track prisoners. The codes show IBM's numerical designation for various camps …
Various prisoner types were reduced to IBM numbers, with 3 signifying homosexual, 9 for anti-social, and 12 for Gypsy. The IBM number 8 designated a Jew. Inmate death was also reduced to an IBM digit: 3 represented death by natural causes, 4 by execution, 5 by suicide, and code 6 designated 'special treatment' in gas chambers.
IBM engineers had to create Hollerith codes to differentiate between a Jew who had been worked to death and one who had been gassed, then print the cards, configure the machines, train the staff, and continuously maintain the fragile systems every two weeks on site in the concentration camps."
A particularly noteworthy memo came from the U.S. Justice Department, which post-war launched a federal investigation into IBM's relationship with the Hitler regime. The memo, written by Howard J. Carter, the chief investigator of the Economic Warfare Section to his superiors, read:
"What Hitler has done to us through his economic warfare, one of our own American corporations has also done ... Hence IBM is in a class with the Nazis … The entire world citizenry is hampered by an international monster."
Black adds:9
"It is important to remember that Thomas Watson and his corporate behemoth were guilty of genocide. The Treaty on Genocide, Article 2, defines genocide as 'acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial, or religious group.'
In Article 3, the treaty states that among the 'acts [that] shall be punishable,' are the ones in subsection (e), that is 'complicity in genocide.'
As for who shall be punished, the Treaty specifies the perpetrators in Article 4: 'Persons committing genocide or any of the other acts enumerated in Article 3 shall be punished, whether they are constitutionally responsible rulers, public officials, or private individuals.' International Business Machines, and its president Thomas J. Watson, committed genocide by any standard."
As noted in Black's introduction to his book, "IBM and the Holocaust: The Strategic Alliance between Nazi Germany and America's Most Powerful Corporation,"10 at the time of Hitler's rise to power, the world was unaware that "massively organized information" had "emerged to become a means of social control, a weapon of war, and a roadmap for group destruction."
Today, we cannot be accused of not understanding that massive data collection can be and is being used to manipulate societies across the globe.
Therefore, it would be insanely naïve to think that digital vaccine certificates, tied to our biometric IDs, banking, credit histories and health data would not end up being used as a tool for social control and a weapon for group destruction.
As Black points out, were it not for IBM and its information technology, Hitler, like other tyrants before him, would not have been nearly as successful in his plan to eradicate the Jews. Hitler also received help from other unexpected quarters:
"In the upside-down world of the Holocaust, dignified professionals were Hitler's advance troops. Police officials disregarded their duty in favor of protecting villains and persecuting victims.
Lawyers perverted concepts of justice to create anti-Jewish laws. Doctors defiled the art of medicine to perpetrate ghastly experiments and even choose who was healthy enough to be worked to death — and who could be cost-effectively sent to the gas chamber," Black writes.11
"Scientists and engineers debased their higher calling to devise the instruments and rationales of destruction. And statisticians used their little known but powerful discipline to identify the victims, project and rationalize the benefits of their destruction, organize their persecution, and even audit the efficiency of genocide."
Eighteenth-century Irish philosopher and statesman Edmund Burke once said, "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."12 Put another way, good people need to gather their wherewithal and refuse to follow instructions they suspect to be harmful or know will lead to evil ends.
Unfortunately, as demonstrated in the 1962 Milgram Experiment, featured in an internet blog titled "Will You Obey the Criminal Authoritarians?" most people simply follow orders when given by a perceived authority. "I was just following orders" was indeed a hallmark excuse during the Nuremberg Trials that followed the end of World War II.
That excuse won't suffice this time around, so just about everyone, at this point, probably needs to engage in some preemptive internal reflection to orient their ethical compass in preparation for what might come next.
I have no doubt that the months and years ahead will test your ethics and humanity, and having a clear picture of recent history — how the greatest genocide in modern history was actually implemented and carried out using information technology — can be a valuable guide that can help you sidestep serious mistakes in judgment.
In his book introduction, Black summarizes the key role of IBM's information technology in the holocaust:13
"When Hitler came to power, a central Nazi goal was to identify and destroy Germany's 600,000 Jews. To Nazis, Jews were not just those who practiced Judaism, but those of Jewish blood, regardless of their assimilation, intermarriage, religious activity, or even conversion to Christianity.
Only after Jews were identified could they be targeted for asset confiscation, ghettoization, deportation, and ultimately extermination. To search generations of communal, church, and governmental records all across Germany — and later throughout Europe — was a cross-indexing task so monumental, it called for a computer. But in 1933, no computer existed.
When the Reich needed to mount a systematic campaign of Jewish economic disenfranchisement and later began the massive movement of European Jews out of their homes and into ghettos, once again, the task was so prodigious it called for a computer. But in 1933, no computer existed.
When the Final Solution sought to efficiently transport Jews out of European ghettos along railroad lines and into death camps, with timing so precise the victims were able to walk right out of the boxcar and into a waiting gas chamber, the coordination was so complex a task, this too called for a computer. But in 1933, no computer existed.
However, another invention did exist: the IBM punch card and card sorting system — a precursor to the computer. IBM, primarily through its German subsidiary, made Hitler's program of Jewish destruction a technologic mission the company pursued with chilling success.
IBM Germany, using its own staff and equipment, designed, executed, and supplied the indispensable technologic assistance Hitler's Third Reich needed to accomplish what had never been done before — the automation of human destruction …
I was haunted by a question whose answer has long eluded historians. The Germans always had the lists of Jewish names. Suddenly, a squadron of grim-faced SS would burst into a city square and post a notice demanding those listed assemble the next day at the train station for deportation to the East. But how did the Nazis get the lists? For decades, no one has known. Few have asked.
The answer: IBM Germany's census operations and similar advanced people counting and registration technologies. IBM was founded in 1898 by German inventor Herman Hollerith as a census tabulating company. Census was its business. But when IBM Germany formed its philosophical and technologic alliance with Nazi Germany, census and registration took on a new mission.
IBM Germany invented the racial census — listing not just religious affiliation, but bloodline going back generations. This was the Nazi data lust. Not just to count the Jews — but to identify them.
People and asset registration was only one of the many uses Nazi Germany found for high-speed data sorters. Food allocation was organized around databases, allowing Germany to starve the Jews.
Slave labor was identified, tracked, and managed largely through punch cards. Punch cards even made the trains run on time and cataloged their human cargo. German Railway … dealt directly with senior management in Berlin. Dehomag maintained punch card installations at train depots across Germany, and eventually across all Europe."
Using a mere 2,000 precomputer automatic tabulators, the Third Reich was able to efficiently identify, sort, track and catch Jews of every stripe in multiple countries. Now fast-forward to today, where virtually every person on the planet has had their personal data siphoned off, hour by hour, day by day, year by year.
Decades' worth of data are catalogued and cross-tabulated in ways we probably cannot even imagine. How efficient do you reckon a modern-day holocaust by would-be dictators might be, using the technologies of today? I'll leave that for you to ponder.
So far, no Big Tech company has vowed to ban their technologies from being used in an attempt to repeat the Holocaust, and that includes IBM, which played a central role in it.
In a 2002 Village Voice article,14 Black addressed this shortcoming, pointing out that while IBM has refused to discuss its role in Hitler's regime, other companies, such as the German media conglomerate Bertelsmann and Ford Motor have at least had the couth to correct their company histories, admitting to (and apologizing for) sponsoring Hitler.
While technology played a determining role in the Holocaust, leaders in the chemical and pharmaceutical industry were also working with Hitler. One of the most prominent ones was the German chemical and drug company IG Farben, which had a factory complex near Monowitz (the slave labor camp at Auschwitz) and actually housed the IBM facilities there.
IG Farben used slave labor from the Monowitz camp and IBM's technology to keep track of them. "The Monowitz systems were customized for the specific coding Farben needed to process the thousands of slave workers who labored and died there," Black explains.15 Auschwitz archivist Piotr Setkiewicz further told Black:16
"The Hollerith office at IG Farben in Monowitz used the IBM machines as a system of computerization of civil and slave labor resources. This gave Farben the opportunity to identify people with certain skills, primarily skills needed for the construction of certain buildings in Monowitz."
Of course, IG Farben was also in the business of pharmaceuticals, and prisoners from Auschwitz were used for horrific medical experiments at the company's facility.17
While IG Farben executives were put on trial after the war, their sentences were light. As just one example, Fritz Ter Meer, a high-ranking executive charged with slavery and mass medical murder, served just three of his seven-year sentence, and after release became chairman of Bayer's advisory board.
Some have speculated18 that the reason they got off so lightly was because of their connections to other powerful figures, such as John Rockefeller, founder of Standard Oil and one of the masterminds behind the creation of Big Pharma.19 (There was actually a Standard Oil IG Farben company. Without the fossil fuels of Standard Oil, IG Farben couldn't have made synthetic fertilizers or fuels.) As noted by Jon Rappoport:20
"You could say that, after the War, the emerging global pharmaceutical colossus was a reincarnation of the Farben pattern: Profit before safety; lethal medical experimentation beyond any legal limit; the use of drugs/vaccines as a means of control."
IBM has now partnered with COVID-19 vaccine maker Moderna and, together, they are producing digital COVID-19 vaccine passes to track vaccinated individuals in real time. A pilot program has already been rolled out in the state of New York.21,22,23,24
IBM and Moderna will "explore technologies, including artificial intelligence, blockchain and hybrid cloud" to "support smarter COVID-19 vaccine management," according to a press release.25 In short, the partnership is aimed at facilitating data sharing between "governments, health care providers, life science organizations and individuals," but this data is not restricted to health data.
As reported by Raul Diego in a March 10, 2021, Mint Press News article,26 other "multiple blockchain ledger applications" being leveraged include IBM's Blockchain Transparent Supply and Food Trust services, which shares food sourcing and supply-chain data, and its Blockchain World Wire cross-border payment processing service.
Considering how similar kinds of data (but far less voluminous) were used to carry out Hitler's genocide, we really need to start thinking about how all of this data collecting and sharing today might be misused. While not discussed much, the collection of genetic data is part and parcel of this program as well,27,28 which opens all sorts of unpleasant possibilities.
Already, in Israel, the requirement of vaccine certificates has resulted in the creation of a two-tier society where unvaccinated individuals are ostracized and forbidden from entering certain public venues such as bars, restaurants, hotels and public exercise facilities.
Although right now in the U.S., vaccine passports are voluntary on a federal level, several counties and states have already either rolled out their own regional vaccine passports, or are considering them. IBM is also looking at its health pass as a model for what it predicts will be mandatory in the future.
According to IBM's U.S. public and federal market leader, Steve LaFleche, the passes will cease to be voluntary "once government guidelines and regulations force the private sector to enforce their implementation."29 As noted by Diego:30
"Conveniently, IBM's strong presence in the law enforcement space, as one of the largest providers of digital profiling technologies and AI policing systems in the world, may also help with any obstacles Moderna may face among vaccine-hesitant populations."
When you look at the big picture, IBM is the best and worst candidate for the job of creating vaccine passports. It has a history of enabling genocide by misusing census data (which was its original business) and creating technologies to identify, track and capture individuals based on specific parameters such as bloodlines and religious affiliation.
They also used their technology to identify areas of food production where Jews lived in order to starve them, and now they're planning to leverage their Blockchain Transparent Supply and Food Trust services that shares food sourcing and supply-chain data, and its Blockchain World Wire cross-border payment processing service. How might all of that be misused?
To get an idea, simply look at the services they rendered Nazi Germany. When you dissect IBM's history and compare it to its current role in the COVID-19 pandemic, it's virtually impossible to not reach the conclusion that they're perfectly equipped to carry out a flawless repeat of the Holocaust, but at an unimaginable scale, and with unfathomable efficiency.
The only difference is they would not be helping to hunt a specific national, religious or racial profile. To start, they'll hunt down vaccine dissenters. After that, there's no telling what the target group might be. But whatever it is, they'll be able to identify and track them down with near-effortless ease.
As noted by Black in the introduction to his book, "Only through exposing and examining what really occurred can the world of technology finally adopt the well-worn motto: Never Again."31 We need to do that, and come to a global consensus that we're simply not going to allow a repeat of history.
One small bright spot amid all this darkness is Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, who March 29, 2021, announced32 he will issue an executive order forbidding local governments and businesses from requiring vaccine certificates.
"It's completely unacceptable for either the government or the private sector to impose upon you the requirement that you show proof of vaccine to just simply participate in normal society," he said.
Although a federal judge blocked DeSantis' executive order in August 2021, he's calling on the state legislature to create a measure that will allow him to sign it into law. Hopefully, such laws will be put into place, and other states will follow suit.
In case you are unaware, Bill Gates in the early '80s was responsible for providing IBM with the DOS operating system for its then-new personal computers, which heralded in the massive explosion of computer technology. I remember it quite well. I got my first IBM clone PC around 1985.
The reason why this is important is that, eventually, computer hardware became a commodity and computer software became the source of most of the technology revenues. Gates' nefarious strategies eventually led him to become the richest man in the world. That mantle now shifts between Jeff Bezos of Amazon fame and Elon Musk, CEO of Tesla Motors.
However, the current market cap of IBM is $110 billion while the market cap of Microsoft is 10 times that at over $1 trillion. So, while IBM has a clearly sordid history going back to World War II, the likely more serious threat is Gates himself, who is largely responsible for engineering and profiting from this entire COVID wealth transfer play through his strategic partnering with the World Health Organization, as we have carefully articulated in previous articles.
It is interesting that IBM is repeating its egregious contribution to the extermination of millions of Jews in Germany, but that may pale to the likely unintended consequences of Gates' plans, which will probably far exceed the lives lost in Nazi Germany. We need to do everything we can to make sure he doesn't succeed. Too harsh? Then I suggest you review Gary Barnett's article on Lew Rockwell, where he states:33
"The extermination of societies through genocide and democide is achieved in many ways, from war, forced starvation, psychological destruction, mass imprisonment, and sterilization; from chemical agents, bombs, nuclear weapons, and now the killing will be due to 'vaccination.'
Surely I jest you say, but I do not, as the indiscriminate killing of hundreds of millions or billions of people around the world at the hands of the powerful is sought.
Some call it population control, some call it depopulation, but it is simply planned mass murder to benefit the agendas of the few. The tool being used to accomplish this goal is the untested, experimental, mind-altering, gene-changing, toxic poison called the Covid-19 'vaccine,' and it is the newest weapon of mass destruction.
Many are having horrible effects due to these injections, and many others are dying. Some are dying immediately after taking this shot, some are dying after a few hours or days, others after a few weeks, and the long-term effects at this point are virtually unknown. (In nearly every case the media denies the association.)
It is as if people are deaf, dumb, and blind when it comes to logic, as this falsely claimed affliction called COVID that supposedly has a survival rate of 99.98%, is being treated as a deadly pandemic, and the 'cure' recommended is a 'vaccine' that kills many more than the purposely created fake virus scam."
Politicians receive very comfortable salaries. Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, for instance, earns $223,500 a year, making her the third-highest-paid elected official in the U.S.1 Yet, since 2004, her wealth has increased from $41 million to nearly $115 million, according to OpenSecrets, which began tracking lawmakers’ personal finances that year.2
She’s not alone in her wealth. Personal financial disclosures reveal that more than half of Congress members are millionaires, with a median net worth of just over $1 million. As is often the case, however, the top 10% of the lawmakers in terms of wealth are three times richer than the bottom 90%. Pelosi comes in as No. 6 on a list of the wealthiest members of the 116th Congress.3
At issue isn’t the fact that politicians are multimillionaires; rather, as noted on a recent Twitter thread by Pulitzer Prize winning journalist Glenn Greenwald, it’s how they made their millions:4
“If you think it's fine and normal that the Speaker of the House's personal wealth tripled to $115 million ever since financial disclosures were required (2004), that's fine, but the issue is how that money was made. It was from companies directly affected by her actions.”
In the last two years, nearly 75% of Pelosi’s stock trades have involved Big Tech stocks, totaling over $33 million in trading. “That has happened as major legislation is pending before the House, controlled by the committees Pelosi oversees, which could radically reshape the industry and laws that govern the very companies in which she and her husband most aggressively trade,” Greenwald wrote in a blog.5
Pelosi’s most traded company was Apple, accounting for 17.7% of her trades. But unlike most people buying and selling Apple stock, Pelosi had the privilege of speaking privately with Apple CEO Tim Cook on at least one occasion to discuss the company’s standing and how it could be affected by pending bills relating to Silicon Valley reforms.
The call in question occurred just days after antitrust reform legislation was introduced. Big Tech pushed back, and Cook called Pelosi directly to voice his concerns. Pelosi, according to The New York Times, then asked him which measures he specifically objected to.6,7 Greenwald reported on the blatant conflict of interest:8
“Sources who refused to be identified tried to convince the Times’ reporters that ‘Ms. Pelosi pushed back on Mr. Cook’s concerns about the bills.’ But in doing so, they confirmed the rather crucial fact that Pelosi was having personal, private conversations with the CEO of a company in which she and her husband were heavily invested and off of which they were making millions of dollars in personal wealth.
And Pelosi, according to the report, asked Cook what changes were needed to avoid harming Apple and other Silicon Valley giants.”
Greenwald also revealed that Pelosi’s five most-traded stocks in the last two years — Apple, Microsoft, Facebook, Amazon and Google — were those that stood to be most affected by pending legislation, and not just any legislation, but legislation that she was working to negotiate and work through Congress.
Four of the companies — Apple, Amazon, Facebook and Google — were directly identified by the House Antitrust Subcommittee as being monopolies, making their futures heavily dependent on the pending legislation. According to Greenwald:9
“Beyond that, Google — one of the companies in which the Pelosis’ stock trades have made millions — is one of the top five donors to the House Speaker.10 The wealthy couple buys and sells in Google stock, making millions. She works on bills that directly affect the future trajectory of Google. And they lavish her campaign coffers with cash, a key source of her entrenched power.”
Meanwhile, Pelosi’s husband, Paul, purchased risky options in Alphabet, the parent company of Google, in February 2020, which he sold in June, netting more than $5 million in profits.11 The purchase was made, Greenwald wrote:12
“… right before the market began plunging due to the COVID epidemic and right before the House, led by his wife, was set to introduce new legislation to regulate those same tech companies. Yet even as the prices in several of those companies plummeted, Paul Pelosi held onto them, only to sell them last June at a massive profit.”
He also cited two other “disturbing incidents” in which Paul Pelosi had impeccable timing with his investment decisions, including exercising nearly $2 million worth of Microsoft call options within two weeks of a Microsoft contract to supply the U.S. Army with augmented reality headsets. The other incident involved the purchase of about $1 million in Tesla stock after calls made prior to the government announcing incentives it would offer to promote the shift toward electric vehicles.13
“In response to media inquiries, Greenwald reported, Pelosi denied that she is involved in or even has knowledge of her husband's stock trading. There is, of course, no way to confirm or disprove that, but what is clear is that the vast wealth generated by those stock trades in companies Pelosi greatly affects — and about which she clearly has non-public information — directly enriches Pelosi herself.”14
Not every lawmaker had filed annual financial disclosures at the time of OpenSecrets’ latest report, including Sen. Kelly Loeffler, R-Ga., who has an estimated worth of over $500 million.15
She and her husband, New York Stock Exchange chief executive Jeff Sprecher, came under fire for suspicious stock trades worth between $1.2 million and $3.1 million that occurred immediately after a “closed-door coronavirus briefing in late January” 2020.16 Among them:17
Loeffler denied using confidential information from her Senate duties to make a private profit but announced in April 2020 that she and her husband were liquidating their stock holdings and “moving into exchange-traded funds and mutual funds.”18 In other suspicious instances:
Sen. Richard Burr, R-N.C., chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, who receives frequent briefings about potential U.S. threats, also dumped stock, including in hotel companies, worth up to $1.7 million in late January 2020.
“As Intel chairman,” Burr “got private briefings about coronavirus weeks ago,” Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., tweeted at the time. “Burr knew how bad it would be. He told the truth to his wealthy donors while assuring the public that we were fine.”19 Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., and Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., also sold stock after Intelligence Committee briefings.20
Corruption runs deep in politics, with Big Tech and Big Pharma giving campaign money to politicians who in turn receive non-pubic information about the corporations that can be used to enrich their personal stock portfolios. The lawmakers then have influence over legislation that affects the companies in which they’re personally invested.
Politicians are supposed to be performing a public service, but once they’re out of the public eye, many go on to serve as lobbyists or work in the corporate world. This means that during their tenure, they don’t want to close doors that may help them once they’re no longer in politics.
The system is such that most politicians aren’t fighting for the public but, rather, are looking out for their own self-interest and wealth accumulation. Case in point: There were 1,502 pharmaceutical lobbyists in 2020, 63.91% of whom were former government employees.21
A revolving door, in which government employees and former members of Congress take jobs with lobbying firms, is common among lobbyists, and the reverse also occurs, in which people from the private sector end up in government positions. How is this legal? As Greenwald explained, unless insider trading can be proven, this type of “lucky” trading that is building the wealth of numerous politicians will continue:22
“While the trades cannot be declared illegal unless it can be proven that either Pelosi acted on non-public information — in which case it would be the felony of insider trading — the ethical stench is obvious.
Just as was true when numerous Senators from both parties sold stocks in COVID-related industries before the pandemic began — raising questions about whether they had advance knowledge of what was coming through classified briefings — watching Nancy Pelosi's wealth skyrocket by millions of dollars from trades in the very companies she is directly overseeing creates a sleazy appearance, to put that mildly.”
Politicians are in good company, as top health officials also cash in on stock options tied to the companies they oversee. For instance, Dr. Julie Gerberding — director of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention from 2002 until 2009, who after leaving the CDC became president of Merck’s vaccine division in January 201023 — sold half her Merck stock options for $9.11 million in January 2020.
In March 2020, a group of legislators introduced the Ban Conflicted Trading Act to “prohibit members of Congress and senior congressional staff from abusing their positions for personal financial gain through trading individual stocks and investments while in office or serving on corporate boards.”24
“Members of Congress should not be allowed to buy and sell individual stock,” said Ocasio-Cortez. “We are here to serve the public, not to profiteer.” Senator Jeff Merkley, who introduced the Act to the Senate, added:25
“Buying and selling stocks while making decisions that affect the stock’s value is inherently a conflict of interest. At best, it can seriously degrade public trust — as we are seeing today. At worst, it’s a blatant abuse of power.”
