Press "Enter" to skip to content


14 Mar 20 (NINTH article in a series)

This is an exercise in pragmatism, logic and timing that arranges elemental evidence like puzzle pieces so as to provide one possible and nefarious explanation for the COVID-19 global pandemic.

HERE is a catalog of all the articles in this series. This article refers back heavily to this work.

An introductory note – this is a very long piece. First, I’m outlining something more conspiratorial than 9/11 narratives outside of the official one. Leveling an assertion of such magnitude requires me to do two things: 1) be thorough in my support of the assertion with reliable evidence while at the same time 2) be efficient with time. This resulted in a longer piece containing some relevant extracts from my previous work. It made no sense to rewrite previous work and the information was necessary for full context here. It serves to give greater meaning and stitch together more tightly the hypothesis being explored. It will also save you the trouble of clicking back and forth between articles.

A sidebar to begin – If you are too young to have lived through the events of 9/11 or perhaps you have no personal understanding of the United States before 9/11, you must realize and accept that pre-9/11 America and post-9/11 America are two entirely different countries and with the former being a much better time and place than the latter. That’s critical to understand. Now, let’s get to it.

Did you notice it? Where did it all go? Russia – gone from the MSM. Mueller – gone from the MSM. Failed impeachment – gone from the MSM. The Ukraine and its corruption enveloping elites and the political class – gone from the MSM. Epstein – gone from the MSM. It was a full-on narrative shift. All of it, essentially – all of the misinformation, disinformation, lying, unconstitutionality, corruption, subversion, sedition and yes, even treason, that has been plaguing this administration – evaporated from the MSM and what remains is perpetual and nauseatingly panicked hysteria rooted in fear mongering, sheep herding and perhaps even a culling of the herd by means of a global viral pandemic that emerged out of nowhere and is in the process of locking down the entire planet. How convenient.

In order to present my arguments in proper context, we must take the time to wrestle with the very real concept of FALSE FLAG CONSTRUCTS, of which 9/11 was certainly one and of which there are many both before and after 9/11: sinking of the USS Maine, Gulf of Tonkin incident, JFK’s assassination, etc. – they are numerous.) It’s important to point this out – ‘false flags’ doesn’t imply that something didn’t happen. For example, by saying the 9/11 is a false flag doesn’t mean that 3,000 people actually died. Some people conflate what a false flag is and is not.

Rather, a ‘false flag’ more generally means that the explanation given doesn’t comport with the truth while the event is being leveraged and manipulated for ulterior gain. False flags can be real, authentic events leveraged in real time toward an ulterior agenda; can be staged events; can be drills taken live; and can include actual deaths – authentic and otherwise – or simulated ones. ‘False flags’ is a great rabbit hole to jump into if you haven’t already. So, by firmly establishing 9/11 as a false flag construct, which it most certainly was, we can lay the foundation for COVID-19 coronavirus functioning in the same capacity, but on a global scale. That is the entire crux of this article and the hypothesis we are exploring.

To begin, let’s place cards on the table. I’m a reformed straight-ballot voting Republican who left the party on the heels of the events of September 11, 2001. This video below best summarizes why I left and for some backstory, know that I was teaching US History to a classroom full of juniors when 9/11 unfolded in real time. My journey began at that moment. Let’s look at building 7 here.


So, that’s Building 7 in the WTC and I find it ironic that the video I happend to select unintentionally began with a shot from the BBC. It was the BBC that aired a segment reporting that Building 7 had already fallen as it was still standing behind the reporter in the live shot. See for yourself (cue to :48.)

How does that happen without foreknowledge? It doesn’t and that’s the point.

See the WTC 7 anomaly for yourself.


As the anchor stated, “there was no new attack” and the building reportedly fell because it had been “weakened” by small to moderate sized fires. Just look at the building before it fell. Where are the fires that could compromise the building’s redundant structural integrity? They’re nonexistent. It’s a ridiculous statement as much as it’s a scientifically impossible one – that the building collapsed due to weakening caused by fires. Where I come from, that’s called horse shit.

Take a closer look. You can see flashes of controlled demolition charges detonating in accordance with the collapse of the structure.

Here’s another view from a different angle. The controlled demolition detonations are patently obvious.

Modern skyscraper structures are engineered using STRUCTURAL REDUNDANCY, which serves to prevent buildings from collapsing as WTC 7 did. In fact, the only way to overcome this engineered structural redundancy, which is put into place with steel and concrete and can withstand earthquakes, is to deliberately compromise said engineering. The only functional means by which to overcome this engineered structural redundancy so as to cause the structure to collapse in its own footprint is CONTROLLED DEMOLITION. Even if a jetliner does strike a tower as it was reported with both the North and South towers, the structure would remain standing as if someone had poked a pencil through a screen (2-dimensional analog.) But again, WTC 7 WAS NEVER STRUCK BY ANYTHING and it was hardly afire and yet it collapsed into its own footprint at free-fall speed.

Let me be CLEAR BEYOND A SINGLE GRAIN OF DOUBT – it is IMPOSSIBLE for WTC 7 to have collapsed into its own footprint sans controlled demolition unless the UNIVERSAL LAWS OF PHYSICS temporarily ceased to exist in NYC on 11 Sep 01 as coinciding with the precise timeline of the 9/11 events.

This modern structure – the Grenfell Tower in West London – was also not struck by a plane AND IT BURNED IN A RAGING INFERNO FOR NEARLY 24 HOURS before it was extinguished. In the aftermath, it is still standing just as WTC 7 (and the North and South Towers) should have still been standing.

Ergo, one can either believe a) the official narrative that includes the temporary suspension of the laws of physics as precisely coinciding with the events of 9/11 or b) that nefarious actors; some embedded deeply in our own federal apparatus, executed or permitted a plan to raze all three buildings using controlled demolition and then wrapped their patently false and physically impossible narrative around it.

I’m firmly in the camp of option B because I don’t believe that the UNIVERSAL LAWS OF PHYSICS temporarily ceased to exist in NYC on 11 Sep 01 as coinciding with the exact timeline of the 9/11 events. I’m hoping your tent is in the same camp as mine. If it’s not, you may not want to read the rest of this.

If you’re still unsettled on this notion and you need even more evidence to demonstrate that what I’m proffering is absolutely accurate and scientifically incontrovertible, here’s a side-by-side of WTC 7 and another building being admittedly razed by controlled demolition.

If a single grain of the official narrative is inaccurate and in obvious, duplicitous, disingenuous and intentional fashion; and replete with foreknowledge as demonstrated on live television with the BBC; among myriad other evidence I don’t have the space for here, we are compelled to believe and accept NONE OF IT. It’s a binary decision – period. We are either told the TRUTH or we are told something that isn’t the truth and a single granular lie is all it takes to infect the broader narrative. As soon as we detect patently false components to the official narrative, we are compelled to reject it in its entirety and that’s precisely where I stand. I hope you stand alongside me otherwise you might be still enjoying the sweet nectar called Kool-Aid.

So, in the aftermath of 9/11, a friend of mine, who at the time happened to be so far left that he was a self-proclaimed raging Socialist at a time when Bernie was a non-factor and it wasn’t “cool” to be such, placed me on a path to learn the truth of the matter. In his older and wiser years, this friend who was younger than me by about a decade, has developed a more conservative perspective, but it was him and his leftist zeal that encouraged me to start digging into the events.

That simple request changed my life and explains why I write today. It forced me to be introspective and reconsider my own platform of beliefs. Make no mistake about it – my political transformation was abrupt and akin to slamming on the brakes at a 100 miles per hour, making a right turn towards the truth, and NEVER looking back except to question why I didn’t see it earlier. I was too busy drinking the Kool-Aid from the powers that be, to be frank.

How and why could I bail so easily on such longstanding allegiances? How could I just drop it all in a flash and walk away? Simple – I decided to embark on a journey for the truth and it took the form of an exercise in pragmatism, logic and timing that arranged elemental evidence like puzzle pieces so as to provide a more factual account of what had occurred on 11 Sep 01.

As it often happens, the so-called ‘Patriot Act‘ was already written and standing by to hitch its ride to implementation and reality with 9/11 events. The entity responsible for it I refer to as a shadow cabal labeled the DSSG/MIC (Deep State [elected and appointed bureaucrats within the federal apparatus], Shadow Government [true power brokers really pulling the strings and lurking in the shadows behind the scenes – the billionaires, the aristocracy, etc.] /Military Industrial Complex [the interface of the US military and Wall Street.]) The Globalists are enmeshed within this cabal.

Moving forward, as it relates to the Globalists and for the purpose of our discussion, in general terms they are an international cohort of power and authority that espouses a one-world government to be ruled by the United Nations or perhaps its eventual replacement; encompasses the MIC and its aims on global US hegemony; represents the President Trump’s immediate enemies and are responsible for what he has endured since his election; promotes a world without borders; and represents the co-opted administrations of George H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush and Barack Obama. They are all players on the same team and it’s the same with many on both sides of the aisle in Congress. They were also completely floored and caught off-guard when an outlier president was elected in 2016. It has resulted in the tumultuous geopolitical landscape we’ve seen since.

It is important to remember the direction the country was heading before 11 Sep 01. As sourced HERE, consider the following as pretext clearly being established (EMPHASIS MINE),

As many will recall, PNAC’s 2000 document, “Rebuilding America’s Defenses,” issued one year before the September 11 events, proclaimed how “the process of [foreign policy] transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor.”


That’s old news – Tracy wrote it in 2015 and the comments precede the event by a year, whereby the event occurred in 2001. If y’all have been plugged-in, you already know this and to the same extent my position on 9/11 is a likely rehash of your own similar position. It is important nonetheless.

There’s more evidence of the same. Consider THIS (EMPHASIS MINE) from ABC News; point being that even the MSM was wading into these conspiratorial waters,

And in a report just before the 2000 election that would bring Bush to power, the group predicted that the shift would come about slowly, unless there were “some catastrophic and catalyzing event, like a new Pearl Harbor.”

That event came on Sept. 11, 2001. By that time, Cheney was vice president, Rumsfeld was secretary of defense, and Wolfowitz his deputy at the Pentagon.

The next morning — before it was even clear who was behind the attacks — Rumsfeld insisted at a Cabinet meeting that Saddam’s Iraq should be “a principal target of the first round of terrorism,” according to Bob Woodward’s book Bush At War.

What started as a theory in 1997 was now on its way to becoming official U.S. foreign policy.


Now, why did I take up so much space in an article that is supposed to be about COVID-19 and dedicate it to the 9/11 false flag construct and the granular objective evidence that supports it? So I can ask you this one but very long question –

If nefarious powers abused essentially every functional aspect of the federal apparatus to bring down 3 towers in Lower Manhattan NYC in broad daylight without a cloud it the sky; and kill 3,000 Americans including those killed in ancillary events at the Pentagon and in a field in Pennsylvania; and destroy an astonishing amount of profoundly important governmental and financial documents in the course thereof; and then start wars in the Middle East while ushering-in draconian laws stateside so as to control the citizens of the United States in authoritarian and tyrannical fashion; and they did all of this as a function of their Globalist agenda; and those Globalists, who are all-in and have NOTHING to lose but their lives, freedom and cause are in the beginnings of a sharp S-curve decline; would these same Globalist have any hesitation to release a bio-engineered virus inside the borders of their chief political, economic and military rival with the net effect of locking the globe down, finalizing their ultimate objective of galvanizing their global constructs and instantly converting the geopolitical landscape into an advantageous one while potentially eliminating their grandest and politically immortal enemy in President Trump?

No. They wouldn’t hesitate one bit and the answer to that one but very long question, as supported by other evidence, suggests that what we are seeing is a highly lethal – literally and figuratively – incredibly precise and uncompromisingly effective global false flag construct similar to what we experienced on 11 Sep 01.

The myriad nefarious intrusions into our rights and liberties; not to mention the actual exponential loss of life, that can be ushered-in under the guise and fluidity of a global viral pandemic is essentially without limits. In other words, it’s PERFECT COVER (just like ‘terrorism’ is) to do whatever in the hell you want, rationalize it immediately and resolutely and scare folks into not only not challenging authority, but hysterically ascribing to it like fools in a cult. It’s the perfect context for a false flag construct and I’ve long believed that the next version of any form of false flag event (and there have been many since 9/11 – do your homework) would most certainly be exactly what we are seeing at this precise moment in time. The most important word in that last sentence was ‘time.’ It’s the timing of it all that allows us to arrange the puzzle pieces through lenses of pragmatism and logic.

Before we get to it, HERE is a current event item in real time outlining what I just summarized above as sourced from an item entitled, “Governments Fast Reverting To Wartime Tactics & Rhetoric For Coronavirus.”

Frankly, there’s a shit-ton of evidence that can be arranged to demonstrate this false flag construct position and here’s how.

Just above, I left off with ‘timing,’ which we will tie directly back to the introduction of this article whereby I asked if you noticed that the MSM is now a meadow crickets on Russia, Mueller, a failed impeachment and the Ukraine and all of the US politicians the broader corruption envelops. It was a virtually instant and fantastically successful MSM narrative shift that completely deflected the national narrative away from all of the Democrats’ absurd sequence of political failures. As we near the 2020 election, the previous 3-plus years of failed headlines have been essentially evaporated and they will not return as COVID-19 will most certainly continue to dominate headlines as the primary portal for presidential criticism and attack; and likely through and past the election.

As we consider the timing of it all we must do so through the lens of the grand question, ‘Cui bono?’ or ‘Who benefits?’ Our job then becomes using logic and pragmatism to consider who benefits from events that happen at specific times.

So then, do you not find this to be curious TIMING given that the Democrats have literally failed at each step since 2016 and they’re dead in the water on the eve of 2020? They’ve done NOTHING but resist, obstruct, lie, cheat, name-call, attack and steal and in the course of doing so, the American people have experienced what many are calling a ‘GREAT AWAKENING.’ Consequently, they’ve been exposed and even some of their most ardent and staunchest constituents are acknowledging this.

So at a precise moment in time that we embark on the most important election in contemporary history, if not ever, the Globalists, as represented now by the Democrat Party, are sprinting forward with no message, no new ideas and no solutions for the American people. Instead, they have relegated themselves to ‘isms, criticizing, obstructing and attacks.

Hell, they don’t even have a viable candidate. The ‘party of diversity’ is on the verge of kicking-out one old and corrupt white man – Sanders – to insert a different old, criminal and corrupt white man – Biden – who will eventually be pushed to the side (read THIS) so that an old, detestable, corrupt, criminal and white lady – Clinton – can steal the nomination again to set-up a rematch of 2016.

And we are to believe that this virus just happened to break-out at this precise moment conicidentally, organically and authentically? Wait. There’s much, much more. Let’s ask some more questions.

The Globalists are essentially using the promise of “free stuff” to entice the younger, indoctrinated and ignorant generations so as to align them with what they believe is Democratic Socialism. It’s actually Marxist Socialism to which they are subscribing and it’s that false premise nexus that provides the Globalist cabal it’s authoritarian and tyrannical power structures and authority. They’re selling one thing and with the intent to implement something different.

Consider that the Left has co-opted public education and has controlled it for decades. This is important because public education ensures that the mechanisms utilized to indoctrinate young people – public schools and universities – will remain in-tact and functional. Over time, if the indoctrination practices hold steady, the result would be a shift in the population of the US whereby increasing numbers of citizens would transition to Democratic Socialism and away from a Constitutional Republic rooted in free-market capatialism and democracy.

In this scenario, if time becomes a problem and you are precluded from permitting education to function as the supplier to a growing Democratic Socialist voting base that is replacing a dying class of traditionally American voters, there becomes an immediate need for a remedy. Since you can’t address the supply of voters you need to realize your objective, you must shift the fulcrum point and attack that which is currently offsetting your vote and that is traditional American voters or, in other words, old people.

Here’s a visual representation of what I’m talking about as sourced HERE,

If you can’t inject enough voters into the constituency in time for 2020 and you absolutely must have them to even have a chance at competing; much less winning, the only other option is to eliminate what stands in your way and that equates to eliminating the votes of the the top sets of lines in the graphic above. It’s that precise population of US citizens that stands between the Globalists having a plurality of subscribers in the US voter base. Don’t think that they don’t know this – they been working for decades to overcome it.

Let’s string together some questions in quick succession to frame this.

Was COVID-19 bio-engineered and does it have artificial HIV insertions? Yes.

Does this speak to intentional design? Yes.

Does intentional design encompass considerations about epidemiology (who get’s infected, how it’s transmitted, who dies, who doesn’t die, etc.)? Yes.

Which voting demographic is in the queue to be or is currently being indoctrinated by the US education system? Young people.

Which voting demographic is dying-off with each passing year and being replaced by the indoctrinated voting demographic? Old people.

Which voting demographic is at the LEAST risk of contracting COVID-19 and represents minuscule infection rates? Young people.

Which voting demographic is at the MOST risk of contracting COVID-19 with exponentially higher infection rates and considerable death rates? Old people.


Pretty convenient, no? Exactly, and it’s only the beginning.

The Globalists and their co-opted Democrats as well as others in government have realized that they’ve already lost the 2020 election. At the same time, the Globalist agenda has been thoroughly exposed and rejected in its ‘snake oil’ form whereby it’s being peddled as Democratic Socialism in the US. To translate, unless something drastic happens, they have no future internationally or domestically. Now ask yourself whether these Globalists have the means, motive and opportunity to change this scenario in wholesale fashion?

With this information in place, lets’ review what we learned using extracts from the first eight articles.


Important in this story is the drug that was provided in the successful treatment – Remdesivir. The antiviral drug Remdesivir was developed by GILEAD SCIENCES, which is headquartered in Foster City, CA.

  1. Gilead supported a blend of candidates in 2016, whom were likely situated so as to act favorably toward Gilead legislatively. SOURCE
  2. Gilead curiously supported Clinton despite her public war against pharmaceutical companies. SOURCE
  3. Gilead was intricately involved in a drug purchasing group called UNITAID and its stated purpose was to create a patent pool for pharmaceutical companies to share their drug patents with other companies to produce generic versions for widespread distribution in selected African nations. Sales of the generic meds then generate royalties payable to the patent holders. SOURCE
  4. Who is the billionaire investor behind Unitaid? It’s none other than George Soros.
  5. Unitaid was supported by Democrat lawmaker Henry Waxman as demonstrated in his letter to Hillary Clinton whereby he solicited support from the Obama administration. SOURCE
  6. Interestingly and standing counter to known Unitaid objectives, Unitaid’s board voted in 2009 to EXCLUDE CHINA among other nations; including Brazil, when considering targeted nations outside of Africa. It could be that the board caved toward industry pressure as China and Brazil are seen as preferred marketplaces. SOURCE
  7. Unitaid’s current information on China is HERE.
  8. THIS is more information on the Unitaid patent pool.

Now consider this quote that is derived from THIS Unitaid report dated 05-06 Dec 18 (emphasis mine.)

THE REPRESENTATIVE OF WHO informed the Board of a recent meeting coordinated by WHO with several global health partners (GPEI, GFF, Gavi, Unitaid, Global Fund) to support the development of a common health narrative. With regard to parliamentary engagement, he informed of a new Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) between WHO and the Inter-parliamentary Union and encouraged Unitaid to build on this commitment in its country work. He underlined the important role of Board members in supporting the Unitaid Secretariat by opening new doors and leveraging existing political and other connections. He also gave positive feedback on the recent Unitaid-WHO visit to China, which explored opportunities for engagement.

UNITAID – Minutes of the 30th Executive Board (EB30) (5-6 December 2018) Marrakesh, Morocco


So, let’s take a look a closer look at Gilead Sciences, the developer of the drug Remdesivir. It’s veneer level stuff with deeper digging needed but let’s see what can we learn (SOURCE).

  1. Over the years, the company has specialized in the research and development of both anti-cancer and anti-viral treatments. It transitioned out of anti-cancer assets in 2002.
  2. Donald Rumsfeld was recruited to the board in 1988 and the company envelops a number of politicians and governmental figures from both sides of the aisle and with deep Harvard roots.
  3. Gilead debuted on the NASDAQ in January of 1992 and to the tune of $86.26 billion.
  4. Rumsfeld was appointed chairman in 1997 before leaving to become Secretary of Defense in 2001.
  5. By 2017, Gilead’s strong history of growth, performance and acquisitions had lost some of its luster and they needed new products to maintain profitability. Consider, “As of 2017, Gilead’s challenge is to develop or acquire new blockbuster drugs before its current revenue-producers wane or their patent protection expires.”
  6. Notice how the need ties directly to patents as outlined in the first article, which specifically pertained to patent pools? That’s important to remember when considering problem/solution scenarios.
  7. Gilead’s struggles were enmeshed in pricing controversies and ultimately tied to poor management that also funneled money into their own pockets, “To begin with, the evidence that Gilead itself uses its profits to “innovate” is thin at best. In 2016, the company reported profit of $13.5 billion. It spent $11 billion to repurchase its own shares, and about $2.5 billion on stock dividends. So the buybacks and dividends together came to $13.5 billion, in effect consuming 100% of the company’s profit.” (SOURCE)
  8. Oddly, Soros dumped his entire position in Gilead in the second quarter of 2014. (SOURCE)
  9. He did the same in the second quarter of 2016 and right before shares eventually rose by 45%. (SOURCE)


With a great many thanks to a kind, thoughtful and engaged patriot who affectionately goes by the social media handle ‘Shazlandia,’ this item HERE bridges that gap. It bridges the gap so strongly that you could transport an entire tank brigade from one side to the other. From that article, which focuses on the fraudulent nature of some viral epidemics in general and not specifically the coronavirus, consider,

THE VIRUS is a fake propaganda idea that has traditionally been used to cover up vast crimes and the destruction of human life in ways that have nothing to do with germs. THE VIRUS is one of the greatest cover stories ever invented. I’ve explained how propaganda about viruses is made to stand in for corporate and government crimes that make people sick and kill them: contaminated water supplies; lack of basic sanitation; giant toxic agricultural farms; industrial poison-pollution; hunger; starvation; protein-calorie malnutrition; fertile farm land stolen from native people by corporations and governments; toxic medical drugs and vaccines; and now, in Wuhan and other Chinese cities, unprecedented mixtures of toxic air pollution, causing lung damage. The basic theme is: DON’T LOOK AT ALL THOSE CRIMES, JUST FOCUS ON THE VIRUS AS THE ONLY PROBLEM. This is sheer invention.


The broader detrimental economic impact that the coronavirus has had on China’s economy is undeniable (see article for deeper understanding and graphics.)

So then, just who or what benefits from the scenarios above? Does the US federal government benefit? Absolutely. Does the US economy benefit? Absolutely. Do pharmaceutical companies like Gilead Sciences, Glaxo Smith Kline and others benefit? Absolutely.

What do we know about Providence Regional Medical Center Everett? We know this – it is, “Guided by the philosophy of the Sisters of Providence, we live their mission of caring for the poor and vulnerable right here in our community.” THIS also provides more background details on Providence.

What do we know about the Sisters of Providence? The HISTORY of the Sisters of Providence dates back to 1843 and the ministry functions with three primary pillars: ministry, community and spirituality and its work focuses on reaching the most under-served in specific contexts including “Social Justice,” “Reclaiming Earth,” “Women and Children” and “El Salvador;” and with particular interest in climate change, the death penalty and human trafficking. I probably don’t need to point-out that this is no conservative group but rather a feminist activist group rooted in religion and with a long established history, which usually comports with a high degree of entanglement.

We also know that in October 2017 George Soros donated 80% of his wealth to his charity, Open Society Foundations and that, according to the linked NBC article (emphasis mine), “Open Society is a sprawling international group of charities that works in more than 100 countries on projects including refugee relief and public health.” Soros’ global interests in the health sector are substantial.

Quite a bit of digging went into examining a multitude of relationships and money flow between Gilead Sciences, Sisters of Providence, Providence Regional Medical Center Everett, Providence Health and Services, Open Societies Foundation, George Soros, Unitaid, and others and here’s what I got – a lot more work ahead to sort-out all of that. With that said, though, my initial instincts on the patent-sharing angle are bearing fruit because Gilead Sciences stands ready to capitalize on the “outbreak.”

In THIS 06 Feb 20 item from the National Post, we have confirmation of the patent-sharing angle whereby, IF ACCEPTED, the deal on the table would allow the struggling Gilead Sciences to both retain the patent and begin receiving royalties from global marketing rights and the Chinese manufacture and sale of their drug Remdesivir. Consider,

The Wuhan Institute of Virology — based in the Chinese city in the center of the epidemic — has applied for a patent in China for the use of the antiviral drug, known as Remdesivir, in treating the ailment. The application was made on Jan. 21 together with a military academy, according to a Feb. 4 statement on the institute’s website.

While Gilead’s experimental drug isn’t licensed or approved anywhere in the world, it is being rushed into trials in China on coronavirus patients after showing early signs of being highly effective. It may go into clinical trials in China as early as next week in patients with moderate and severe symptoms of the pathogen, said Merdad Parsey, Gilead’s chief medical officer.


More from Time Magazine,

A Chinese drugmaker said it has started mass-producing an experimental drug from Gilead Sciences that has the potential to fight the novel coronavirus, as China accelerates its effort to find a treatment for the widening outbreak.

Suzhou-based BrightGene Bio-Medical Technology said in a statement filed to the Shanghai Stock Exchange on Tuesday night that it has developed the technology to synthesize the active pharmaceutical ingredients of remdesivir, Gilead’s drug that is a leading candidate to treat the highly-infectious virus that’s killed more than 1,000 people. The drug isn’t licensed or approved anywhere in the world yet.

Its stock surged 20% in Tuesday morning trading in Shanghai.


More of the same from The National Law Review. Consider,

The Wuhan Institute of Virology announced on February 4, 2020 that they applied  for a Chinese patent on Gilead’s Remdesivir for treating the novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) that originated in Wuhan in late 2019.  The Chinese patent application was filed on January 21, 2020 and the Institute plans to file internationally via the Patent Cooperation Treaty


The Patent Cooperation Treaty linked above says this,

The Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) assists applicants in seeking patent protection internationally for their inventions, helps patent Offices with their patent granting decisions, and facilitates public access to a wealth of technical information relating to those inventions. By filing one international patent application under the PCT, applicants can simultaneously seek protection for an invention in a very large number of countries. Read more about the PCT.


According to The National Law Review,

Accordingly, as Remdesivir is unavailable in China and chloroquine is, it seems the Institute’s goal is to enable a cross-license with Gilead and so avoid having the Chinese government invoke compulsory licensing under Articles 48- 50  of the Patent Law, which might cause political repercussions with the U.S. in light on the Phase I trade deal.



It’s the patent angles we’re tracking and these are the vectors: Gilead Sciences (holds the patent and goes back to GlaxoSmithKline), GSK (is a Rothschild’s owned corporation), Unitaid (NGO funded by George Soros and brokers patent-sharing deals), George Soros (funding Unitaid and the patent-sharing efforts in select African Nations while looking to penetrate China’s (and Brazil’s) closed markets for the same purpose. Beyond that, I suggest reading the articles.

Stay focused on the patents, here, because they’re introducing another billionaire, also another vector(s) to the fold. Quick sidebar – I find it troubling that there are two billionaires yanking on the same end of the coronavirus rope (or shall we say construct since the evidence is portending that. The dam that is an authentic outbreak has entirely too many holes to plug a this point.)

With a h/t to @Shazlandia (Twitteer/Gab) for keeping the evidence furnace fired with coal, consider what James Fetzer is now reporting in THIS article (emphasis mine),

In this report we take an inside look at Event 201, which took place in NYC on October 18 2019.

Event 201 is a high-level pandemic exercise hosted by the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security in partnership with the World Economic Forum and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

This is extremely fascinating because this pandemic simulation exercise of coronavirus took place about 6 weeks before the first illness from the coronavirus was actually reported in Wuhan, China.

That is one hell of a coincidence if you believe in that sort of thing.

Another fascinating connection is the fact that not only did the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation participate in and help set up the pandemic simulation of a coronavirus outbreak, but they just so happen to fund the group who owns the patent to the deadly coronavirus and are already working on a vaccine to solve the current crisis.


So, not only is billionaire and global string puller George Soros standing to benefit from this “outbreak” of coronavirus in Wuhan, China, so does billionaire and global string puller Bill Gates. Gates and his foundation just happened to have funded and participated in an exercise/drill simulating specifically a coronavirus outbreak some 6-weeks prior to the actual one. Not only that, Gates also happens to financially back the Pirbright Institute, which happens to own a patent for a strand of the coronavirus that may (will likely) provide a cure (vaccine) that is sure to also produce a king’s ransom. (SOURCE)


What if I told you they (or their organizations and/or their colleagues) potentially stand to lose absurd amounts of money due to the same cronoavirus epidemic? Or, rather, pandemic? It’s the delineation between those two precise terms and who gets to make that decision that is the crux of it all.

Here’s how. Consider this excerpt from Whitney Webb at Mint Press News sourced HERE (emphasis mine),

In June 2017, the World Bank announced the creation of “specialized bonds” that would be used to fund the previously created Pandemic Emergency Financing Facility (PEF) in the event of an officially-recognized (i.e. WHO-recognized) pandemic.

They were essentially sold under the premise that those who invested in the bonds would lose their money if any of six deadly pandemics hit, including coronavirus. Yet, if a pandemic did not occur before the bonds mature on July 15, 2020, investors would receive what they had originally paid for the bonds back in addition to interest and premium payments on those bonds that they receive between the date of purchase and the bond’s maturation date.

The PEF, which these pandemic bonds fund, was created by the World Bank “to channel surge funding to developing countries facing the risk of a pandemic” and the creation of these so-called “pandemic bonds” was intended to transfer pandemic risk in low-income countries to global financial markets. According to a World Bank press release on the launch of the bonds, WHO backed the World Bank’s initiative.

However, there is much more to these “pandemic bonds” than meets the eye. For example, PEF has a “unique financing structure [that] combines funding from the bonds issued today with over-the-counter derivatives that transfer pandemic outbreak risk to derivative counterparties.” The World Bank asserted that this structure was used in order “to attract a wider, more diverse set of investors.”

Critics, however, have called the unnecessarily convoluted system “World-Bank-enabled looting” that enriches intermediaries and investors instead of the funds intended targets, in this case low-income countries struggling to fight a pandemic. These critics have asked why not merely give these funds to a body like the Contingency Fund for Emergencies at the World Health Organization (WHO), where the funds could go directly to affected countries in need.

Notably, WHO determines if a pandemic meets the criteria that would see investors’ money be funneled into PEF as opposed to their own pockets, which would take place if no pandemic is declared between now and when the bonds are set to mature this upcoming July.


How does the declaration of whether or not coronavirus is a pandemic or epidemic tie directly to Soros and Gates? That’s the nexus we have to establish to continue in this direction. Here it is and let’s start with Gates.

Before we start, though, it’s imperative to view it all through this lens – recall that all of this is predicated on this simple notion – the pandemic bonds are triggered when a pandemic is declared and the World Bank gets to make that decision. That decision is predicated on the pandemic declaration that would come only from the World Health Organization. Ergo, if we want to know who is pulling the strings here, we have to look at who pulls the strings at the WHO and that’s what we’re doing.

Let’s get to it starting with Gates and building on the information about him and Soros as outline in the previous articles.

The angle on Gates is a simple one – he owns the WHO through funding (just like Soros did with Gilead, Unitaid and the treatment.) In fact, aligning perfectly with the ancient and reliable adage, ‘follow the money,’ left-leaning Politico ascribed to Gates the title of “world’s most powerful doctor.” Consider what the 04 May 17 Politico piece sourced HERE has to say about Gates and the World Health Organization (emphasis mine),

Over the past decade, the world’s richest man has become the World Health Organization’s second biggest donor, second only to the United States and just above the United Kingdom. This largesse gives him outsized influence over its agenda, one that could grow as the U.S. and the U.K. threaten to cut funding if the agency doesn’t make a better investment case.

The result, say his critics, is that Gates’ priorities have become the WHO’s. Rather than focusing on strengthening health care in poor countries — that would help, in their view, to contain future outbreaks like the Ebola epidemic — the agency spends a disproportionate amount of its resources on projects with the measurable outcomes Gates prefers, such as the effort to eradicate polio.

Evidence of Gates’ unprecedented influence abounds in ways subtle and showy.

“He is treated liked a head of state, not only at the WHO, but also at the G20” — Geneva-based NGO representative

The Gates Foundation has pumped more than $2.4 billion into the WHO since 2000, as countries have grown reluctant to put more of their own money into the agency, especially after the 2008 global financial crisis.

Dues paid by member states now account for less than a quarter of WHO’s $4.5 billion biennial budget. The rest comes from what governments, Gates, other foundations and companies volunteer to chip in. Since these funds are usually earmarked for specific projects or diseases, WHO can’t freely decide how to use them.

Most of the Gates Foundation’s influence in the WHO is very discreet, she said, adding that it can also decide to take initiatives outside of the organization, as it did with GAVI, which helps the poorest countries buy vaccines in bulk at a discount, or with a recently launched Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, an alliance to develop vaccines for emerging infectious diseases.

But the foundation’s focus on delivering vaccines and medicines, rather than on building resilient health systems, has drawn criticism. And some NGOs worry it may be too close to industry.


Why the focus on delivering vaccines and medicines rather than building resilient health systems? Follow the money – the former is sustainable over time, has little relative overhead cost and is entirely more profitable than the latter. It’s medicine for profit – plain and simple. Or, rather, profit for profit but using medicine as the vehicle and people as the mechanism (prevent and make money or treat and make money; but make money nonetheless and do it off the world population regardless.)

Let’s now drag Soros into the fold before tying it all together. As for Soros, veneer-level, limited research has established some looser and more direct ties between him, his ventures (NGOs) and the WHO; and there’s plenty of evidence entangling Soros and the WHO over long periods of time.

According to the WHO as sourced HERE,

Philanthropist George Soros, founder of the Open Society Institute, announces a $3million two-year grant to Boston-based NGO Partners in Health to immediately strengthen TB control in Lesotho, a country devastated by the dual TB/HIV epidemic. WHO invites FIND to collaborate with Partners In Health in Lesotho to begin work on transforming TB diagnosis services.


Soros’ WHO entanglements, as mentioned, are deep over time and importantly, we should recall that in 2017, Soros donated $18B of his personal wealth to his foundations – a very curious decision. Notably and as sourced HERE and HERE, he was a major player and partnered with the WHO in a global effort to combat TB and HIV. Sidebar – recall, the coronavirus strain COVID-19 is reported to have four bio-engineered HIV insertions as noted in previous articles (linked at top.)

Soros’ own Open Society Foundations has 3,626 hits on the WHO when searched from its own site HERE. Reciprocally and understanding that the WHO is more likely to link back to Soros’ NGOs rather than Soros directly, the WHO’s own site returns 49 hits HERE.

Now consider the deep entanglements of the Soros Economic Development Fund sourced HERE in this World Economic Forum document and dating back to 28 Nov 17; with a March 2017 publication date. The document is a ‘Workshop Summary’ entitled ‘Market-Based Solutions and Innovative Finance New Approaches to Addressing Humanitarian Needs,’ and therein it directly establishes a nexus between George Soros, his NGO, pandemic risk-transfer (bonds) and the WHO.

Lessons learned from NewRe’s risk-transfer facilitiesNewRe, a Swiss reinsurance company, is engaged in a number of schemes to facilitate emergency relief, for example, the Caribbean Risk Insurance Facility (CRIF) and a similar facility in the Pacific Islands, set up with the World Bank in 2013, which paid out after Cyclone Pam. A similar drought insurance scheme in Africa set up in 2014 paid out in the aftermath of crop failure to prevent the crisis from escalating. The World Bank is now working with NewRe to develop a pandemic risk-transfer facility triggered by the early stages of an infectious disease outbreak. In the view of NewRe, all these schemes add value if they can make an impact on mitigating crises.

‘Workshop Summary’ entitled ‘Market-Based Solutions and Innovative Finance New Approaches to Addressing Humanitarian Needs


Let’s now consider the technical definition of a pandemic according to the WHO and as sourced HERE (emphasis mine),

A pandemic is defined as “an epidemic occurring worldwide, or over a very wide area, crossing international boundaries and usually affecting a large number of people.”


Consider how Webb accurately closes her article (emphasis mine),

The WHO’s decision to refuse to use the “p-word” may be the result of several factors, though the pandemic bonds loom large as a $425 million incentive for not doing so. While avoiding the use of the term may please pandemic bondholders, it is set to have major negative consequences for global public health, particularly given the fact that early action against epidemic and pandemic outbreaks is widely considered to be an imperative.



After reading Guinness’ piece, I saw an opportunity to revisit the Trilateral Commission, something I haven’t read-up on in a while, and do so through the lens of the COVID-19 coronavirus. Guinness astutely grounds his work in a Trilateral Commission brochure circa summer 2019 and I want to begin there. For a quick review of the Trilateral Commission, review Guinness’ article HERE, entitled ‘Order Out of Chaos: A Look at the Trilateral Commission.’ Extracting some relevant quotes, Guinness elaborates on this basic premise,

(The Trilateral Commission has) three key parts: The Operators, The Propagandists and Technicians, and the Power Holders.

The Operators are shown as being a quartet of politicians, bureaucrats, establishment lawyers and trade unionists.

Propagandists are the media who seek to control the public news cycle, whereas Technicians are the academics and research controllers who devise the plans required to ‘promote and implement objectives.’ It is these plans which politicians and bureaucrats attempt to bring before the legislature for implementation. In short, Propagandists and Technicians are ‘the intellectual linkage between the Power Holders and The Operators.’ Without them, plans cannot be devised and disseminated down to government.

The Power Holders, (are) a concentrated mix of multinational corporate directors and international bankers. The Power Holders exist to, lay down guidelines for the propagandists and the research directors, and pass through objectives to the operators for implementation. The Power Holders are, in part, those who make-up the Trilateral Commission’s Executive Committee.

The suppression of national sovereignty in favour of a global form of centralised governance is a leading pillar of the Trilateral Commission.


Here’s the relevant question – Does the coronavirus pandemic fit as a mechanism to simultaneously suppress the national sovereignty of multiple nations in favor of centralized governance in rules-based form; also known as Globalization as underpinned by authoritarianism and tyranny?

Directly and succinctly, a global pandemic such as COVID-19 coronavirus is a perfect fit for a construct to implement a false flag operation.

Earlier we asked if the pandemic could serve as mechanism to achieve a pillar objective of the Trilateral Commission – replacing national sovereignty with rules-based Globalism. The answer to that question is an easy yes – a viral pandemic is a highly fluid construct that could be used to exact an entire menu of draconian measures just about anywhere and at just about anytime. In other words, it’s perfect cover.

COVID-19 coronavirus reasonably stands as an excellent construct to 1) achieve a pillar of the Trilateral Commission at the same time it 2) execute a false flag operation. It’s now relevant to ask if they are related?

To answer that question, we have to consider the ties that Soros and Gates have to the Trilateral Commission. Rest assured, it doesn’t take long to link Soros, Gates, one or the other to groups like Trilateral, the Council on Foreign Relations, The Brookings Institution, The Bilderberg Group, Club of Rome, etc. Consider this sourced work from Fred Donaldson,

Bill Clinton was a member in 2005. So was George Soros, George H. W. Bush, Madeleine Albright, Tom Foley, Charles Rangel, Dick Gephardt, Richard Perle, Henry Kissinger, Zbigniew Brzezinski, Dianne Feinstein, Fareed Zakaria, David Gergen, Mort Zuckerman,  Robert McNamara and Lynne Cheney. Plus money experts like David Rockefeller of Chase Bank, Jaimie Dimon of J P Morgan, Martin Feldstein,  Larry Summers, John Thain and Paul Volcker.


As I continue to harp on the importance of NGOs (non-governmental organizations funded by the elite to interface with geopolitics at the ground level), note that Soros’ interface with the Trilateral Commission was via two of his NGOs. This is how it works. Here’s the Trilateral Commission 2005 membership citation, “George Soros, Chairman, Soros Fund Management LLC, New York, NY; Chairman, The Open Society Institute.”

Donaldson’s work also establishes this per the AP, “Besides Brookings, other think tanks funded by the Soros’ Ploughshares Fund include the Arms Control Association, and the Atlantic Council, according to the AP.”

Additionally, Gates and Soros were members of Club of Rome SOURCE (page 106.), while Soros was also a member of the Council on Foreign Relations SOURCE (page 98.)

This excerpt from a Global Research book review penned by Stephen Lendman provides a glimpse at how representation in one group can parlay into representation or influence in another, by proxy or directly,

His (Daniel Estulin) book, “The True Story of the Bilderberg Group,” was published in 2005 and is now updated in a new 2009 edition. He states that in 1954, “the most powerful men in the world met for the first time” in Oosterbeek, Netherlands, “debated the future of the world,” and decided to meet annually in secret. They called themselves the Bilderberg Group with a membership representing a who’s who of world power elites, mostly from America, Canada, and Western Europe with familiar names like David Rockefeller, Henry Kissinger, Bill Clinton, Gordon Brown, Angela Merkel, Alan Greenspan, Ben Bernanke, Larry Summers, Tim Geithner, Lloyd Blankfein, George Soros, Donald Rumsfeld, Rupert Murdoch, other heads of state, influential senators, congressmen and parliamentarians, Pentagon and NATO brass, members of European royalty, selected media figures, and invited others – some quietly by some accounts like Barack Obama and many of his top officials.

Always well represented are top figures from the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), IMF, World Bank, Trilateral Commission, EU, and powerful central bankers from the Federal Reserve, the ECB’s Jean-Claude Trichet, and Bank of England’s Mervyn King.


At a TED conference sourced HERE (page 78), Bill Gates presented a formula to track CO2 emissions the impact of a single individual on the construct of ‘global warming’/’climate change,’ and wittingly strolled down a path of global depopulation. Gates’ entanglements also include being a supporter of the Brookings Institution as sourced HERE (page 109.)

Again, it’s Donaldson’s work HERE that ties Gates to the Trilateral Commission circa 2009 by proxy in “Catherine Bertini, Professor of Public Administration, Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs, Syracuse University, Syracuse, NY; Senior Fellow, Agricultural Development, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation; former Under Secretary-General for Management, United Nations; former Executive Director, UN World Food Program.” Bertini was still a member circa 2019 as sourced HERE; however, her direct affiliation with Gates ended in 2009. THIS Donaldson item also connects Gates to Bilderberg 2010 as an attendee.

Let’s examine the summer 2019 brochure from the Trilateral Commission entitled ‘Recreating the Trilateral Commission to Revitalize Our Democracies to Uphold the Rules-Based International Order,’ which you can view in a PDF link HERE, in line-by-line fashion. We’ll start with the executive summary (EMPHASIS MINE),

The global order that seemed so invincible at the end of the Cold War is now in doubt. Challenges to it come from within the very societies that honed and championed this order, as well from more traditional geopolitical opponents of it. Whether the world proves able to tackle the most urgent problems facing mankind today will in part depend on the ability of advanced democracies to overcome their current malaise and work together as they have in past decades.

A forty-five year old organization, the Trilateral Commission is recreating itself to be a leader and an indispensable resource in this effort. The Commission has unique advantages in galvanizing those in developed democracies to move from lamenting democratic decline to taking action to remedy it. It is the only organization with an explicit trilateral structure (North America, Europe, and Asia) and a legacy of catalyzing cooperation on global issues across the very geographies now suffering from democratic discontent. Rediscovering its roots, the Commission is sharpening its mission, rejuvenating its membership, and committing itself to a work program that will generate thought and action to strengthen the advanced democracies, enabling them to work together more effectively to meet the challenges of the 21st century.


Focusing on the emphasized text in the Executive Summary, let’s interpret what the Trilateral Commission is stating as viewed and interpreted through the lens of national sovereignty. Note the overarching framework that makes the Trilateral Commission a formidable one – it bridges the three most formidable continents – North America, Europe and Asia. Moreover, it’s a ‘global order,’ and thus a functionary body of the concept of Globalism ergo it stands counter to traditional principles such as national sovereignty, national citizenship, individual rights and liberties, etc.

Notice how specific mention is given to the decline of the post-Cold War construct, or in other words, a construct that was created whereby the balance between mutual annihilation and detente served to usher in decades of draconian policy, military build-up and social control leverage.

When the Trilateral Commission indicates that ‘global order’ is ‘in doubt’ due to new ‘challenges,’ we need to interpret for clarity. The interpretation reads as summarized – the control mechanism (construct) that was previously used to exact Globalism and maintain social control across the continents of North America, Europe and Asia, is in significant jeopardy. The ‘challenges’ identified can be viewed as impediments to their objectives and the impediments are simply us – the people – ergo said challenges now clearly stand as a renewed sense of national sovereignty, individual rights and liberties and political populism. Essentially, it’s the revolutionary, historical and global shift that was set upon us with the results of the 2016 election of Donald J. Trump. Since that time, Globalism and the institutions that perpetuate it have begun to be dismantled and in significant fashion. The Trilateral Commission is essentially OWNING EVERY BIT OF THAT (significantly important) by making the statements I outlined above.

Why is that critically important? The Trilateral Commission answered that for us – they are working to “generate thought and action to strengthen the advanced democracies, enabling them to work together more effectively to meet the challenges.” What does that mean? It means they are re-calibrating their efforts to further perpetuate Globalism, which is the manifestation of their ‘thoughts’ by means of co-opting the power and authority of the world’s most advanced and leading national governments, described as ‘democracies’ (North America/USA, Europe/European Union and Asia/China, to take ‘action.’ By taking ‘action’ the Trilateral Commission therefore imposes its Globalist will unto targeted populations and that includes you, me, everyone we know, and a whole bunch of others. Once modernized, advanced democracies fall under that umbrella, pulling in the remaining less developed nations is child’s play – see imperialism and colonization.

Notice how the political aspects of this are labeled as “geographies now suffering from democratic discontent.” The relevant question becomes, “What is the source for that discontent?” Easy – it’s the current global push back to the decades-long forced implementation of Globalism and social control. Here are examples – Great Britain leaving the EU; the ongoing ‘yellow vest’ protests in France, Trump’s election, etc. Those are exact examples of the precise ‘democratic discontent’ that institutions like the Trilateral Commission and others seek to squash and replace with their own vision of what nations and the globe should be. They call it Globalism but in reality, it’s a border-less world with an autocratic, authoritarian, tyrannical one-world government that will shred the US Constitution on its way to eliminating all of our individual rights, liberties and freedoms.

Before you chalk that up to conspiracy theory – no such thing, by the way – consider the Commission’s own words (EMPHASIS MINE),

The drive toward deeper integration and greater globalization seemed irreversible until just a few years ago. Yet in recent times, the unintended consequences of these trends—from inequality to cultural alienation—have fueled new forms of discontent, spurring a rise in populism and nationalism in the most advanced economies and democracies in the world. Today’s institutions—both global and domestic—seem ill-equipped to face these trends down and ensure the maintenance of the rules-based international order.


The commission is saying the exact same thing but in words designed to obscure real meaning and throw cover to an ulterior agenda. The Commission continues (EMPHASIS MINE),

Although the headlines differ, there is a remarkable commonality in the stresses bearing down on the democracies of North America, Asia, and Europe. Social, economic, and technological pressures—be they rising inequality, shifting demographics, or the changing nature of work—are leading many to question whether democracy is still working for them. Social media is transforming and degrading politics by reinforcing bias, spreading falsehoods, and segmenting people into more insulated groups.


The ‘rising inequality’ results from the UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES (I continually hammer this theme with the Left in most everything I write – they are the masters of it) created by the autocratic implementation of Globalism against the will of the majority and now that folks apparently have decided to take part in a ‘GREAT AWAKENING’ so as to defend their collective and individual rights and liberties, the Commission, Globalists and others are re-calibrating to ensure that never comes to fruition and that Globalism eventually manifests. They leave no stone unturned as they drill down on social media in classic censorship fashion akin to co-opted partners in Twitter, Facebook, etc.

The Commission continues (EMPHASIS MINE),

The fate of these advanced democracies has major consequences for the ability of the world to tackle pressing global problems in the security, economic, and political realms. These countries have the greatest capacity to address problems outside their own borders and in tandem with others. Prospects for maintaining the open global trading system, stemming nuclear proliferation, and adequately addressing climate change are slim as long as advanced democracies are compromised by internal divisions and governed by institutions that are no longer well-suited to the realities of the day.


The two underlined and emboldened sentences above outline the Commission’s justification for it’s “thought” and “action” whereby their designs are rooted in preserving the institutions they cherish and leverage to control and manipulate the masses – global trading, nuclear proliferation, climate change (largest conduit for corruption and theft ever devised), etc. Note how the impediments to their objectives are characterized as, “internal divisions and governed by institutions that are no longer well-suited to the realities of the day.” Make no mistake about it – that’s a direct shot at the Trump Administration and any national government aligned with it.

Now consider how the Commission seeks to remedy the challenges it faces (EMPHASIS MINE),

The democracies of North America, Europe, and Asia must be revitalized in order to ensure that they—not the authoritarian regimes gaining confidence and establishing themselves more firmly on the global stage—are the ones that offer workable solutions to the dilemmas of our rapidly changing world. This democratic renewal will require new voices and thinking from all segments of these societies.


Let’s now translate what it means to “revitalize” democracies; especially the Constitutional Republic of the United States of America, in light of the 2019 time frame. In short, just examine what has happened to President Trump since his 2016 election up to now (Russia> Mueller> Ukraine> impeachment> COVID-19 coronavirus???????); especially given his STRONG PUBLIC OPPOSITION to Globalism and that a pillar of his political platform is literally undoing it. What they call “revitalizing” has taken the appearance of impeachment and a multifaceted and ongoing coup d’etat as led by the Lawfare Group.

The Commission even taps its past to possibly prognosticate its future. Consider,

Founded in 1973, the Commission’s original goal—to bring Japan into the umbrella of democratic societies when others would not—was controversial. But its purpose was also to buttress a beleaguered global trading order in the wake of President Nixon’s withdrawal from the Gold Standard and the Bretton Woods Agreement. Following Vietnam, the Arab oil embargo, and the diminishing share of global GDP generated by the United States, doubts had surfaced about America’s role in the world.


There has been a long-sustained effort from the Globalist element to push the globe into a cashless society; one whereby digital currency would become the standard. As I posted the other day, since the coronavirus scenario began to unfold, I’ve been waiting for one particular HEADLINE centered on using coronavirus as the rationale for a remedy that will replace actual currency with digital currency so as to prevent the spread of the virus. Like with all else, it would begin to unfold incrementally, be billed as a temporary measure, be hailed as monumentally successful endeavor and then be implemented permanently and globally.

Any point in time that none of us can actually select to physically possess our currency and wealth is a point in time that none of us actually possess any currency or wealth. It would be wealth by proxy and it could be eliminated at the proverbial push of a button and by anyone having access to that button. Do you think a mechanized construct like that could serve to control the masses in a highly effective way? Rhetorical question – that’s precisely why they want it and the fluid construct of a viral outbreak and the resulting fear of the spread of contagions is the perfect cover to usher-in such a global currency reset. Is in-part this why the Commission revisited its own history?

The Commission then begins to dial in on specifics. Consider (EMPHASIS MINE),

Moreover, the trilateral structure is essential to catalyze cooperation to meet pressing global problems—from nuclear proliferation to climate change to pandemics to growing protectionism.

“Pandemics.’ Now that’s an interesting word. So interesting in fact, that the World Bank, as predicated by a non-declaration decision by the World Health Organization, which is funded by Bill Gates, whereby it refuses to declare the COVID-19 coronavirus epidemic a pandemic; despite it meeting the WHO’s own criteria for a pandemic classification, because such a declaration would result in enormous sums of money being eliminated by means of the ‘pandemic bonds’ on which I previously reported HERE, in the last article, and described above.

So then, whose hands are in this proverbial ‘cookie jar?’ Consider,

In each group of the Commission, the membership includes senior people from business, government, academia, and the media—including former prime ministers and cabinet officials from around the world, top CEOs and chairmen, and the most recognized thought leaders.


Now ask yourself exactly which groups and individuals would be required to be enlisted in any such epidemic or pandemic outside of an authentic or genuine outbreak; recalling that 4 artificial HIV insertions were discovered within COVID-19. Must that group include, “senior people from business, government, academia, and the media—including former prime ministers and cabinet officials from around the world, top CEOs and chairmen, and the most recognized thought leaders?” Rhetorical question – that’s the precise list.

The entire summer brochure (LINK) is short and worthy if you care to read it in its entirety.


The CEPI, founded over three years ago, suggests that the COVID-19 coronavirus is a global pandemic that requires aggressive action. Who created and funds CEPI? Bill Gates. Who else contributed to its foundation? George Soros.

That brings us to the news event of the day courtesy of permanent Twitter outlaw Zero Hedge and THIS item. Therein we learn,

An infectious diseases expert at the forefront of the search for a coronavirus vaccine said on Friday that it was the most “frightening disease” he’s ever encountered, and that “war is an appropriate analogy” for what the country is facing, as “50 – 70 percent of the global population” may become infected.

Dr. Richard Hatchett, who sat on the White House Homeland Security Council in 2005 – 2006 and was a principal author of the National Strategy for Pandemic Influenza Implementation Plan, and currently heads the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, told the UK’s Channel 4:

This is the most frightening disease I’ve ever encountered in my career, and that includes Ebola, it includes MERS, it includes SARS. And it’s frightening because of the combination of infectiousness and a lethality that appears to be manyfold higher than flu.”

He feels this way “because of the combination of infectiousness, and a lethality that appears to be many-fold higher than the flu.


That sounds ominous and frightening, does it not? It’s also by design and the revelations below will demonstrate this but more importantly, they will demonstrate the motive (look up for a hint) for sending such a strong message.

Consider this from the CEPI’s own page sourced HERE (emphasis mine.)

CEPI was founded in Davos by the governments of Norway and India, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the Wellcome Trust, and the World Economic Forum.

CEPI has secured $760 million toward its $1billion funding target, with multi-year funding from Norway, UK, Germany, Japan, Canada, Ethiopia, Australia, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, and Wellcome. CEPI has also received single-year investments from the governments of Belgium. The European Commission provides substantial financial contributions to support relevant projects through its mechanisms.

Close collaboration with global partners is also crucial to the success of our work to develop vaccines against emerging infectious diseases. That’s why work with industry, regulators, and other bodies to ensure that any vaccines we develop get licensed and can reach the people who need them.


It should come as no surprise that Soros also has direct linkage to CEPI as sourced HERE and whereby he is indicated as an ‘agenda provider’ to the World Economic Forum. If you glance back at the first paragraph in the quote above, you’ll notice that the World Economic Forum was a founding body of CEPI.

Referring back to the same above quote, notice that Gates is also entangled with Wellcome as established in THIS item and in other capacities (see below.)

Connections between Soros and Wellcome are thin because they are competing entities; however, the contemporary coalescence of swampy NGOs in Berlin serves to reflect the appropriate implications. It’s reasonable to think that if Soros’ Open Society Foundation and Gates’ Foundation and Wellcome Trust cared to intermingle, it would be easy as pie to make happen. Take Berlin as one example and as sourced HERE (EMPHASIS MINE),

Wellcome’s arrival means that three of the world’s largest international foundations have now opened offices in Berlin in the past year. That includes the world’s largest foundation, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, which now has ten staff in Berlin, and the Open Society Foundation (OSF) which plans to have around 100. Both foundations also have long-established offices in London.

Any change at Wellcome, as the UK’s largest foundation by a huge distance, could have significant implications for the British foundation sector and the charities they support.

The presence of Wellcome, Gates and OSF in Berlin underscores Germany’s status at the heart of European philanthropy and OSF in particular – with its un-ashamedly political orientation – could shake up the large but relatively sleepy German foundation sector. OSF arrived in Berlin last year after its exile from Hungary, the country of birth of its founder George Soros. According to OSF’s head of Institutional Relations, Selmin Çalışkan, the Berlin office will become the largest office outside its New York HQ with planned spending in excess of 100 million Euros per year.


Now consider Wellcome’s emergence and partnership with Gates germane to drug-resistant illnesses and as it converges on the same 2017 timeline underpinning fact sets demonstrated in the previous articles; and as sourced HERE (EMPHASIS MINE).

Under provisional leadership from Germany, the Global Antimicrobial Resistance (AMR) Collaboration Hub will co-ordinate efforts to invigorate antimicrobial research and encourage global involvement and investment. The scope of work will cover all stages of the antimicrobial development pipeline, as well as vaccines, alternative therapies and new diagnostic tools.

The Global Collaboration Hub will be open to all G20 countries, G20 guest countries and to non-government donors. Members will be expected to release additional investment in national and/or international research, but there will not be a set minimum for entry.

UK charity Wellcome and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation are among the first to pledge support.


If we dig back to May of 2014 and as soured HERE, we can find a merging of Gates and Wellcome as each invested $20 billion in a British pharmaceutical company called Kymab. What did Kymab do; recalling that COVID-19 contains four artificial HIV insertions? This (EMPHASIS MINE),

Kymab, a British biopharmaceutical company, has announced Series B investments of $20 million each from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and the Wellcome Trust.

The funds will enable Kymab to maximize the potential of its Kymouse platform and advance its proprietary pipeline of first-in-class therapeutic human monoclonal antibodies in areas of significant unmet need. In addition, Kymab will collaborate with the Gates Foundation and its partners on vaccine antigen discovery research and development, with an initial focus on malaria and HIV.

The company is using its Kymouse platform to discover and develop fully human monoclonal antibody drugs — the best-selling classes of drugs, due in large part to their superior safety profiles. To complement the growth of its pipeline, Kymab will seek a limited number of strategic collaborations to identify and develop therapeutic antibodies for a range of diseases.

“We are excited to work with Kymab in pursuit of research and development of drugs and vaccines to address diseases that have a disproportionate impact on the world’s poorest,” said Trevor Mundel, president of global health at the Gates Foundation. “We believe Kymab has one of the most comprehensive transgenic technologies to date…and are pleased to support the company as it enters its next stage of growth.”


Here’s what Kymab’s page says today as sourced HERE (EMPHASIS MINE),

Our Series B financing commenced in 2014 when the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the Wellcome Trust invested $40 million in Kymab and closed in 2015, when Schroder UK Public Private Trust plc (formerly Woodford Patient Capital Trust plc), the Woodford Equity Income Fund and Malin Corporation plc invested US$50 million. We secured $100 million in November 2016, with investment from ORI Fund and Hepalink as well as follow-on investments from existing shareholders.

Two of our long-term investors, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and the Wellcome Trust, are the World’s largest healthcare charities, which hold combined funds of over $68 billion.

We completed our Series C financing in November 2016, securing $100 million investment from ORI Fund and Hepalink, as well as follow-on investments from existing shareholders.

These investments in turn enabled us to develop our platform, establish a pipeline of therapeutic antibodies and advance our pipeline into the clinic. 

We have, in parallel and supported by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, conducted vaccine R&D in numerous partnerships focused on infectious diseases, which inflict suffering on people in resource poor countries.


How does Kymab relate to the coronavirus given the obvious implications from the descriptions above? Here’s how as sourced HERE (EMPHASIS MINE),

Commenting on the appointments, newly appointed CEO Dr David Chiswell said, “I am delighted that we have attracted such experienced scientists to head up our key therapeutic areas. Their appointments elevate our intellectual firepower in key areas of biology and medicine as well as providing a statement of the value of our expanding pipeline.”

Professor Paul Kellam, Vice-President of Vaccines & Infectious Disease has a distinguished career in virology and published over 175 articles, having worked at the Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute, where his team uncovered a crucial human genetic variant that affects the outcome of influenza infection. He is an internationally recognised expert in examining the genomes of emerging infectious disease, such as Ebola and the MERS coronavirus as well as HIV and other virus infections. In addition to his role with Kymab, Professor Kellam serves as part-time Professor of Virus Genomics at Imperial College London.

KYMAB NEWS – Three appointments to lead key therapeutic areas

What a convenient convergence of overlapping items of interest for Mr. Gates, his foundation, his interests and his holdings; and all of the intermingling with other NGOs; especially in GERMANY (recall the Berlin context provided above) of all places! It all seems to frame the 2017 course for pursuing the stated goal of all stages of antimicrobial development including vaccines. The coincidences in all of this are profound given what Gates owns and controls relative to the current timeline and the nexuses and entanglements that draw him back to the origin and genesis of it all.

It seems Gates’ head start goes back even further to at least 2014 from a practical standpoint; but what else happened in 2017?

For one, Gilead Sciences was in trouble as shown HERE in the third article,

By 2017, Gilead’s strong history of growth, performance and acquisitions had lost some of its luster and they needed new products to maintain profitability. Consider, “As of 2017, Gilead’s challenge is to develop or acquire new blockbuster drugs before its current revenue-producers wane or their patent protection expires.”


Guess what else happened in 2017 as reported HERE in the fifth article and quoted from The Mint Press,

In June 2017, the World Bank announced the creation of “specialized bonds” that would be used to fund the previously created Pandemic Emergency Financing Facility (PEF) in the event of an officially-recognized (i.e. WHO-recognized) pandemic.


As you tie that information to the 2017 timeline, recall that the World Bank is 100% dependent upon a pandemic declaration from the World Health Organization to trigger the pandemic bonds and it’s none other than Bill Gates who controls the WHO via funding. I’m sure that’s just another coincidence, though.

And look at what the aforementioned World Economic Forum was working on in 2017 and as reported HERE in the fifth article,

The World Bank is now working with NewRe to develop a pandemic risk-transfer facility triggered by the early stages of an infectious disease outbreak. In the view of NewRe, all these schemes add value if they can make an impact on mitigating crises.


When considering what Gates and Soros owned, controlled and funded dating back to the foundational time of 2016-2017, when the backdrop to all of this began to manifest, relative to where we are today germane to the prospective treatment options and apparent global need for treatment, again, I ask, “Cui bono?”

Soros, Gates and the Globalists – that’s who. It doesn’t matter where the looking begins, it always seems to draw back to Soros and Gates.


The WHO pandemic declaration is a significant trigger for the World Bank in the broader COVID-19 matter and it all links to Gates, Soros and the Globalists.

As confirmed by the WHO in THIS press release, COVID-19 has been declared a pandemic and that is a monumentally critical declaration in the broader coronavirus matter. The result of this declaration having occurred prior to July of this year is significant through the lens of something called pandemic bonds germane to Bill Gates, George Soros and the Globalists.

Let’s pause – that was a lot of information that I have summarized as,

Essentially, the fundamental components look like a global pandemic rope with two billionaires standing side-by-side and tugging on both ends of it and whereby one end is comprised of patents and patent-sharing strategies; while the other end is comprised of pandemic bonds controlled by the World Bank, as predicated by a pandemic declaration, as determined by the World Health Organization, as controlled by those same two billionaires, as entrenched by, of course, funding (follow the money!). On the former end of that rope, the billionaires stand to earn a king’s ransom while on the latter end of that rope, the billionaires are working to preserve a different king’s ransom; and all at the expense of how many people globally?


That’s a lot – take a breath – and then consider this. After reading what I’ve already shared with you above, isn’t that exactly what this scenario looks like and doesn’t that demonstrate intent means, motive and opportunity?

Our next step down this road is the purely and sinfully political one – that COVID-19 is the contingency plan in the ongoing effort by the Globalists to rid themselves of this President. I have represented this ongoing coup d’etat as: Russia> Mueller> Ukraine> Impeachment> 25th Amendment? I think it may be safe to rewrite that to look like Russia> Mueller> Ukraine> Impeachment> COVID-19> 25th Amendment?

Ask yourself what it looks like if the President tests positive for COVID-19? What’s his age? Yeah, squarely in the middle of the demographic with the highest risk for infection and death.

Ask if it’s yet another coincidence whereby yet another “drill” preceded yet another (false flag) event devised to herd the ‘sheeple’ into desirable positions; this time courtesy of John Hopkins and Bill Gates. It’s funny how all of these narrative generating events seem to be preceded by federal and local agency drills simulating the same events and often in the same general area.

Ask yourself how all of these paralleling timelines came to converge on the same roughly 2017 timeline?

With the Globalists facing a guaranteed loss in the nearing 2020 election, ask if it’s by coincidence that a bio-engineered virus stands to precisely target and possibly eliminate a significant portion of the older voting base, which would presumably tip it back in the direction of the younger voting base, which, by epidemiological design, this virus hardly impacts?

What else does the fluidity of a global viral pandemic provide in terms of policy, law, regulation, rationale, justification, oversight and authority that is either extra-constitutional or unconstitutional? Once it reaches a certain threshold, it’s perfect cover to usher-in martial law, gun confiscation, quarantine and other avenues to ‘stifle panic’ and focus on everyone’s ‘safety,’ such as restricting movement, speech, association, etc.

Knowing how NGOs and government funding functions, ask yourself if the COVID-19 global pandemic can become the mother of all conduits to facilitate corruption and criminal theft moving ENORMOUS sums of money on a GLOBAL SCALE.

Ask yourself if otherwise intelligent people may succumb to the pervasive hysteria and therefore submit authority and the implementation and enforcement of draconian regulations and laws so as to preserve the ‘safety’ of themselves and their loved ones.

Ask if China’s economic and societal implosion would be of benefit to the Globalists.

Ask if instantly decimating President Trump’s historic economy with a proverbial flip of the switch is just coincidence and only happens to be to the Globalists’ benefit.

Ask if it is just coincidence that Barack Obama went globetrotting in preemptive fashion hitting all of the same stops President Trump did and that includes two critical nations under the COVID-19 umbrella – CHINA and ITALY; not to mention IRAN (by proxy in John Kerry, et al.)

Ask if a viral global pandemic is the perfect fluid construct to eliminate national borders and therefore national sovereignty as a broader global coalition or entity (United Nations?) ascends to a position of authority to assume global control. Ask such a construct whether that construct be of benefit to the Globalists?

Ask if the Globalists would benefit from the precautionary mandate to move the globe to a digital currency in the form of a global currency reset?

Ask that if the pandemic hit the US hard enough by November so as to compel the closing of open polling venues as a precautionary measure such that all voting would be relegated to online, does that make it easier for the Globalists to steal 2020 (how many voting machines does GEORGE SOROS OWN?).

Here’s the critical aspect to the TIMING in all of this and it is presented as another question to ask yourself, which is rooted in the notion of the Globalists being in fast decline.

“The decline phase of the S-Curve is just beginning” for the Globalists. (SOURCE). So ask yourself this – If Globalism and it’s organization, structure and mechanisms are “just beginning” a downward trajectory that will ultimately and unavoidably lead to defeat, WHEN (timing!) would be the most effective time to default to your Hail Mary contingency plan? When would you need to do that? The logical answer is before that buggy gets too far down the road and on a practical 2020 election timeline, the answer is NOW. In a broader sense, this includes the same time frame as the December viral outbreak.

What do the numbers look like? According to the CDC the worst case scenario in the US is 214 million infected and 1.7 million dead in “over a year.” We stand about 8 months from the election as I type.

Knowing what we know about the epidemiology of COVID-19, that would equate to (not entirely but in significant percentages) the elimination of voters nearing or surpassing perhaps 1.5 million. Those same people just happen to stand in the way of the Globalists simply by means of their age, historic voting turnout and political ideology. Conveniently, the younger indoctrinated voting demographic would be spared from the same bio-engineered epidemiology of COVID-19.

As for the rest of the voters who may be inclined to cast their ballot for someone other than President Trump and likely for Hillary Clinton (depending on whether the DOJ and President Trump expose the Clintons to appropriate legal jeopardy), it seems GOOGLE, which has long-established ties to these same Globalists, will take care of them with it’s intent to manipulate about 15 million votes in 2020 using subliminal methods (this is something I talk about regularly and reference as a component of ‘social programming’.)

Here’s more conspiratorial fodder for you. Does this explain the well-reported incidences of Wal-Marts converting to FEMA centers; FEMA coffins being transported and stored in different geographic locations; columns of military equipment being positioned across the nation; and the convoys and caravans of UN personnel and equipment?

When would be the best time for a foreign power to strike the US homeland? At a time the nation is immobilized with a viral pandemic?

Moreover, have you considered the similarities to the 9/11 media coverage: misinformation, disinformation, erroneous information, conflicting information, etc. And that doesn’t even reflect on the sense of hysteria being instilled and sewn into the mainstream by a corrupt and complicit MSM with its roughly 1,800 media outlets being owned and controlled by six corporations part and parcel with, yep, the Globalists.

So, the Globalists, since George H.W. Bush’s presidency, have been able to establish every element of control, authority, access, means, motive, opportunity and other amounting to the requisite capabilities to execute an intentional viral global pandemic so precisely bio-engineered that it not only accomplishes their primary objective of galvanizing global control under this guise, but it’s so exact that it only really infects and kills the last barrier between themselves and full implementation of their agenda – the older voting demographic.

All that remains is whether you believe they actually did this or it’s all just one giant coincidence. I don’t profess to know the answer to that question – I’ve only uncovered a mountain of evidence that speaks to it.

They defied the universal laws of physics to bring down three structures in broad daylight, attacked the Pentagon and killed 3,000 Americans the last time they reared their head in this fashion. What makes you think they would not unleash a golbal viral pandemic assuming THEY STOOD TO LOSE EVERYTHING AND HAD NO OTHER VIABLE OPTIONS?

To close, I’m not saying definitively that this happened this way rather, I am saying definitively that you can arrange the elemental pieces of evidence to demonstrate that it could happen this way.

Like with 9/11, time will tell.


  1. […] At a time that the entire world was trying to understand COVID-19 as a “pandemic,” I was exclusively evidencing it as a false flag construct and specifically as a construct of enterprise fraud. In an article dated 14 Mar 20, which was several weeks after the first U.S. case on 19 Jan 20 [1] [2] and around the same time that the first infection and mortality data became available for examination, I began arranging the elemental evidence in building the case for enterprise fraud: IS COVID-19 A GLOBAL 9/11? EVIDENCE CAN BE ARRANGED TO SUGGEST A FALSE FLAG CONSTRUCT AND HERE’S H…. […]

  2. […] I was far enough ahead of the curve that by the mid-March 2020 timeline, I wrote this article: IS COVID-19 A GLOBAL 9/11? EVIDENCE CAN BE ARRANGED TO SUGGEST A FALSE FLAG CONSTRUCT AND HERE’S H… [this is less than two months after the first U.S. […]