Yuri Rubtsov

The key structures that defined the post-war development strategy of the West were the central financial institutions of Great Britain and the United States — the Bank of England and the Federal Reserve System (FRS) — and the associated financial and industrial organizations set out as a means to establish absolute control over the financial system of Germany and its ability to control political processes in Central Europe.

[…]

The new project was developed in the depths of “JP Morgan & Co.” under the instruction of the head of the Bank of England, Montagu Norman. At the core of his ideas was representative of the “Dresdner Bank” Hjalmar Schacht, who formulated it in March 1922 at the suggestion of John Foster Dulles (future Secretary of state in the Cabinet of President Eisenhower) and legal adviser to President W. Wilson at the Paris peace conference.

Dulles gave this note to the chief Trustee “JP Morgan & Co.”,which then recommended H. Schacht in consultation with Montagu Norman, Governor of the Bank of England.

In December, 1923, H. Schacht became Manager of the Reichsbank and was instrumental in bringing together the Anglo-American and German financial elites. 

In the summer of 1924, the project known as the “Dawes plan” (named after the Chairman of the Committee of experts who created it – American banker and Director of one of the banks of the Morgan group), was adopted at the London conference. He called for halving the reparations and solved the question about the sources of their coverage. However, the main task was to ensure favorable conditions for US investment, which was only possible with the stabilization of the German Mark.

To this end, the plan gave Germany a large loan of $200 million, half of which was accounted for by JP Morgan.

While the Anglo-American banks gained control not only over the transfer of German payments, but also for the budget, the system of monetary circulation and to a large extent the credit system of the country.

The Weimar Republic

By August 1924, the old German Mark was replaced by a new, stabilized financial situation in Germany, and, as researcher G.D Preparta wrote, the Weimar Republic was prepared for:

“the most picturesque economic aid in history, followed by the most bitter harvest in world history” — “an unstoppable flood of American blood poured into the financial veins of Germany.”

The consequences of this were not slow to appear.

This was primarily due to the fact that the annual reparations were to cover the amount of debt paid by the allies, formed by the so-called “absurd Weimar circle”.

The gold that Germany paid in the form of war reparations, was sold, pawned, and disappeared in the US, where it was returned to Germany in the form of an “aid” plan, who gave it to England and France, and they in turn were to pay the war debt of the United States. It was then overlayed with interest, and again sent  to Germany. In the end, all in Germany lived in debt [were indebted] , and it was clear that should Wall Street withdraw their loans, the country would suffer complete bankruptcy.

Secondly, although formal credit was issued to secure payment, it was actually the restoration of the military-industrial potential of the country.

The fact is that the Germans were paid in shares of companies for the loans so that American capital began to actively integrate into the German economy.

The total amount of foreign investments in German industry during 1924-1929 amounted to almost 63 billion gold Marks (30 billion was accounted for by loans), and the payment of reparations — 10 billion Marks. 70% of revenues were provided by bankers from the United States, and most of the banks were from JP Morgan. As a result, in 1929, German industry was in second place in the world, but it was largely in the hands of America’s leading financial-industrial groups.

US Investments in Nazi Germany. Rockefeller Financed Adolf Hitler’s Election Campaign

“Interessen-Gemeinschaft Farbenindustrie”, the main supplier of the German war machine, financed 45% of the election campaign of Hitler in 1930, and was under the control of Rockefeller’s “Standard oil”.

Morgan, through “General Electric”, controlled the German radio and electrical industry via AEG and Siemens (up to 1933, 30% of the shares of AEG owned “General Electric”) through the Telecom company ITT — 40% of the telephone network in Germany.

In addition, they owned a 30% stake in the aircraft manufacturing company “Focke-Wulf”.

“General Motors”, belonging to the DuPont family, established control over “Opel”.

Henry Ford controlled 100% of the shares of  “Volkswagen”.

In 1926, with the participation of the Rockefeller Bank “Dillon, Reed & Co.” the second largest  industrial monopoly in Germany after “I.G Farben” emerged — metallurgical concern “Vereinigte Stahlwerke” (Steel Trust) Thyssen, Flick, Wolff, Feglera etc.

American cooperation with the German military-industrial complex was so intense and pervasive that by 1933 the key sectors of German industry and large banks such as Deutsche Bank, Dresdner Bank, Danat-Bank (Darmstädter und Nationalbank), etc.  were under the control of American financial capital.

The political force that was intended to play a crucial role in Anglo-American plans was being simultaneously prepared. We are talking about the funding of the Nazi party and Adolf Hitler personally.

As former German Chancellor Brüning wrote in his memoirs, since 1923, Hitler received large sums from abroad. Where they went is unknown, but they were received through Swiss and Swedish banks.

It is also known that, in 1922 in Munich, a meeting took place between A. Hitler and the military attaché of the US to Germany – Captain Truman Smith – who compiled a detailed report for his Washington superiors (in the office of military intelligence), in which he spoke highly of Hitler.

It was through Smith’s circle of acquaintances that Hitler was first introduced to German-American businessman Ernst Franz Sedgwick Hanfstaengl, a graduate of Harvard University who played an important role in the formation of A. Hitler as a politician, endorsed by significant financial support, while securing him ties and communication with prominent personalities of the British establishment.

Hitler was prepared in politics, however, whereas Germany under the Weimar Republic reigned, his party remained on the periphery of public life. The situation changed dramatically with the beginning of the 1929 financial crisis.

Since the autumn of 1929 after the collapse of the America’s stock exchange was triggered by the Federal Reserve, the third stage of the strategy of the Anglo-American financial establishment commenced.

The Federal Reserve and JP Morgan decided to stop lending to Germany, inspired by the banking crisis and economic depression in Central Europe. In September 1931, England abandoned the gold standard, deliberately destroying the international system of payments and completely cutting off the flow of “financial oxygen” to the Weimar Republic.

But a financial miracle occurred with the Nazi party: in September 1930, as a result of large donations from Thyssen, “I.G. Farben”and Industrialist Emil Kirdorf (who was a firm supporter of Adolf Hitler), the Nazi party got 6.4 million votes, and took second place in the Reichstag, after which generous investments from abroad were activated.

The main link between the major German industrialists and foreign financiers became H. Schacht.

1932 Secret Agreement: Wall Street Finances Hitler’s Nazi Party 

On January 4th, 1932, a meeting was held between British financier Montagu Norman (Governor of the Bank of England), Adolf Hitler and Franz Von Papen (who became Chancellor a few months later in May 1932) At this meeting, an agreement on the financing of the Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei (NSDAP or Nazi Party) was reached.

This meeting was also attended by US policy-makers and the Dulles brothers, something which their biographers do not like to mention.

A year later, on January 14th, 1933, another meeting was held between Adolph Hitler, Germany’s Financier Baron Kurt von Schroeder, Chancellor Franz von Papen and Hitler’s Economic Advisor Wilhelm Keppler took place, where Hitler’s program was fully approved.

It was here that they finally resolved the issue of the transfer of power to the Nazis, and on the 30th of January 1933 Hitler became Chancellor. The implementation of the fourth stage of the strategy thus begun.

The attitude of the Anglo-American ruling elites in relation to the new Nazi government was very sympathetic.

When Hitler refused to pay reparations, which, naturally, called into question the payment of war debts, neither Britain nor France showed him the claims of the payments.

Moreover, after his  visit to the United States in May 1933, H. Schacht became once more head of Reichsbank, and after his meeting with the U.S. President and the big bankers on Wall Street, America allocated Germany new loans totalling $1 billion.

In June, during a trip to London and a meeting with Montagu  Norman, Schacht also sought a British loan of $2 billion, and a reduction and cessation of payments on old loans.

Thus, the Nazis got what they could not achieve with the previous government.

In the summer of 1934, Britain signed the Anglo-German transfer agreement, which became one of the foundations of British policy towards the Third Reich, and at the end of the 1930’s, Germany became the main trading partner of England.

Schroeder Bank became the main agent of Germany in the UK, and in 1936 his office in New York teamed up with the   Rockefellers to create the “Schroeder, Rockefeller & Co.” investment Bank, which Times Magazine called the “economic propagandist axis of Berlin-Rome”.

As Hitler himself admitted, he conceived his four-year plan on the basis of foreign financial loans, so it never inspired him with the slightest alarm.

In August 1934, America’s Standard Oil [owned by the Rockefellers] in Germany acquired 730,000 acres of land and built large oil refineries that supplied the Nazis with oil. At the same time, Germany  secretly took delivery of the most modern equipment for aircraft factories from the United States, which would begin the production of German planes.

Germany received a large number of military patents from American firms Pratt and Whitney”, “Douglas”, “Curtis Wright”, and American technology was building the “Junkers-87”. In 1941, when the Second world war was raging, American investments in the economy of Germany amounted to $475 million. “Standard oil” invested – 120 million, General Motors- $35 million, ITT — $30 million, and Ford — $17.5 million.

[…]

Via https://www.globalresearch.ca/history-of-world-war-ii-nazi-germany-was-financed-by-the-federal-reserve-and-the-bank-of-england/5530318

Jeremy Kuzmarov

Internationalist 360°

On September 9^th, The Economist ran a remarkable story entitled “Ukraine’s Assassination Programme: Its Agents Have Become Expert in Dark Revenge.”

It spotlighted how the Ukrainian Security Services (SBU)’s Fifth Directorate and Special Operations Forces (SSO) are running an assassination program across regions of Ukraine occupied or reintegrated into Russia and in Russia itself, and that some SBU agents are starting to believe that these programs have gotten out of control.

An unnamed SBU counter-intelligence officer is quoted as saying that it made him uncomfortable that “marginal figures” were being targeted in operations that were designed “to impress the president rather than bring victory any closer…clowns, prostitutes and jokers are a constant around the Russian government. Kill one of them, and another will appear in their place.”

The same officer noted that Ukraine’s assassination campaign was being “driven by impulse rather than logic,” and “risked exposing sources and the extent of Ukrainian infiltration into Russia,” adding that “our security services shouldn’t do things just because they can.”^[1]

These comments provide an incredible admission of an out-of-control assassination program, subsidized in effect by U.S. taxpayers, that is engaging in wanton violence and killing.

A historical parallel can be found with the CIA’s Vietnam Phoenix Program, an assassination operation designed to liquidate civilian officials supportive of the National Liberation Front (NLF), which also got out of control and was used to resolve private disputes.

The Economist, predictably, did not mention the CIA, though we know from Vasily Prozorov, a former SBU officer who defected to Russia, that the SBU was advised by the CIA since 2014, and that CIA employees have come to the SBU’s central office to plot secret operations.

A Ukrainian hit list on the Myrotvorets website is also now advertising itself as a CIA project based in Langley, Virginia, the location of the CIA’s headquarters.

The Myrotvorets site was launched just after the February 2014 Maidan coup backed by the U.S.

Former SBU Director Valentyn Nalyvaichenko said that Ukraine’s leaders decided that their policy at that time of imprisoning supposed Russian collaborators was “not achieving enough. Prisons were overflowing, but few were deterred. We reluctantly came to the conclusion that we needed to eliminate terrorists.”^[2]

Many of these “terrorists” were actually patriots who supported the legitimately elected government of Viktor Yanukovych (2010-2014), who was deposed in an illegal coup backed by far-right nationalists that worshiped pro-Nazi figures like Stepan Bandera.

They also favored close political-economic and cultural relations with Russia, which had been firmly established over generations. Many were involved in peaceful protests against the post-coup order that were violently suppressed or supported legal political parties that were banned.^[3]

In eastern Ukraine, the “terrorists” supported the renegade Donetsk and Luhansk People’s Republics, which were established after the people living in those republics voted for their autonomy in referenda. They voted that way because they did not accept the Maidan coup and were outraged by the passage of draconian language laws that were an affront to their culture.^[4]

The rights of the people of Donetsk and Luhansk were recognized under the Minsk peace accords, which representatives of the Donetsk and Luhansk People’s Republics signed and which Russia supported, though which Ukraine viewed largely as a ruse to buy time to build up Ukraine’s military capacity to wage war, as German Chancellor Angela Merkel admitted.

On August 31, 2018, the head of the Donetsk People’s Republic, Aleksandr Zakharchenko, was murdered, in a café where he was eating, after a bomb was set off by the death squads profiled in The Economist. (Zakharchenko’s bodyguard also died and 12 people were severely injured in the blast.)

A former mine electrician who staunchly supported the Minsk accords, Zakharchenko had been a compromise figure between the left-leaning and anti-establishment forces that led the Donbas uprising and the more conservative, pro-capitalist forces backed by the government of the Russian Federation.

Zakharchenko’s assassination coincided with that of other notable Russian-backed commanders in the Donbas, such as Mikhail Tolstykh (aka Givi), who was murdered by a flamethrower while he was working in his office, and Arsen Pavlov (aka Motorola), whose 2016 murder in an apartment complex bombing was falsely blamed on Russia in Western media outlets.^[5]

Yevhen Yunakov, the mayor of the town of Velykyi Burluk in the Kharkiv region, was another victim murdered by the SBU in a car bombing. The Economist reported that Yunakov was “one of dozens of people targeted in clinical operations” who were “shot, blown up, hanged, and even on occasion poisoned with doctored brandy.”^[6]

Ukrainian General Kyrylo Budanov was quoted in The Economist piece stating, “if you are asking about [creating a version of] Mossad. We don’t need to. It already exists.”^[7]

These comments provide a stunning rebuke to the pristine image that Ukraine has tried to cultivate given the ruthless reputation of Mossad, which has assassinated more people than any other intelligence service in the Western world—save perhaps the CIA with its drone and torture programs.

The parallel between Ukraine and Israel is that both countries feel they can get away with illegal practices because of the military backing and support that they get from the United States. A further parallel is that both are coming to be viewed more and more as pariah states among politically conscious citizens of the world—as they have both crossed over onto the dark side.

U.S. Intelligence Official Admits to Black Propaganda Operation Against Putin

The exposure of Ukraine’s assassination program in the mainstream media comes amidst the backdrop of the failure of Ukraine’s spring-summer counteroffensive, which has resulted in the demoralization of Ukraine’s army.

Maverick investigative reporter Seymour Hersh recently interviewed an intelligence official with access to up-to-date intelligence who said “it’s all lies,” in reference to claims of incremental progress in the counteroffensive. “The war is over. Russia has won. There is no Ukrainian offensive anymore, but the White House and the American media have to keep the lie going.”

The same official said that while believing Vladimir Putin’s decision to start the war was “stupid,” the Biden administration’s decision to wage a proxy war in response was “also stupid. And so now we have to paint him [Putin] black, with the help of the media, in order to justify our mistake.”.

These latter comments acknowledge the existence of a black propaganda campaign against Putin by the CIA along with British intelligence that the media has been central to.

CovertAction Magazine has previously reported on this campaign, which fits the pattern of past demonization campaigns targeting U.S. adversaries like Fidel Castro, Muammar Qaddafi, Saddam Hussein, Nicholas Maduro, Daniel Ortega and many others.

The accomplishments of the above leaders were all suppressed in the propaganda campaigns and supposed evil played up.

Putin fits the standard as a leader who has stood up to U.S. interests by strengthening national control over Russia’s economy following an era of foreign exploitation and looting under his predecessor Boris Yeltsin.

Putin has also increased the central authority of the Russian government and projected Russian power outwards, coming to the defense of the beleaguered people of Eastern Ukraine that were attacked by the Ukrainian military, with U.S. and UK backing following the 2014 coup that they orchestrated.

As I have analyzed elsewhere, the black propaganda campaign against Putin compares to that adopted against the German Kaiser during World War I, which helped whip the American public into a frenzy that led them to support U.S. intervention in the Great War—with dubious consequences that included the death of an estimated 100,000 American soldiers.

The current campaign against Putin has been so successful that many elements of the so-called left have embraced it and supported U.S. weapons supplies and covert military intervention in Ukraine.

However, the lies surrounding this campaign and delusions underlying U.S. policy in Ukraine are beginning to crumble.

More and more people are waking up to the Vietnam-like disaster that has been steadily unfolding—replete with Phoenix style terrorist operations that expose the true dark nature of the Ukrainian regime the U.S. has helped to prop up.

[…]

Via https://libya360.wordpress.com/2023/09/30/ukraine-assassination-program-bears-parallels-with-the-vietnam-phoenix-program-and-israeli-mossad-operations-targeting-palestinians/

Speaker of the House Kevin McCarthy holds a news conference just after the House approved a 45-day funding bill at the Capitol in Washington, Sept. 30, 2023 ©  AP / J. Scott Applewhite

RT

Episode 15 The Crusade Against the Cathars

1215: Years That Changed History

Dr Dorsey Armstrong (2019)

Film Review

Originating in the Balkans, Catharism (aka Albigensianism) was an anti-materialist religious movement that spread (during the 12th century) to Italy and southwestern France. The Cathars were Manichean dualists, believing that evil (ie the Devil) had equal power to God. They also blamed the corruption in the Catholic church on the Devil.

The only sacrament they recognized was baptism. Among the Cathars, a few highly spiritual individuals achieved a perfect life of austerity and charity and the rest were doomed to reincarnate after death.

Believing women to be equal to men, the Cathars viewed marriage for the sake of procreation as evil, condemning children to suffering by bring them into an evil world. Shunning procreation in cattle, as well, they were staunch vegetarians. They also rejected Christ’s divinity, crucifixion and resurrection.

Armstrong believes the cosmopolitan nature of medieval southern France provided fertile ground for Catharism, as well as tolerance for Jews, troubadours and women owning property.

Because Catholicism was a state religion throughout Western Europe, the church and state collaborated in executing heretics who spoke out against church doctrine. However with powerful nobles supporting the Cathars, the only way to crush Catharism was to declare war on the entire region.

Although not a Cathar himself, the most powerful figure in southern France Count Raymond VI of Toulouse was a strong patron. Following the assassination of a papal legate seeking to end the Cathar heresy, on June 18, 1209 the French government forced him to 1) undergo a publicly whipping and 2) expel all the Jews from Toulouse.

A month later Pope Innocent III’s called for a Crusade against the Cathars, and a northern French army invaded Baisier and slaughtered its entire population. Unable to breach the walled city of Carcassonne, they cut off the city’s water supply. After Raymond IV negotiated a truce with Simon de Montforte, residents were allowed to exit  the city unharmed provided they leave all possessions behind.

The sacking of southern French cities and villages continued, with many residents being tortured and/or burned alive.

In 1217-25, with the support of Count Raymond VI, the Cathars rebelled, with a group of women and girls killing de Montforte In 1217 with a catapult.

In 1226 Louis VIII led the French army against southern France, resulting in the surrender of the Cathars and all the nobles who supported them. In 1229 Raymond VII signed (under duress) the Treaty of Meaux, agreeing to take up arms against the Cathars and return property they had seized to the Church. He also agreed to marry his daughter to the king’s brother Alphonse, which meant his Toulouse land holdings eventually devolved to the king of France.

Five years later, Pope Gregory IX of France founded the infamous Inquisition, initially targeting any Cathars who remained in the South of France.

Film can be viewed with with a library card on Kanopy.

https://www.kanopy.com/en/pukeariki/watch/video/12392969/12393000

2nd Smartest Guy in the World

This Substack has been diligently tracking the grim post slow kill bioweapon rollout trends . . .

The latest testimony comes courtesy of Dr. Makis, who explained that young people in their 20s, 30s, and 40s are developing aggressive turbo cancers:

The youngest case that I’ve reported was a twelve-year-old boy who had one Moderna vaccine. Four months later, he developed stage 4 brain cancer. And then six months later, he died.

Dr. Makis went on to add not just how unprecedented this parabolic rise in cancers is, but, also, just how rapidly the cellular mutations are occurring as a direct function of the slow kill bioweapon injections:

I’ve diagnosed probably 20,000 cancer patients in my career. I’ve never seen cancers behaving like this.

[…]

Dr. Makis has also recently posted on X extremely troubling information:

This is an especially interesting post given that X (aka Twitter) did an erroneous “fact check” because readers of this Substack know full well that PSYOP-MUSK is nothing more than a Deep State puppet:

Given that we have irrefutable data (e.g. cancer treatment expenditures post “vaccine” rollout, life insurance actuaries payouts, etc.) that turbo cancers are all too real, yes the X “context” is exceedingly helpful in appreciating that the X Everything App is a social credit score digital gulag in the making. And PSYOP-MUSK, who was extremely pro “vaccine” will soon reverse course on this “fact checking” and be forced to admit that turbo cancers are here to stay, and will only become worse. Far, far worse.

Dr. Makis also recently posted on 20 horrifying turbo cancer case studies:

[…]

Via https://www.2ndsmartestguyintheworld.com/p/oncologist-ive-never-seen-cancers

Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images

By   Jeffrey Tucker

Brownstone Institute

Jeremy Farrar’s book from August 2021 is relatively more candid than most accounts of the initial decision to lock down in the US and UK. “It’s hard to come off nocturnal calls about the possibility of a lab leak and go back to bed,” he wrote of the clandestine phone calls he was getting from January 27-31, 2020. They had already alerted the FBI and MI5.

“I’d never had trouble sleeping before, something that comes from spending a career working as a doctor in critical care and medicine. But the situation with this new virus and the dark question marks over its origins felt emotionally overwhelming. None of us knew what was going to happen but things had already escalated into an international emergency. On top of that, just a few of us – Eddie [Holmes], Kristian [Anderson], Tony [Fauci] and I – were now privy to sensitive information that, if proved to be true, might set off a whole series of events that would be far bigger than any of us. It felt as if a storm was gathering, of forces beyond anything I had experienced and over which none of us had any control.”

At that point in the trajectory of events, intelligence services on both sides of the Atlantic had been put on notice. Anthony Fauci also received confirmation that money from the National Institutes of Health had been channeled to the offending lab in Wuhan, which meant that his career was on the line. Working at a furious pace, the famed “Proximal Origin” paper was produced in record time. It concluded that there was no lab leak.

In a remarkable series of revelations this week, we’ve learned that the CIA was involved in trying to make payments to those authors (thank you whistleblower), plus it appears that Fauci made visits to the CIA’s headquarters, most likely around the same time.

Suddenly we get some possible clarity in what has otherwise been a very blurry picture. The anomaly that has heretofore cried out for explanation is how it is that Fauci changed his mind so dramatically and precisely on the merit of lockdowns for the virus. One day he was counseling calm because this was flu-like, and the next day he was drumming up awareness of the coming lockdown. That day was February 27, 2020, the same day that the New York Times joined with alarmist propaganda from its lead virus reporter Donald G. McNeil.

On February 26, Fauci was writing: “Do not let the fear of the unknown… distort your evaluation of the risk of the pandemic to you relative to the risks that you face every day… do not yield to unreasonable fear.”

The next day, February 27, Fauci wrote actress Morgan Fairchild – likely the most high-profile influencer he knew from the firmament – that “be prepared to mitigate an outbreak in this country by measures that include social distancing, teleworking, temporary closure of schools, etc.”

To be sure, twenty-plus days had passed between the time Fauci alerted intelligence and when he decided to become the voice for lockdowns. We don’t know the exact date of the meetings with the CIA. But generally until now, most of February 2020 has been a blur in terms of the timeline. Something was going on but we hadn’t known just what.

Let’s distinguish between a proximate and distal cause of the lockdowns.

The proximate cause is the fear of a lab leak and an aping of the Wuhan strategy of keeping everyone in their homes to stop the spread. They might have believed this would work, based on the legend of how SARS-1 was controlled. The CIA had dealings with Wuhan and so did Fauci. They both had an interest in denying the lab leak and stopping the spread. The WHO gave them cover.

The distal reasons are more complicated. What stands out here is the possibility of a quid pro quo. The CIA pays scientists to say there was no lab leak and otherwise instructs its kept media sources (New York Times) to call the lab leak a conspiracy theory of the far right. Every measure would be deployed to keep Fauci off the hot seat for his funding of the Wuhan lab. But this cooperation would need to come at a price. Fauci would need to participate in a real-life version of the germ games (Event 201 and Crimson Contagion).

It would be the biggest role of Fauci’s long career. He would need to throw out his principles and medical knowledge of, for example, natural immunity and standard epidemiology concerning the spread of viruses and mitigation strategies. The old pandemic playbook would need to be shredded in favor of lockdown theory as invented in 2005 and then tried in Wuhan. The WHO could be relied upon to say that this strategy worked.

Fauci would need to be on TV daily to somehow persuade Americans to give up their precious rights and liberties. This would need to go on for a long time, maybe all the way to the election, however implausible this sounds. He would need to push the vaccine for which he had already made a deal with Moderna in late January.

Above all else, he would need to convince Trump to go along. That was the hardest part. They considered Trump’s weaknesses. He was a germaphobe so that’s good. He hated Chinese imports so it was merely a matter of describing the virus this way. But he also has a well-known weakness for deferring to highly competent and articulate professional women. That’s where the highly reliable Deborah Birx comes in: Fauci would be her wingman to convince Trump to green-light the lockdowns.

What does the CIA get out of this? The vast intelligence community would have to be put in charge of the pandemic response as the rule maker, the lead agency. Its outposts such as CISA would handle labor-related issues and use its contacts in social media to curate the public mind. This would allow the intelligence community finally to crack down on information flows that had begun 20 years earlier that they had heretofore failed to manage.

The CIA would hobble and hamstring the US president, whom they hated. And importantly, there was his China problem. He had wrecked relations through his tariff wars. So far as they were concerned, this was treason because he did it all on his own. This man was completely out of control. He needed to be put in his place. To convince the president to destroy the US economy with his own hand would be the ultimate coup de grace for the CIA.

A lockdown would restart trade with China. It did in fact achieve that.

How would Fauci and the CIA convince Trump to lock down and restart trade with China? By exploiting these weaknesses and others too: his vulnerability to flattery, his desire for presidential aggrandizement, and his longing for Xi-like powers over all to turn off and then turn on a whole country. Then they would push Trump to buy the much-needed personal protective equipment from China.

They finally got their way: somewhere between March 10 or possibly as late as March 14, Trump gave the go ahead. The press conference of March 16, especially those magical 70 seconds in which Fauci read the words mandating lockdowns because Birx turned out to be too squeamish, was the great turning point. A few days later, Trump was on the phone with Xi asking for equipment.

In addition, such a lockdown would greatly please the digital tech industry, which would experience a huge boost in demand, plus large corporations like Amazon and WalMart, which would stay open as their competitors were closed. Finally, it would be a massive subsidy to pharma and especially the mRNA platform technology itself, which would enjoy the credit for ending the pandemic.

If this whole scenario is true, it means that all along Fauci was merely playing a role, a front man for much deeper interests and priorities in the CIA-led intelligence community. This broad outline makes sense of why Fauci changed his mind on lockdowns, including the timing of the change. There are still many more details to know, but these new fragments of new information take our understanding in a new and more coherent direction.

[…]

Via https://brownstone.org/articles/fauci-and-the-cia-a-new-explanation-emerges/