Why
does the public tolerate its biological warfare?
As
Jeffrey A. Lockwood recounted in
his 2008 book Six-Legged Soldiers: Using Insects as Weapons of War, the
first four nations that pioneered biological warfare were during the 1930s —
Hitler’s Germany, Hirohito’s Japan, and Churchill's England and Canada.
However, under U.S. President Franklin Delano Roosevelt in the 1940s, a biowarfare
R&D program, “Operation Capricious,” was created in 1943 so secretly that
though it operated under William J. “Wild Bill” Donovan, who headed the OSS
predecessor to the CIA, it was hidden even from Donovan himself. The way it was
hidden is that it was being described to higher-ups as purely defensive,
R&D against insect pests that enemy nations might use against America by
bombing America with germ-infected insects. It was placed under the direction of George W. Merck, the
hereditary President of the pharmaceutical giant, Merck & Co. This newly
formed U.S. biological warfare program, that he headed, produced and stockpiled
bacillus anthracis (anthrax), clostridium botulinum (botulism), and other deadly
bacteria. However, starting under U.S. President Harry S. Truman, the actually aggressive program was
finally approved and operationalized by the U.S. military in 1952 against North
Korea and parts of China, but it was crude and unsuccessful, like
all prior biowarfare efforts had been.
No
biological warfare program has ever been strategically successful, because the
really effective pathogens, such as viruses or the plague, simply
cannot be successfully targeted — they are too contagious — and no
weapon that can’t be targeted can be of use either tactically or strategically.
However, the United States today has a vast network of biological-warfare
laboratories, by far the world’s largest, many of them located in foreign
countries.
As
Major Leon A. Fox, who was the chief of the Medical Section for the U.S.
Army’s Chemical Warfare Service, was the first to
point out, in 1932, which then became published in the journal The
Military Surgeon, v. 72, #3, in 1933, and republished in
the Veterinary Bulletin, v. 28, pages 79-100:
Bacterial
warfare is one of the recent scare-heads that are being served by the
pseudo-scientists. …
How are
these agents to be introduced into the bodies of the enemy to produce
casualties? … Certainly at the present time we know of no disease-producing
micro-organisms that will respect uniform or insignia. … The use of bubonic
plague today against a field force, when the forces are actually in combat, is
unthinkable for the simple reason that the epidemic could not be controlled. …
Many
are now associating chemical warfare and bacterial warfare, with the result
that in the resolution of adjournment, voted by the General Commission of the
Disarmament Conference on July 23, 1932, at Geneva, we find chemical,
bacteriological, and incendiary warfare grouped for consideration. ...
Certainly
at the present time, practically insurmountable difficulties prevent the use of
biologic agents as effective weapons.
1: Such
‘weapons’ didn’t behave as they had been hoped to behave — they’re
uncontrollable (just as Dr. Fox had predicted), and no uncontrollable thing can
be effectively used as a weapon.
2: Even
if they were to have behaved as they had been hoped to, they cannot be
effectively targeted (which again is what Fox had predicted): they would have
endangered not only the targeted country but the entire world, even if they
worked, since all of us are humans, and since biological ‘weapons’ work only if
they’re extremely contagious and thus pose an extreme danger to the entire
human species.
Consequently:
all of that public expenditure (maybe in the trillions of dollars) is sheer
waste, in terms of national defense. But it’s even worse than waste, because it
poses extreme danger to ANY nation, including to the one that develops the
given ‘weapon’.
And Fox
was likewise correct that grouping “chemical and biological weapons” together
is plain stupid. Perhaps it works as propaganda, but it certainly is false as
science, and as military strategy and tactics. This fact, too, is hidden from
the public, instead of published to the public.
The
U.S. Arms Control Association, which is secretive but was founded by major figures in America’s
military-industrial complex and is charitably funded by U.S.
billionaires, has squibs on 16 countries as currently having real
or alleged “Chemical and Biological Weapons”, and
this ‘charitable’ Association groups together those two types of ‘weapons’, so
as to hide the obvious fact that ‘biological weapons’ cannot really exist, as a
practical matter, since we all are humans (not only a given targeted country
are), and therefore those fake ‘weapons’ are certainly not rationally to be
discussed in the same category along with chemical weapons,
which — like nuclear weapons — can be targeted, and
therefore can and do actually exist as weapons, so that “nuclear
weapons and chemical weapons” might be rationally discussed
together, but “chemical and biological weapons” cannot (since
there are no actual ‘biological weapons’). The ONLY reason why
“chemical and biological weapons” are discussed together is that this enables
the U.S. military contractors, who derive profits from selling to the United
States Government, to continue their “socialism-for-the-rich” gravy train, by
treating germs and viruses (which are contagious) as if they were merely
chemicals (which are not contagious). For example: On 24
January 2008, Barton J. Bernstein’s article in the Journal of Strategic
Studies, "America's
biological warfare program in the Second World War” described
U.S. President Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s unsuccessful
attempt, on 14 July 1943, to find out “Why is it so
confidential to destroy insect pests?” And it’s why that Deep State program was
headed by George Merck, who “led
the War Research
Service, which initiated the U.S.
biological weapons program with Frank Olson."
Nonetheless,
as Whitney Webb well documented in her 30 January 2020 “Bats, Gene Editing and Bioweapons: Recent
DARPA Experiments Raise Concerns Amid Coronavirus Outbreak”, the
Pentagon currently has an extensive program of R&D into even just
specifically bat-based biological ‘weapons’, and China has cooperated with the
Pentagon in that research. Why would China be cooperating with America in order
to develop unnaturally deadly — human-created — human pathogens? Whereas
America’s funding of this ‘research’ is open, publicly acknowledged (even
though the ‘weapons’ that might result from it would be international
war-crimes to use), China’s Government claims to have no biological-warfare
program. Who, then was funding such useless ‘research’ at the Wuhan lab?
The
basic question here, however, is “Why does the public tolerate its biological
warfare?” and one possible reason why they tolerate it
might be that they are propagandized by the media of the billionaires who
benefit from bioweapons R&D — profit from it — and who (like the Arms
Control Association, and like the also billionaires-owned-and-controlled media)
hide the reality, so that the profits from this useless R&D can continue
flowing, from the Government, to themselves.
Who profits
from biowarfare R&D? Who are the people that have been behind this?
The
laboratories, that do it, receive some, but not all, of their funding from the
governments (the taxpayers) in all nations that perform this research — mainly
the U.S., but also including China, Canada, and perhaps a few others.
Here are the top 100 U.S. corporations that profit
from warfare — invading and militarily occupying and subduing
foreign countries (since all actual dangers to U.S. national
security that haven’t been “false-flag” events such as 9/11, ended when World
War II ended, and were produced in order to increase U.S.
military expenditures, not actually in order to protect
Americans or anyone else). Other than some universities, such as (in 2015) #56
Johns Hopkins, and #82 Johns Hopkins Health Sys Corp., and drugmakers, like #89
GlaxoSmithKline, few of them seem even possibly to be receiving federal money
for the development of biological ‘weapons’. However, if some of them are owned
or controlled by the same people who own or control Merck or other drug
companies that might be profiting from this, then control of the military
contractors could be boosting those drug companies’ stock values. And the
ownership and control of virtually all major corporations is hidden by many
devices, both legal and illegal. What exists in such a situation is secret
government, not even possibly a democratic government.
Regarding
specifically China: Are some Chinese profiting from this research; and, if so,
which ones? And why isn’t the Chinese Government publicly exposing them,
legally trying them in entirely public proceedings, and executing them if clear
evidence is presented to the public that they had been doing this illegal
research for private profit? Because, if the Chinese Government won’t do that,
then it’s not really illegal in China.
All the
while, the nation that has by far the largest biological-warfare program, the
U.S., continues to expand it, instead of bans it — as international law would
require, if the U.S. Government even paid attention to international law,
which it doesn’t. (This
U.S. flouting of international law is endorsed by both of America’s political
Parties; it is bipartisan in the U.S.)
If the
public will no longer tolerate its funding biological warfare, then when will
the massive public demonstrations be organized throughout the world condemning
the U.S., China, and other governments, that either participate in this R&D
or else tolerate instead of clearly outlawing it — punish
everyone in the given nation who participates in it?
Why
haven’t these massive public demonstrations, against this R&D, already
occurred?
If this
won’t happen, then there is no public demand for accountability, and then this
purely destructive R&D will continue, and it will continue to be publicly
funded, though it benefits only some stockholders and corporate executives, and
causes massive global harm — perhaps including the coronavirus-19 pandemic.
—————
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.