(by Rhoda Wilson | Daily Exposé) – At the Grand Jury of the People’s Court of Public Opinion, Whitney Webb gave her testimony which included: China’s role in current events; the commonalities between Covid and anthrax simulation exercises such as ‘Dark Winter’, Event 201 and Crimson Contagion; people involved in gain-of-function research; DARPA’s Total Information Awareness program and more.
“For those that don’t know, [Dark Winter] was a simulation of a smallpox outbreak, but also included a potential threat of an anthrax attack within it. It predicted major parts of what would then become the September 11, 2001, narrative. And the people who participated in that exercise in the immediate aftermath of 911 showed the apparent fore knowledge of those attacks, the anthrax attacks that would follow soon afterwards.
“You also have Crimson Contagion. And that’s significant because the person who speaks the name ‘Dark Winter’ within the exercise, Robert Kadlec, was the HHS Assistant Secretary for preparedness and response under the Trump administration that led that exercise, Crimson and Contagion, in 2019.
“After the 2001 anthrax attacks, he assumed a lot of power and essentially constructed that Assistant Secretary position over the course of basically a little under 20 years. And then he occupied it right at the time that Covid happened to take place. How coincidental,” Webb testified.
Below is the video of Webb’s testimony and the transcript.
Click on the image below to watch the video on Bitchute.
More information about the proceedings can be found on the Grand Jury’s website: www.grand-jury.net
Transcript Whitney Webb
(links contained within the text below are our own)
Reiner Fuellmich: Whitney, one of the questions that I keep asking myself is: what is the role of China in all of this? If you look at this as an Anglo-American or City of London dominated game, really, what is the role of China in this?
Webb: Hi. Can you hear me okay?
Reiner Fuellmich: Yes, we can hear you.
Webb: Okay, great.
So, I’m not really a China expert, but I have done some work on the transnational networks of capital and influence, I guess you could say, from sort of the nexus that people have been talking about so far today, the city of London, Wall Street nexus and how they’re very influential in China. Probably the best, most accessible example perhaps is Steve Schwarzman, of Blackstone capital, who finances a program at exactly which Chinese University, but it’s very prestigious. And that’s sort of like his personal version of the Young Global Leaders program of the weapon, in a sense. And of course, the Blackstone Group is intimately related to BlackRock having come out of that same sphere in Wall Street. He’s considered one of the US-China “whisperers,” as is, of course, the original figure in American politics to have that sort of title is Henry Kissinger.
Beyond that, you have someone like Henry Paulson, who was Secretary of Treasury under George W. Bush, previously Goldman Sachs. He’s also very intimately involved in China and has a Chinese focused “philanthropic” foundation.
Another individual would be Mike Bloomberg, who actually resurrected an event that used to be hosted by the World Economic Forum in China. I believe it was called the Annual Meeting of the New Champions that discontinued in 2018. And from 2018 on, it’s been the Bloomberg New Economy Forum, which is essentially specifically focused on the US-China relationship and having what happens there, the decisions made at that meeting to facilitate creating this particular system that people have been discussing, the sort of technocratic control grid, having it be constructed jointly by the US and Chinese leadership.
And essentially what you have, or something that I wrote about a couple of years ago, was this organisation called the National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence, which was headed by Eric Schmidt, the former CEO of Google. In that Commission it was mainly Silicon Valley, the US military, and the US intelligence community representative. And in 2019, before Covid, they talked about the need to either beat China in the AI arms race or work together with China in the construction of this sort of AI driven technocratic control grid as a way to avert world war. And this was something promoted by Henry Kissinger in one of the events of this particular Commission. And Eric Schmidt has emphasised that as well. And so that in a sense, ties in with The Great Reset, as it’s often called, going on across the world but in the US, specifically, in this context, the effort to completely digitise every sector of the economy and society in order to amass data and to use that data to train AI algorithms. Basically, this Commission and the forces represented, they see it as necessary for the US to maintain its current military and economic hegemony, to have the best AI algorithms, and thus they need to have the biggest stores of data. They recognise that China, because of its large population and more technological control systems already in place is far ahead of the US in terms of amassing that type of data.
And so, the US, this organisation before Covid, was talking about the need to urgently force people to do everything online – from shopping to teleworking and all of these things to telemedicine – and of course, there was a huge push for that during Covid-19.
And while they sort of framed in this sort of new Cold War type of context, they say within their own documents that there’s a need to do this alongside China, essentially create the same system in a parallel way and collaboratively, in order to avert world war. And this is essentially what is happening at events like the Bloomberg New Economy Forum and things like that.
I don’t know if you want me to go any further because I know there’s a time limit and I have to go in 30 minutes.
Reiner Fuellmich: Yeah, well, is the social credit system then – whose invention is it really the Chinese? When I say Chinese, I mean the Chinese leadership, not the Chinese people. Was it invented by the Chinese leadership, or was this invented in cooperation with the City of London, Anglo-American financial interests?
Webb: So, I’ve never really written about the origin of that system. So, I don’t think I’m the right person to talk to about that specifically. But from what I understand, obviously there is sort of this biometric technocratic system that exists within China, and obviously that was developed by Chinese leadership, or at least with their blessing and implemented by the government over there.
But it’s worth pointing out as well that ever since the “opening up” of China during the Nixon era, which of course involved Henry Kissinger quite intimately, there’s been a lot of go between, between the leadership of China – despite them being publicly labelled Communist – with the same transnational networks of Western capital and also negotiations with Western leadership that ultimately have their governments essentially co-opted by that same transnational network of capital.
Viviane Fischer: We see someone like Henry Kissinger popping up over and over again. But has that changed in the meantime, that it’s not so much like individual figures, but it’s now more like a network of people connecting in between these different areas of interest?
Webb: Well, sure. Well, I think Kissinger is definitely on the way out because of his age and sort of has been for some time. And so, there’s a lot of the people he mentored, specifically when he was teaching at Harvard, that have come out to sort of be the new generation of “Kissingers,” as it were, with a Klaus Schwab probably being a leading example of that, in particular.
I see that Matthew has the comment, and he probably is more qualified to talk on some of these things than myself because I was under the impression that I was going to be talking about Dark Winter and Anthrax. But I can continue to talk about this if you prefer.
Matthew Ehret: Oh, if you want to talk about Dark Winter and Anthrax, you should do that. I thought the presentation was over.
Webb: No, it’s fine.
Reiner Fuellmich: Do you have an answer to that question? What is the role of China in all of this, Matthew?
Matthew Ehret: Well, I do, but it’s a longer thing. Are you guys familiar with Soros getting kicked out in ‘89 in the ouster of Zhao Ziyang and the Club of Roman China?
Reiner Fuellmich: No, I didn’t know that.
Matthew Ehret: I can maybe speak for 1 minute, but I don’t want to take away from Whitney at all.
Zhao Ziyang the Soros man in China. He was called the Gorbachev of China and he ran the Chinese Communist Party for two years in ’87 – ‘89. He actually ran a think tank with Soros, and he brought in Alvin Toffler, the transhumanist. He called for the fourth industrial revolution. He brought in the Club of Rome and their computer models to manage the one child policy in ‘79 / ‘80. That was one of his key collaborators. And the whole ‘80s was like an effort to get a Yeltsin process of perestroika in China, which was happening in Russia to privatise their entire banking system and bring in the technocrats – Milton Friedman, everything.
But he was ousted because there was a coup d’état in ‘89 that he was supposed to run. And the CIA, MI6 – I shared an article on it – but it’s useful to look at these anomalies like why is Soros not allowed to operate in China for the past 30 years, whereas he’s like running the west.
Reiner Fuellmich: Why is that?
Matthew Ehret: Yeah, that’s a whole thing. I could address that later because I know he’s brilliant.
Reiner Fuellmich: Try and give us the very basics of that.
Matthew Ehret: Okay. Well, I mean, the very basics. I think it has a lot to do with what Guterres warned about when he said that two different opposing paradigms are emerging around AI, geopolitics last year, or not even it was last November. But up until 2010/11, Soros was still saying that China is the role model because they like the social credit, they like the technocratic controls, the centralised controls. They love that stuff, the transhumanist-borgs in the West. They love that.
They don’t like the actual utilisation of national credit, because China never prioritises their central bank. And they also don’t like the large-scale infrastructure development, the high-speed rail, all this stuff that pulls people out of poverty, like a billion people out of poverty in just like 20 years. They hate that. They don’t like the idea of a nation state determining their economic destiny.
So, there’s a fight over, like, AI is not going away – a lot of these things aren’t going away. And China has been penetrated with deep state columns, like fifth columns, for a long time that they’ve been trying to purge. Jack [Masso], a great example of the World Economic Forum trustee who called for the overthrow, essentially an economic regime change in China last year. And he was like, just taken out. Like he was just totally stripped of power. So, you have evidence of these fights, especially with the Shanghai clique of billionaires who have been allied with the Western liberalists.
Russia has the same thing, too. They’ve got their own fifth columns around their liberal privatised central bank tied to the West. That’s tied to a lot of these Big Pharma networks inside of Russia.
So, there are fights going on all over the place. But I think the military encirclement of China and of Russia is a serious issue that people should think about. Like, there is something that is frightening the oligarchy, such that they are. I don’t know what your thoughts on that like. Why would they put so much effort to do a full containment, full spectrum dominance of China and Russia?
Reiner Fuellmich: Whitney, James Bush is with us, and he is going to give us the details on Operation Dark Winter, Rockefeller Lockstep thing and Event 201. But if you can introduce us to that, that will probably be very helpful.
Webb: Well, I was going to talk about something that’s probably a little separate than him, more like the importance of Dark Winter, some of the parallels between 2001 and some of the figures that were Covid and anthrax have in common, things like that. So, I’ll just be pretty brief about it. So, I’ll let him since I guess he was there, talk about Dark Winter in detail.
But for those that don’t know, it was a simulation of a smallpox outbreak, but also included a potential threat of an anthrax attack within it. It predicted major parts of what would then become the September 11, 2001, narrative. And the people who participated in that exercise in the immediate aftermath of 911 showed the apparent fore knowledge of those attacks, the anthrax attacks that would follow soon afterwards.
So, we have, of course, the simulation preceding the event there and then Event 201. We have that as well.
You also have Crimson Contagion, which I believe Debbie mentioned just a little bit ago. And that’s significant because the person who speaks the name ‘Dark Winter’ within the exercise, Robert Kadlec, was the HHS Assistant Secretary for preparedness and response under the Trump administration that led that exercise, Crimson and Contagion, in 2019.
After the 2001 anthrax attacks, he assumed a lot of power and essentially constructed that Assistant Secretary position over the course of basically a little under 20 years. And then he occupied it right at the time that Covid happened to take place. How coincidental. But the Crimson Contagion is significant because it didn’t just last a couple of days – like Event 201 or Dark Winter, some of these other ones – that actually went on from January 2019 to August 2019 and involved public-private cooperation. It occurred at the federal level, the regional level, the local level, the municipal level, essentially, and was very extensive. And also, you could argue in a sense, a little more predictive of what would come later than Event 201, even, in the sense that it was focusing on the outbreak of pandemic influenza within China. Whereas Event 201 placed the outbreak taking place in South America.
But a lot of these, Event 201 and Dark Winter, involved some very significant connections. Mainly the people involved in both of those, like Thomas Ingelsby, had ties to these organisations, like Answer, their Institute for Homeland Security created in the late ‘90s that was intimately tied to the CIA and some other institutions that also had intelligence links.
Beyond the commonalities of these two simulations, between the anthrax attacks and Covid, you have the spectre of gain-of-function research being very prominent. So, in the case of anthrax in 1997 the Pentagon created plans to genetically engineer a more potent variety of anthrax, allegedly because a Russian scientist had claimed to have created a strain of anthrax that was resistant to the standard anthrax vaccine in animal studies. But not necessarily for the purpose of bio warfare, biodefence. But the Pentagon used this to justify these gain-of-function experiments.
And also at the same time, in 1997, the CIA also began gain-of-function experiments on anthrax as well. And these experiments were going on at a facility called Patel, located in West Jefferson, Ohio, that currently has ties to the Leslie Wexner Foundation, for people familiar with his role in the Epstein network. But it also does contract work for the CIA and the military – I’m not going to go into extreme detail on this – but basically, a CIA asset at the time a defector from the bioweapons, biodefence program of the Soviet Union, Ken Alabac, was the program manager for these gain-of-function studies at Battelle. And he and another figure named William Patrick, who wasn’t actually initially suspected of the attacks, had been added to the investigation, i.e., cover up of those attacks were essentially the people leading that gain-of-function research.
And most people that look into the anthrax attacks and are aware that Bruce Ivins was not a lone wolf in all of this and are aware of how the narrative is inaccurate, including several US attorneys actually, at the time that Ivins had a very untimely suicide, believed that Patel was responsible. And any serious 2001 anthrax researcher that I’m aware of thinks that Patel was the site for the anthrax that was actually used in the attacks.
Moving on to another parallel bio surveillance solutions. This is arguably one of the most critical in the context of what we’ve been talking about here today. So, after the anthrax attacks and also 911, there was a push to create a system within DARPA called the Total Information Awareness. One of those programs was called the Bio-Surveillance program, which was aimed at developing, quote, “necessary information technologies and resulting prototypes capable of detecting the covert release of a biological pathogen automatically,” and that this would be “accomplished by the monitoring of non-traditional data sources, pre-diagnostic medical data and behavioural indicators obtained from civilian data.”
Essentially, even though it claims to be focused on bioterrorist attacks, it wanted to acquire early detection capabilities for any sort of “normal” disease outbreak as well within the automated with some, I guess, the precursors to today’s artificial intelligence algorithms. And it basically wanted to be a massive data mining program, was essentially the goal of that. Total Information Awareness was shot down by Congress because it was said it would eliminate it was accurately pointed out that it would eliminate civil liberties for Americans entirely, essentially the right to privacy would no longer exist. So, it was scrapped.
But the architects of Total Information Awareness, including neoconservative figure Richard Perle, worked hand in glove with Peter Thiel and Alex Karp to [ ] Palantir, which is the private sector successor of Total Information Awareness. Total Information Awareness having been a public-private partnership with the US military. But Palantir wasn’t so involved with the military after its creation. It was more intimately involved with the CIA. The CIA helped them create their product, and the CIA was their only client from 2005 to 2008.
Some aspects of the Total Information Awareness program, which was scrapped, like this Bio-Surveillance program, have been resurrected in the Covid era under people like Robert Kadlec, like the monitoring of wastewater systems to detect disease outbreaks. That was all planned out during that earlier period of time. And it’s no coincidence that all of that data in the modern day, now in this particular Covid era if you want to call it that, is being fed into a database that’s being managed by Palantir. And also in the UK, the NHS Covid data is being handled by Palantir as well.
So, it’s sort of the Anglo-American Total Information Awareness control grid that’s come up in Palantir certainly doesn’t get enough attention they deserve, but their origins go back to this particular period of time and in 2001, and involve a lot of the same actors who were setting it up.
It’s also worth pointing out that Peter Thiel is a major funder of right leaning media, including in the alternative media sphere. I’ll just leave that though because that’s for another time.
The last thing I want to point out is that both the anthrax situation and what happened with Covid-19 is the fortuitous rescue of imperial vaccine companies with the deep ties to the US military.
So, the first one would be BioPort, which today is Emergent BioSolutions. They changed their name in 2004 because of the controversy around their anthrax vaccine, which they had a monopoly on the production and sale of to the US military. The US, this sort of same network responsible for the anthrax attacks, mandated the use of the anthrax vaccine for US troops. It ended up causing what is often referred to as Gulf War syndrome and a litany of adverse effects. And they were bailed out by the Pentagon multiple times because their factories were being shut down repeatedly because of violations of safety regulations and health regulations, among other things. And they didn’t use the money to fix those factories. They were used on executive bonuses and executive office refurbishments, among other things, which is quite typical in these circles, it seems.
But anyway, they teamed up with Patel at the end of 2000. As I mentioned, Patel was doing this gain-of-function research for the Pentagon and the CIA at the time. And that research entered a new phase when this partnership began because it directly involved the anthrax vaccine.
The Pentagon was going to release a report on how to continue their mandatory anthrax vaccine program without this company in September 2001. This is derailed by 911 because the administrative wing working on that report was hit by a plane on September 11, 2001, essentially ending that inquiry. And Donald Rumsfeld decided to rescue that program, essentially. And the concerns that were heard in Congress and throughout the US political system at the national level during that time about this particular vaccine product disappeared in the panic of the anthrax attacks and was replaced with calls not just to make the vaccination campaign mandatory for the military, but for first responders, for teachers, firefighters, policemen, and so on.
And of course, the commonality in terms of that sort of company today is Moderna, which, essentially, they’ve even admitted now, was going to collapse if it wasn’t for Covid-19 coming, at the exact time it came. I want to stress that. A month or two of difference and they would have totally gone under.
And of course, Moderna has very deep ties to the US military, DARPA specifically, which has been funding them since, I believe, 2012. For more information on either of those things, you can go to my website, Unlimitedhangout.com, and look at the investigative series Engineering Contagion, on the anthrax issue. And then I have one called Moderna, about Moderna. I forget the exact name of the series. I think it’s called like Moderna Gets Its Miracle or something like that, for Covid-19.
I’ll stop there because I have ten minutes, in case you wanted to ask about another topic or issue.
Viviane Fischer: Quick question. This Emerging BioSolutions, they’re involved in the production of the vaccines now, is that right?
Webb: Yes. Well, initially they were, I think, after they produced, I believe, a very significant number of doses for the Johnson and Johnson vaccine that were deemed contaminated and unusable. I think they were scrapped. But it’s worth pointing out that Robert Kadlec, who I mentioned earlier, has a long running deep ties to that company and actually founded a separate company with the founder of Emergent BioSolutions. And he basically was, even the Washington Post was forced to admit that he showed them favouritism and the awarding of contracts for Covid-19. So, despite the really horrendous track record and even complaints from within the system, they were given contracts to produce vaccines. I forget exactly which companies were doing it, but the Johnson and Johnson vaccine was one, and they got a lot of push back. So, I’m not sure if they’re still manufacturing that.
But I would say that some of these mRNA companies, specifically Moderna, have now shifted to using a new company that was created during the Covid era, called Resilience, to produce their RNA specifically for their vaccine. That has people from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the FDA advisor board, a member of the 911 Commission, the head of In-Q-Tel, the CIA venture capital firm, among other groups producing their products. And that that company was created in November 2020, and they’re hoping to produce mRNA, going forward, within the United States of Canada.
Viviane Fischer: Okay. It seems there’s some infighting going on, but basically all these different interests are pulling in the same direction, but it’s not clear who’s going to be the leader of the pack.
Webb: Yeah, well, I think the infighting is more, like, over the overall end of the day agenda.
Reiner Fuellmich: Both of the mRNA companies, Moderna and BioNTech, which is being used by Pfizer, both of them have come under a lot of pressure recently. Their share price is more or less collapsing. And this is due to the fact that there’s a decision in the United States which forces Pfizer to, more or less, declassify the documents that they wanted to hide from the public. And all of a sudden, there’s a recent interview by an investment banker by the name of Ed [ ], who explains this in great detail. All of a sudden, when people can see what’s really going on, they decide to dump the share. So, the rescue seems not to really have worked, but that is only as a result of other people exposing what’s really going on.
Webb: Right. Which I don’t think they anticipated necessarily because …
Reiner Fuellmich: They prove Matthew’s point that they don’t really have everything under control.
Webb: Yes, I would agree with that as well. And I think that’s why we’re seeing them, for example, in various countries, particularly Western countries, sort of roll back restrictions for the time being. As Leana Wen, one of the CNN “medical experts,” said, this was so that public trust could be sort of restored so we can use these measures again in the future for “pandemic II” or some sort of event to that extent.
And if you look at the World Economic Forum. Since last year, their whole theme for last year was rebuilding trust with the public. So, this is something that really concerns them – the lack of trust the public have in the elites.
But I think they’re sort of in this mindset still: “Well, even if they start to not trust us enmasse, what are they going to do about it?” I think that’s essentially where this is.
But I think they’re also planning to try and ramp up different things that are not necessarily Covid, as that particular narrative crumbles, to try and keep people divided and distracted and confused by just the massive information coming out all the time from these people, which is, as people have explained before, this is sort of the PSYOP, the psychological operations, side of what’s going on.
Reiner Fuellmich: Okay. Well, are there any further questions from you, Virginie, or Dexter or Anna or Dipali?
Dexter L-J. Ryneveldt: No questions for me. Thank you very much, Ms. Webb.
Reiner Fuellmich: Yes. Thank you very much. Thank you.