Today, I’d like to assess the way the majority of world citizens currently view the American government and the policies our elected leaders pursue. In this essay, I will also highlight a few reassessments - my effort to show how these views have changed over a period of 2 1/2 decades.

IMO this thought exercise will show that many previous assessments were false or dubious, but these “authorized narratives” were exploited to pursue agendas that ended up making the world a more dangerous place and lowered the standard of living or quality of life for the majority of world inhabitants.

I do know that honest “reassessments” can be bracing to acknowledge or ponder … but so be it. From time to time, writers or thinkers probably do need to take the time to point out this is the way things used to be - or this is the way most people thought at one time - and here’s the way many or most people think today.

In my view, most components of the “New-Normal” Status Quo are far more disturbing than the former Old Status-Quo conventional wisdom.

For convenience, I will use the date 9-11-2001 as a line of demarcation to contrast views that might have been common on this date with views that prevail today.

That was then …

Prior to 9-11-2001, most world inhabitants almost certainly viewed America as the world’s “Good Guy” - “a shining beacon on the hill,” symbolizing freedom, free market capitalism and a bulwark fighting the more sinister regimes on the planet.

This is now …

This morning I watched a podcast with retired Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson. In his appearance on Glenn Diesen’s You Tube show, Wilkerson said that recent global opinion polls show that two-thirds of the world population now view America as a threat or impediment to a brighter world future.

I actually earned my college degree in political science, but even if I hadn’t, I would know that such a sea-change in global sentiment … ain’t good for the home team.

Furthermore, according to these polls, two-thirds of the world population views China in a positive manner or think China is the nation that is doing more things to make the world a better place to live.

For almost my entire life - until just the last couple of months - most Americans viewed the nation of Israel as the one beacon of democracy in the Mideast, a nation that must constantly fight for its survival and a nation and government that all Americans and freedom-lovers should always support.

I don’t need to check opinion polls to know this “assessment” has - in a remarkably fast period of time - experienced a stunning reassessment.

In the CliffsNotes’ version, Israel has also always been the “Good Guy.” Indeed, anyone who questions this assessment should be viewed as threat who must be silenced, censored, punished or vilified.

This assessment clearly changed due to the confluence of several fairly current events …

• One, millions of American and global citizens have taken a keen interest in the Epstein Files and Epstein’s various operations (significantly many people believe Epstein was working for Israel and Mossad),

• Two, hundreds of millions of global citizens have, belatedly, come to believe (or at least entertain the possibility) that Israel’s non-stop bombing of Gaza does approach or meet the definition of “genocide.” (Also, Israel’s non-stop bombing of towns in southern Lebanon has no doubt factored into this reassessment).

• Three, Israel desired and pushed America into a war with Iran, a war that, per a common and fair assessment, could be labeled as a “sneak attack.”

In one day, the first volleys of this “sneak attack” resulted in the assassination of the Supreme Leader of a sovereign nation, as well as scores of other Iranian leaders and their women and children family members … as well as the murder of 168 Iranian school girls and their teachers.

• Four, as a footnote that might be worth noting, millions of Americans were clearly agitated that Rep. Thomas Massie, Congress’s highest-profile critic of Israel, was soundly defeated by an obscure candidate whose campaign benefited from $20 to $30 million in donations from the Israel lobby (and, of course, the endorsement of President Trump, who - as more citizens now better grasp - is also supported by the same lobby).

In the aggregate, the above events (and other events not mentioned) caused untold millions of citizens to reassess everything they’d previously believed about Israel.

During the same time frame, a similar number of people began to reassess everything we’d been conditioned to think about the “evil” “terrorist” nation of Iran, which leaders of Israel had spent decades framing as Israel’s greatest enemy.

Everything did change on 9-11 …

Following the terrorists attacks of 9-11, the key take-away (assessment) of almost everyone was that America would have to fight terrorists “over there” before the terrorists, again, struck a shocking blow against America over here.

If America could just spread democracy - and change several “evil” regimes - the people in these nations wouldn’t “hate us for our freedoms” and, per the nearly universal assessment - would never attack us again.

This was the assessment of a group of geo-political strategists known as Neo-cons and, for decades, this argument (excluding Donald Trump’s presidential campaigns) prevailed in the battle for hearts and minds in America. (Israel and its long-time prime minister Bibi Netanyahu was the main and most-influential advocate for this policy course.)

America used what, at the time, was a much more formidable military to implement neocon-endorsed policies by first invading Afghanistan and then, in a much larger invasion, Iraq.

(Question: Today, would most people assess that the American military is stronger and more capable in 2026 compared to 2001? My answer: I think not, meaning this would be another noteworthy reassessment.)

The assessment at the time (a correct one) must have been that the regime of Iraq would be much easier to topple than the regime of Iran, which could be dealt with later (which turned out to be 25 years later).

As I’ve documented ad nauseam, official and settled assessments of the professional assessors almost always turn out to be bogus as was the claim that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction, which this nation, for some suicidal reason, was going to, somehow, soon deploy against American cities.

Also, while intelligence agencies found that almost all the 9-11 terrorists were citizens of Saudi Arabia, a close American ally, this assessment … didn’t matter. (Take-away: Certain “assessments” carry more rhetorical and policy weight than others.)

Clearly, more people have begun to reassess whether Israel really was or is the Godly, pristine, noble nation we were all taught to believe it is. Also, more people have begun to re-evaluate “truths” or “facts” regarding Israel’s arch enemy, Iran.

A maxim about the danger of ‘Truth Bombs’ …

As I’ve written in many essays, the power of a proverbial “thermo-nuclear truth bomb” detonating is not just that one “authorized narrative” could be obliterated as bunk in one blast … the real threat to the Powers that Be is that if one false-narrative whopper is exposed as such … it’s very possible the same people will/could also quickly start to identify many other lies their “trusted leaders” have fed them.

That is, the fear of the world’s real rulers is that massive numbers of citizens begin to perform other critical-thinking “reassessments” dealing with other previously “settled” areas of political science.

Which, per my geo-political analysis, is exactly what’s happening right now.

***

For the first time in my life, millions of people are questioning whether the nation of Iran really was/is the villain we’ve always thought this nation was.

It’s been said you can judge a person (or a nation) by noting who their friends are. The converse might also be true - one can can also judge a nation by who they are fighting or who they think is a villain.

For decades, Iran and its people viewed Israel as an evil villain that was, literally, getting away with not just murder, but mass murder.

While certainly not the case with all people, today a rapidly-growing number of people is beginning to say:

“Damn. Iran might have been right all along. Israel might not be the wonderful nation we thought it was. Iran might have been ahead of the curve; they had Israel pegged before I did.”

Share

“Death to America!” … Iran clearly lost lost the “narrative battle” (until just recently)

It should be noted Iran was itself facing a major PR obstacle. For at least 47 years, the official narrative was that Iran was an evil, terrorist nation, a view that was largely grounded in the fact that Iranian students over-ran the U.S. embassy and held American citizens hostage for more than a year.

Furthermore, every American who keeps up with current events or is familiar with historical events has seen numerous clips where throngs of Iranian citizens gather in the streets and chant “Death to America!”

The obvious conclusion was that Iranians want to kill us all. If so many people are chanting these words, we should take them at their word and do anything we can to punish or contain such a mortal threat to our people.

One reassessment that might be occurring - at least to some extent - is that more people are beginning to look back over the last five decades and decided that Iranians, actually, had killed hardly any Americans.

For example, Iranians didn’t kill the 52 hostages, who they ultimately released unharmed.

Per conventional wisdom, just about every American believes “Iran” killed hundreds of Marines in a suicide attack in Beirut in 1983.

Iran tried to counter this narrative by saying, “we didn’t do that” - another group did that and only did it because President Regan inserted troops into a combat zone. (To proffer a politically incorrect but correct military truism .. When troops are inserted into a combat zone they will, very possibly, be targeted by enemy forces who don’t want said troops to be there).

Also, all neo-con politicians have said (assessed) that Iraqi resistance forces didn’t use roadside bombs to kill and injure American troops occupying Iraq. It was really “Iran” that killed and injured many of our troops.

Whether Iran helped “resistance” forces in Iraq with these IUD counter-attacks or not, the fact remains American troops were targeted only because Iraqis or some Muslims didn’t want American troops to be occupying this nation.

(FWIW, the members of the French Underground resistance organized and executed the same type of attack against Nazis who occupied their nation. Also, per deductive reasoning, if America had never invaded and occupied Iraq, the number of American casualties - caused by Iraq or Iran - would have been zero. That is, one can say Iranians killed our troops, but one could just as easily say the policies of President George W. Bush led to the deaths of our troops.)

Thirdly, per the accepted narrative, “Iran” has encouraged or produced legions of citizens who killed myriad Americans in myriad terrorist attacks.

However, as it turns out, this is not true. In fact, the only Iranian sympathizer I can think of who killed Americas might be the man who killed several Americans in a Texas bar, presumably as “revenge” after America and Israel attacked Iran.

The real terrorists, who have produced significant body counts, were Al Qaida and ISIS terrorists and Iran is/was an opponent of both terrorist groups. (FWIW, Iran condemned the 9-11 attacks and expressed condolences to these American victims.)

(I will say that, so far, articles on the Iran War haven’t been particularly popular at my Substack, but at some places they are).

Share

The Free Press actually can change long-held narratives

Another reason the narrative (Iran is THE evil terrorist nation in the world) might be changing is that more Americans and global citizens are starting to listen to commentators who are presenting Iran’s version of world events.

The most influential of these commentators is a professor from Tehran University named Seyed Marandi.

Professor Marandi, who speaks American English better than I do, must do 12 interviews with international podcasters every day. (I’m actually surprised YouTube hasn’t completely blocked these interviews and, also, I’m somewhat surprised America or Israel hasn’t killed Professor Marandi yet. Note: See Bonus Content in today’s Reader Comments).

In the parlance of war, Professor Marandi is probably a more dangerous force than three divisions of the Iranian Army.

Many people who have watched any of his interviews have no doubt concluded this man is highly intelligent, very persuasive and comes across as honest, credible and humble.

In numerous interviews, he has admitted that yes, Iranians chant “Death to America!” all the time. But he, convincingly, makes the point that Iranians are not calling for the death of every-day Americans or any Americans, what Iranians want to see happen is the American government defeated and American forces to get out of the Mideast and quit imposing draconian sanctions on their country, etc.

Iranians, he makes clear, have no beef with every-day Americans, who when they do visit Iran are always treated with respect and allowed to go back home.

The fact these messages (which are really efforts to rebut authorized narratives) are resonating with millions of people around the world is because Professor Marandi has become a kind of “rock star” of YouTube podcasts (at least among those who are weary of CNN, NBC and Fox News “coverage” of the war).

Speaking for myself, I’ve acknowledged the common “death to America!” chants, but, as they say, actions speak louder than words and one can simply judge what nation is committing actions that kill and wound huge numbers of the other nation’s citizens.

That is, no Americans are gathering in the streets chanting “death to Iran!” but the militaries of America and Israel have recently killed at least 3,000 Iranian citizens (more than 9-11) and wounded many more in two different bombing and missile assaults occurring across all sections of Iran.

One could argue, convincingly, that the President of the United States might as well be screaming “death to Iran!” As he’s made too many comments and made too many posts on Truth Social to keep track of where he’s told the people of Iran that America is going to “obliterate” its nation or “destroy its civilization” or bomb this nation back to the Stone Age.

President Trump has gloated about taking out Iran’s Supreme Leader and still hasn’t expressed any condolences or remorse about the 168 Iranian school children our military murdered.

I would also like to note that President Trump has repeatedly bragged and crowed about an assassination he ordered in his first term - the death by Hellfire Missile of IRGC general Qasem Soleimani in Iraq in January 2020.

This, I think, was when one could note another significant change in the thinking of political leaders (and the non-outraged response of the vast majority of the U.S. population).

Just like today, when Trump ordered the assassination of this Iranian leader, our nation had actually not declared war on Iran. Soleimani had been invited by America’s now-ally Iraq to speak to Iraq’s prime minister.

He and nine other people (including five citizens of Iraq) were then instantly blown up by a Hellfire missile fired from a drone by the U.S. military. (Sidebar trivia: Lockheed Martin’s Hellfire missile, as well as the THAAD and JASSM missiles, are built in my hometown of Troy, Alabama, meaning if all these regional wars ever go global, our family is going to be watching the skies closely).

IMO, once upon a time, this event would have been viewed by most world leaders, the press and diplomats as a state-sponsored assassination (and/or an act of terrorism).

But not in 2020. By this time, a reassessment had obviously occurred and the act was actually cheered by most political observers and all Fox News pundits. For their part, American citizens just shrugged their shoulders. (On an Outrage Scale going from 1 to 100, the level of public outrage might have been a 1.)

FWIW, Iran responded by bombing a U.S. military base in the region after Iran gave a heads-up it was getting ready to do this. Notably, this was not one of today’s “tic-for-tac” responses as Iran did not try to assassinate, say, the chairman of U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff.

While it didn’t get any corporate news coverage, one assumes the Outrage Scale among Iranian citizens was probably a 100, but the Supreme Ruler (later assassinated himself) did not authorize a stronger response. Still, the event probably did produce a few more rallies where, curiously, even more Iranian citizens chanted, “Death to America!”)

One new “assessment” begets another new assessment …

IMO, the assassination of Gen. Soleimani was also a seminal event as several years later President Trump green-lit missile attacks on purported Venezuelan cocaine smugglers.

Again, once upon a time, instantly killing civilians (in a country America was not at war with) would have created outrage among numerous members of the Influencer Class.

But this was no longer the case. Per the new “assessment” any American president could order the military to kill any civilians, at least if they were believed to be transporting cocaine.

Long-held principles of American jurisprudence like “Innocent until proven guilty” or habeas corpus or that an instant death penalty shouldn’t be administered to people in the illegal drug trade … no longer applied. (Needless to say, these principles do not apply to “dealers” in the legal drug and “vaccine” trade).

In Summary …

At least for myself, it’s amazing and surreal to take note of all the previous assessments that no longer apply and all the new assessments that now do apply. Also, it’s striking to reflect on all the assessments that, as I write are, perhaps, being reassessed.

Not long after 9-11, all the political experts who mattered assessed that America had to invade Iraq and Afghanistan, military operations that, we were told, would be accomplished in a couple of months.

Needless to stipulate, America always had to defend and support Israel, which is still the assessment of both parties in Congress.

However, also of note, this is one assessment where the views of political leaders seems to be increasingly at odds with the views of the American “men and women on the street.” (Even Facebook is replete with posts from people who seem to have moved at least some of their previous iron-clad assessments into the trash file).

In the last five months, per the assessment of everyone who matters, the regime of Iran had to be changed or else Iran was going to nuke America or Israel any day.

President Trump said Operation Epic Fury (not “Operation Liberate Iran”) would take four to five weeks and Americans, and President Trump, would be showered with roses once our military disposed of Iran’s villainous leaders. (Instead, in “the largest funeral in world history,” 40 million Iranians mourned the leader USrael” murdered.)

In 2001, America - by far - had the world’s strongest economy and people in most countries of the world had a favorable opinion of our nation.

Nobody had heard of Jeffrey Epstein or the Epstein Class. If a typical citizen had heard of such a vile person, most Americans would just assume the government would prosecute him and all his co-accomplices and would also prosecute any and all “Johns” Epstein pimped young girls and women to.

This “assessment” has certainly changed. Indeed - who had this on their Bingo card? - it’s Iran that seems to have declared war on the “Epstein Class.”

In 2026, a U.S. president finally decided to do what Benjamin Netanyahu (and Lindsey Graham) had been lobbying for for a quarter century and change the regime in Iran.

In 2001, per common assessments of the time, any policy that would costs hundreds of billions of dollars and jeopardize the lives of many American military members and risk economic catastrophe, would at least have required a vote of Congress … but not in 2026.

Skip forward a couple of decades and a president could simply do this on his own volition and didn’t even need to brief one member of Congress.

Still, most Americans had little issue with such a sneak attack and certainly few Americans equated this to what Japan did to America on Dec. 7, 1941.

Eight months ago, per everyone’s assessment, Iran was a backwards, uncivilized nation of “Arabs” who could make quality rugs as well as farmers who excelled at raising goats. If this “assessment” hasn’t changed by now, I just … give up.

Also, according to intelligence assessments, Iran’s leaders had just killed 3,000 protestors … later assessed at 10,000 … then 30,000 … then 40,000 and now 52,000. (Presumably, the mass graves will be unearthed in the years to come).

Iran certainly didn’t have the military capability, nor the public support, to put up much of a fight against the combined might of American and Israel.

In a couple of weeks, Iran would surrender unconditionally and, in two years, McDonalds and Dollar General stores would be on every other corner in Tehran.

Until I came up with today’s story idea, I hadn’t thought about this, but the “reassessments” are actually kind of stunning once you start itemizing a few of them … Not just reassessments but sudden and dramatic reassessments.

It’s almost like a strange kind of low-yield neutron truth bomb - one, like “vaccine” deaths, is hard to easily detect - is already starting to detonate.

Writer gratuities via Ko-Fi.

Author’s note: I’ve been thinking about today’s subject for years, but, frankly, held off publishing an article because I know many readers or subscribers might disagree with my thoughts and I’m already losing a flood of subscribers for my contrarian views. However, the topic of “what really happened on 9-11” is back in the news as Pink Floyd’s Roger Waters recently did a high-profile interview with Tucker Carlson stating his emphatic view that plastic explosives actually brought down three WTC buildings. I should say I’m a big admirer of Waters’ brave stands for “human rights” and note that all Waters wants is a real court inquiry into what really happened on 9-11 … and I certainly support this effort.

***

As I’ve written many times, I definitely believe in numerous “conspiracy theories,” even conspiracies that might involve millions of accomplices (like Covid).

However, among the cohort of “conspiracy kooks, ” I’m probably atypical in that I don’t necessarily subscribe to all widely-accepted conspiracy theories.

For example, I’m not sure I believe the 9-11 conspiracy thread that postulates some unknown group of conspirators wired at least three of the World Trade Center buildings with explosives and then brought down all three buildings with a controlled detonation.

In this piece, I simply want to pose many questions that might explain why I question certain elements of a widely-held 9-11 conspiracy theory. My hope is that readers might offer good answers to some of my questions, an outcome that could cause me to reconsider my current views.

Second caveat: I think certain conspiracies involving elements of the U.S. government could likely be true. For example, I think the U.S. government has conspired to cover-up for individuals in Saudi Arabia who helped make these attacks possible.

I also think it’s possible Mossad or elements of Israel intelligence might have been aware of the 9-11 attacks and did NOT alert American officials and, of course, American politicians who have “kissed the wall” would be very likely to cover-up for American’s closest ally. (Amazingly to myself, Saudi Arabia - led by the renowned humanitarian MBS - is also considered one of our nation’s most important allies, which would provide a reason for our government to not want to embarrass this particular petro-dollar-supporting friend and ally.)

I also think the subsequent “anthrax” scare was almost certainly an intentional and planned conspiracy (probably or perhaps perpetrated by individuals in our own government) to spread fear and make possible a massive bio-weapons complex and the merger of the Science Industrial Complex and the Military Industrial Complex - a marriage that probably produced “Covid” two decades later.

***

A popular and widely-accepted 9-11 “conspiracy theory” is that the two famous World Trade Center skyscrapers didn’t collapse because two commercial jets crashed into them and caused an intense fire. Per this theory, the buildings were actually brought down by a “controlled demolition.” Also, and significantly, believers of this theory point to the admittedly odd collapse of World Trade Center building No. 7, which collapsed more than five hours after the first plane hit the first Tower.

As no one seems to have ever said that “Muslim terrorists” installed the explosives that caused these buildings to collapse, the logical conclusion would be that employees or “operatives” working for element(s) of the U.S. government actually did all the work that resulted in the implosion of these buildings.

Right here, if proven, the public would be confronted with one of the most evil and audacious plots in the history of nations and governments. If “proven,” one could logically conclude that all of the attacks that occurred on this day were actually conceived and executed by our own government.

The theory, one assumes, would postulate that many people in the U.S. government knew that on 9-11-2001 four planes were going to be hijacked and be flown into four different symbolic U.S. targets: Two World Trade Center buildings, the Pentagon and the fourth suicide-attack, which wasn’t successful, on either the Capitol or White House.

Significantly, organizers of the conspiracy must have calculated that the impact and fires caused by two planes that flew into the World Trade Center towers would NOT bring down these building.

Thus, one can assume conspirators deemed it essential that at least three WTC buildings completely collapsed, a result that, per the conclusions of plotters, would be possible only via the detonation of plastic explosives that had been planted days, weeks or months BEFORE the planes were hijacked.

At least for myself, it seems farfetched to believe that, say, the CIA spent weeks wiring three buildings with powerful explosives, which they were going to detonate out of the blue on some random day (without planes crashing into the buildings prior to the explosives being detonated).

Those who subscribe to this theory must agree that the plan (razing at least three iconic national buildings) would entail production of a credible “cover story” - the “cover story” being that two jet airliners, hijacked by crazed and militant Muslim terrorists, caused the buildings to collapse.

After the first part of the plan occurred (hijacked planes did crash into these buildings), the CIA (or whoever hatched the plan) could wait 40 to 75 minutes before someone pushed the detonator buttons and brought down the two iconic skyscrapers (and, many hours later, for some curious reason, a WTC building most people didn’t even know existed).

That is, such a “plan” would seem to prove that the conspirators knew two planes were going to crash into these skyscrapers on 9-11, which, in turn, provided the perfect cover to detonate the explosives that brought these buildings down.

This foreknowledge, in turn, would seem to prove that the CIA (?) also coordinated all of the “cover-attacks,” components of the plan that had to happen for the scheme to work.

According to this crime theory and my own effort at deductive reasoning, psychopathic spooks in the government recruited and/or enticed 21 Muslim extremists to hijack planes on 9-11 (thereby creating the requisite cover story). But it was CIA operatives (or maybe Mossad operatives?) who wired three New York City buildings with explosives.

Presumably, this was a classic “false flag” operation, the goal or motive of which was to create national and international outrage at Muslim terrorists, which would allow Neo-cons to launch wars and regime-change operations against four or five Mideast nations and grow the Military Industrial Complex (and Surveillance Complex) by a sizable degree. (Of note, the ensuing Mideast regime-change operations would also facilitate the Project for a Greater Israel).

As they say, “follow the money” and everything that happened after 9-11 did make numerous companies vaults of new revenue and definitely increased the size and power of the U.S. government and the MIC, which apparently wasn’t large enough or controlled too few people in 2001.

In one sense, this “motive” doesn’t sound that farfetched as this is exactly what ended up happening.

However, to my mind, framing this plot using the context of a “risk-benefit analysis” makes such a scenario highly unlikely. (As I wrote in an essay arguing that Jeffrey Epstein and Charlie Kirk are, in fact, dead, every important decision any person makes involves calculating personal risks and possible benefits).

Here, I’ll list a few of my questions, beginning with the “risk” side of this analysis.

Per this particular theory, the key component of the 9-11 operation would be: The wiring of three buildings with explosives. (Also, recruiting and logistically supporting the terrorists who hijacked four planes in a period of 90 minutes - i.e. both elements of the plan had to happen in tandem.)

Obvious questions:

How many people does it take to wire three buildings with explosives?

Like everyone reading this, I’ve seen videos of large buildings that were instantly razed by demolition experts. It seems to me the necessary “prep work” would require, at a minimum, scores of employees/conspirators, performing weeks of prep work. Also, the World Trade Center towers were the second and third tallest buildings in the country. As far as I know, no company has ever imploded a 100-story skyscraper, which can’t be easy … and this particular project involved at least three buildings.)

How long would it take to execute such an operation? Could explosives experts, working in a clandestine manner without being exposed, do this, in say, a week or would it take many weeks or months?

(It’s possible the all-important explosive experts had a plausible cover story. For example, perhaps members of this crew had infiltrated an asbestos removal team. Still, this handful of key conspirators would have to do the same work at three different buildings, which would require even more time and human assets to perform the necessary “prep work.”)

Were the people recruited to do this essential work told why they were doing this?

If so, what were they told? (Perhaps they were all told, “Blowing up these buildings and killing tens of thousands of innocent American citizens will help preserve our national security” or, this has to be done to protect Americans’ freedoms.

Or, perhaps, they were told/ordered to do this and, as good intelligence soldiers, they knew not to ask any questions about why they were engaged in such a sinister project.

The biggest “risk” question that occurs to me is … What if the people who wired any of these three buildings were caught?

This possibility must have occurred to plot organizers … and/or it’s hard to believe organizers wouldn’t have considered this possibility.

What would happen to the plotters if they were discovered to have planted powerful explosives in the World Trade Center buildings?

It’s possible I guess (or, really, guaranteed), that the CIA would try to cover-up any possible discovery of its elaborate explosive-planting operation, but, for example, would members of New York City’s Police Force have gone along with any effort to keep such details from the public?

Would key detectives and executives of New York’s Finest, upon discovering who really brought down the buildings, have said, “Normally, we would charge such plotters with mass murder, but since we now see the federal government was trying to protect America’s National Security (by using the thousands of deaths as an excuse to invade Mideast countries), we will spike this investigation?”

If New York officials did decide to spike the biggest crime in U.S. history (an event that also killed hundreds of New York City firemen and police officers), other scenarios could have also resulted in exposure of the plot and the real villains.

For example, it’s possible that someone - maybe a janitor or security guard who stumbled upon one of the team members installing the explosives - - could have gone to the press. Would every New York newspaper and TV station decide to sit on the story that someone was trying to blow up three WTC towers and kill up to hundreds of thousands of people?

I guess such a scenario is possible, but I doubt it. IMO, this “story” would have gotten out and, to quote Donald Trump, would have been “huge.” (Also, corrupt organizations weren’t as captured in 2001 as they are in 2026).

Also, it wouldn’t have taken much detective work to find out who the explosive team members really worked for. Once everyone learned the CIA (or Mossad or whoever) was plotting to blow up the WTC, …. there goes the CIA … and/or there goes “support for the nation of Israel.”

Indeed, if proven beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law, one actually wonders if the citizens of the United States of America would have continued to want to be ruled or “led” by Satan-like rulers, opening up the distinct possibility of instant secession or another Civil War.

Also, if one goal was to increase the power and influence of the Intelligence Agencies and Military Industrial Complex, any proof that these same organizations conspired to kill as many innocent Americans as possible would, presumably, not be as possible in the future as, presumably, the first new consensus of public opinion would be to nuke the CIA and dismantle the MIC.

In other words, the “risk” for the people who installed the explosives and brought down a block of New York City buildings (and exploded a section of the Pentagon and - but for the actions of one group of heroes - destroyed the U.S. Capitol - would not be small.

At a minimum, if convicted and prosecuted, every accomplice would spend the rest of their lives in prison. One also imagines that murdering thousands of people might warrant the death penalty for at least a few of the key participants.

Furthermore, the reputations of family members of the guilty would would be forever sullied; wives of the guilty would leave their husbands; children of the conspirators would surely disown their fathers, etc.

Thus, the main reason I am skeptical of the “controlled demolition” theory is A) plotters would simply not have been able to recruit enough participants who would go along with the plot and B) any intelligence operatives would, presumably, be smart enough to know the plot could, at least potentially, be exposed. The defense that “we were just following orders” might work in some cases but not in a scenario where the orders entailed the murder of 2,500 or more innocent civilians.

Share

Contrasting a 9-11 Conspiracy with the Covid Conspiracy …

I actually can envision a scenario that might explain why accomplices or conspirators of Covid Crimes against Humanity “went along” with this conspiracy.

For example, doctors and nurses that placed patients on ventilators and administered them fatal doses of remdesivir could argue that they were just trying to save patients … or were just following accepted medical protocols, (orders) passed down from the CDC.

“We didn’t know we were harming these patients,” would no doubt be a common defense, one that might, in fact, be true for many of these (alleged) “care-givers.”

This defense contrasts with a defense of 9-11 conspirators who might argue, “We didn’t know those plastic explosives would actually be used to blow up and bring down those buildings.”

Or: “We didn’t know those Muslim terrorists we recruited to hijack U.S. planes would actually try to fly those planes into the those two sky scrapers, the Pentagon and the Capitol.”

(I’ve also always thought it strange the CIA was trying to kill the politicians who fund and enthusiastically support the CIA. IMO, If plotters knew the terrorists were going to fly two planes into the WTC towers and, per this theory, they did; they must have also known another plane was going to hit the Capitol or The White House).

What would be the benefit for conspirators?

As I explore this thought exercise, I’m trying to identify any possible “benefits” of going along with the plot.

It seems to me any half-way intelligent plotter would have had to have concluded, “Okay, if the truth is ever exposed, I’m going to lose everything that’s important to me; I’ll be remembered as one of the country’s worst-ever traitors and mass murderers - this would be the risk … but what would I gain if I do go along with this plan? What’s the benefit side of the equation here?”

Possible answers:

… It’s possible, I guess, the conspirators might get a promotion or maybe a (secret) bonus. I guess they’d get to keep their CIA jobs. Also (where do they find these sadists?) maybe a few sickos would enjoy the satisfaction of killing tens of thousands of innocent people to support the crazy plans of rogue neo-con bosses?

And what about the bosses who hatched this plan and recruited the accomplices? What would their futures look like if they were exposed?

IMO, most insane intelligence operations are designed to increase the power, budgets and control of different elements of the government and Deep State.

One has to wonder how many Congressmen would authorize bigger budgets - or more clandestine “black operations” - for an agency that conspired to kill tens of thousands of Americans.

A scenario I don’t view as possible:

Congress: “Okay, CIA, here’s your $20 billion allocation for this year. However, you’ve got to promise you’ll never try to blow up the World Trade Center, Pentagon and Capitol ever again.”

To my mind, these massive risks simply wouldn’t be worth the benefits.

Speaking about the plotters, these questions also occur to me:

WHY was it so important to make sure three WTC buildings collapsed?

Here, one has to picture the outcome if these buildings had not collapsed and the other parts of the plan did work.

With this scenario, on 9-11, terrorists would have flown planes into two World Trade Center buildings (producing thousands of casualties even if the buildings didn’t collapse). With another plane attack, they would have blown up a section of the Pentagon and the Bad Guys would have flown a plane into either The Capitol or the White House, probably destroying one of those symbolic buildings and producing hundreds or thousands of additional deaths.

Question: Would this NOT qualify as enough “shock and awe” to galvanize the country into fighting back against Osama Bin Laden or the nations that allegedly support him?

I simply don’t understand the plotters’ thinking, which, per this theory, apparently was that these shocking events would NOT be shocking enough …. unless the two tall towers - and Building No. 7 - collapsed.

In my view, this conspiracy would give new and dark meaning to the term “over-kill.”

Some who espouse this theory have speculated that one or all of the buildings had to completely collapse to destroy and literally bury incriminating documents or maybe vaults of gold (which I think would survive tons of debris crashing down on any bars).

If this is true, why did the plotters also decide to to attack the Pentagon and the Capitol/White House?

I also don’t understand how plotters could be confident the hi-jacking part of the operations would be successful. What if, for many different possible reasons, two planes didn’t crash into the World Trade Center? (To prove my point, the attack of the fourth plane, which crashed in a field in Pennsylvania, was NOT successful).

A scenario, that could have happened, that I doubt many people have considered:

Under this possible scenario, one of the teams that hijacked a commercial airplane did succeed with their mission and flew into one of the World Trade Center Towers. However, for 50 different possible reasons, the other team didn’t succeed in their mission. That is, only one plane flew into one tower.

Plotters, using the cover of the plane explosion and the inferno caused by the jet fuel, would, presumably, have gone ahead and detonated their plastic explosives, bringing down one tower. However, presumably they couldn’t (or wouldn’t) blow up the other tower that wasn’t hit, which would leave open the possibility all the plastic explosives planted in this building could later be discovered, meaning the CIA would have to scramble and remove the plastic explosives.

This hypothetical, I think, illustrates the key to the entire operation of the New York City 9-11 attacks: Everything hinged on two planes being successfully hijacked by two teams of terrorists who did succeed in flying both planes into both buildings - thus providing the requisite cover explosions to “cover” for the plastic explosives that actually brought down both buildings.

Of course, the most sinister take-away from this line of detective work is that the plotters must have, obviously, known all along that this is exactly what was going to happen. This would, in turn, mean, that (many) individuals in the U.S. government knew all along what was going to happen because, presumably, they orchestrated the entire operation (not just planting the explosives, which they never would have done unless they knew planes were going to crash into those buildings.)

That is, the plastic explosive part of the plan couldn’t even be implemented unless the other parts of the plan had gone off (successfully) … as planned.

Among other logical take-aways, this suggests plotters had been working on this plan for many months if not for more than a year - certainly long enough to recruit the terrorists, allow a couple of them to complete their pilot lessons and allow ample time to wire at least three buildings with enough explosives to bring down all three buildings. (I also assume that if plotters wired three World Trade Center buildings with explosives, they must have/probably also wired all seven buildings with explosives).

Building No. 7 …

The most compelling part of the buildings-imploded-by-exposives theory involves the (admittedly) strange collapse of WTC Building No. 7.

However, another question that has always occurred to me is why did plotters feel it necessary (mandatory?) to implode this building with explosives as well?

If destroying this building was vitally important, is it possible plotters created the entire multi-faceted 9-11 attacks simply to provide cover for imploding this one obscure building?

Again, did the plotters think that bringing down both WTC skyscrapers wouldn’t provide enough national psychological trauma to achieve their goals; they also had to take all the additional risks of wiring an obscure WTC building?

(Also, detonating this building six hours later would - as we have now seen - raise many obvious and fair questions. It seems to me if conspirators blew up two buildings, they would have blown up the third building at approximately the same time - not hours later.)

To me, all of this spit-balling conjecture makes zero sense. Stated differently, if Building No. 7 had not collapsed, everything that happened in the world after 9-11 would have still happened.

Here one, again, tries to put one’s self into the minds of the plotters.

One, two planes flying into two World Trade Center towers would NOT cause enough outrage for American politicians and citizens to launch a war on terror.

Nor would the supplementary attacks on the Pentagon and terrorists blowing up the White House or U.S. Capitol.

Key strategists must have said: “We have to detonate our pre-planted explosives in both towers to make sure they collapse, killing even more people and making an even more indelible impression on the masses.”

“But we also need to make sure we bring down this 47-story building on the outskirts of the WTC complex. (If something very incriminating was in that building and had to be buried with rubble never to be discovered, inquiring minds, myself included, would like to know what this thermo-nuclear evidence might have been).

How does anyone know the buildings wouldn’t collapse on their own?

Another point made by adherents of the demolition theory is that both WTC buildings would NOT have collapsed on their own. (According to Roger Waters, “all” structural engineering experts agree with this conclusion.)

However, speaking for myself, I don’t know how plotters could know (for a fact with 100-percent certainty) that neither of these two towers would collapse because, as far as I know, no large jet aircraft, fully-loaded with jet fuel and traveling at 500 mph had ever crashed into a skyscraper before.

(FWIW, I also believe the fact much of the asbestos fire-retardant had been removed and replaced in both buildings might explain why the buildings ultimately collapsed or, if the original and superior fire retardant material had not been replaced, might have collapsed at a later time or maybe not collapsed).

Alternate conspiracy theories that seem more plausible to myself …

A more plausible conspiracy theory IMO would be one where psychopathic intelligence operatives, perhaps, recruited 20 Muslim hijackers to do exactly what they did. This would, almost, be a fool-proof plan, as the people who crashed the planes into their targets would, of course, all die in the suicide attacks.

Another conspiracy theory, more believable to myself, is that elements of U.S. intelligence might have uncovered the plot before it happened and decided to let it happen, figuring this would be an excellent “crisis” they could exploit to bring all their neo-con plans to fruition.

However, organizing the entire operation, including going to the trouble (and risks) of wiring and blowing up three buildings, would massively increase the number of Americans who must have been involved.

Something that hasn’t happened …

Fans of Mafia movies like “Good Fellows” (which was based on a true story), know that many people involved in conspiracies often end up getting “whacked.”

Thinking about the 9-11 conspiracy theory outlined above, I wonder how many American conspirators must have known about this conspiracy and participated in it (by wiring at least three buildings with explosives or, per my logic, planning the whole thing).

To me, this number might be in the triple digits and must certainly be far into the double digits. So the question occurs to me, have 20 or 30 CIA or Mossad agents been “whacked” in the years after 9-11?

I don’t know. Has Whitney Webb or some alternative media journalist reported on this?

Were the plotters 100-percent convinced that nobody on their team would ever talk or do something stupid? Apparently, if this conspiracy theory is true, they had/have no such worries.

All of this said, let me now say this …

No where in this essay do I say the “controlled demolition” version of the 9-11 conspiracy theory is definitely wrong.

The main reason I don’t completely rule out this “high-risk” conspiracy theory is that I’m convinced a far more massive conspiracy gave us “Covid.”

The 9-11 theory outlined above could only be conceived and orchestrated by officials who are unfathomably evil. However, I do believe - based on copious evidence - that evil people exist, probably in numbers that would stun every decent and normal person on the planet.

Correctly tabulated, if one tallies all the deaths caused by wars and occupations in Mideast countries over the last 25 years, the 9-11 attacks might have ultimately produced at least one million victims and millions of additional victims who suffered serious injuries.

As mind-boggling as it is to ponder these figures, they are a pittance compared to the world-wide victims caused by the Covid conspiracy (and the lethal government response to same).

Thus, if elements of our government (and Deep State) are and were able to perpetuate a conspiracy that would kill tens of millions of people (Covid), wouldn’t the same type people be okay with a plot that would kill 10,000 or 1 million innocent people with their 9-11 plot?

This, I admit, is an excellent rebuttal point to this essay. If nothing else, history teaches us that national leaders have orchestrated numerous schemes that ended up killing millions of innocent people.

But, in my opinion, Covid was a different type of conspiracy.

With Covid, I suspect only a relatively small number of people and organizations were involved in creating an alleged “deadly pandemic.” Millions of people - necessary accomplices - ended up participating because they were all easily duped and conditioned to follow the experts and authorities and support the “authorized narrative.”

With Covid, the vast majority of citizens (and especially leaders of important organizations) quickly figured out they would BENEFIT by going along with the authorized narrative (and faced little risk from doing this). Essentially, they figured out being a member of “the herd” provided great career safety.

The difference between Covid and the popular 9-11 conspiracies is that almost no American could be portrayed as being any kind of “accomplice” in the 9-11 attacks. The only conspirators who mattered would be the people who wired three buildings with explosives, pushed the remote-control detonation devices, and/or recruited (or didn’t stop) the 20 terrorists who did, in fact, hijack four planes.

Speaking for myself, If I was invited to participate in such a plot - or even ordered to participate in such a plot, I would have refused. Even if I wanted to participate in one of the greatest homicide events in world history, I would have spent the rest of my life worried about being exposed, prosecuted, the plan going sideways or me later being rubbed out so I couldn’t talk.

But, per the “controlled demolition” conspiracy theory, dozens (or hundreds) of key conspirators either didn’t see any real risks involved or were willing to assume these risks.

In Conclusion …

IMO, large swaths of of our ruling elites excel at concocting bogus Fear Narratives like a “deadly pandemic” or “this rogue nation has weapons of mass destruction they are getting ready to use on us.” Still, for plotters, these are low-risk ruses, especially since the MSM is a co-conspirator in these Narrative Control Operations.

However, American “public servants” wiring three buildings for explosives, recruiting and partnering with real terrorists and then pushing three buttons and bringing down three iconic buildings is a far riskier proposition IMO.

Plus, IMO, this would be an extreme risk - involving elaborate and time-consuming work - that plotters didn’t even need to take.

As I don’t think the CIA (or Mossad) would take on these risks, I don’t think this popular conspiracy theory should be viewed as conspiracy fact.

Writer gratuities via Ko-Fi.

A new employee of Alabama’s Emergency Management Agency (Josh Johnson, a popular former TV meteorologist) recently made a post on his Facebook site, reminding everyone we are now in Hurricane Season and included a link from the AEMA including seven bullet points, providing citizens Official Hurricane Safety Guidance.

In response, I provided my contrarian bonafides, telling anyone who reads the Comments Section that I am tired of Government Safety Nannies telling us what to do and acting like they are saving lives.

Here is my exact post:

“In my contrarian opinion, this is just more Nanny State BS (“Follow official evacuation routes,” etc. ). These agencies are conditioning/brain-washing people to comply with our saviors and protectors - the government. I can figure out how to get through a possible hurricane on my own.”

As you can tell, Nanny Bureaucrats have long been a pet peeve of mine.

However, I am obviously in the minority. For example, here are two other comments Josh’s post generated:

Poster 1: “Thanks for continuing to take care of us.”

Poster 2: “Thank you Josh, still taking care of us. God b!ess.”

(I do want to say that Josh, who I’ve met a couple of times, seems like a nice guy and I’m not trying to pick on him. I’m just using him and his latest guidance post to make a few points I’ve been wanting to make for a while.)

As do-gooder agencies go, the AEMA is not the monstrosity of other state and federal do-gooder agencies.

From Google AI, I learned (emphasis added by this contrarian):

“The Alabama Emergency Management Agency (AEMA) operates with a dedicated staff of approximately 60 state employees. Headquartered in Clanton, Alabama, this team coordinates with 34 state departments, federal partners, and local county EMAs to manage disaster preparedness and recovery efforts.”

In other words, the AEMA does far less harm and consumes far less tax-payer dollars than the Alabama Department of Public Health (ADPH), which, per Google AI, employs “more than 2,600 people.”

For example, it is the “dedicated” employees of the ADPH who work tirelessly 24-7, 365 days out of the year to make sure every Alabama citizen gets their annual flu shot.

The same agency encouraged everyone to get their Covid shots and ensured all Alabamians that Covid was a mortality threat to all Alabamians, including children.

(When I asked the media person for the ADPH how many Alabama children had actually died from Covid, I was told the “public health” agency couldn’t provide this information to the public. Nor could/would the agency answer my question about how many of the ADPH’s own 2,600 employees had died from Covid in the past five years - “HIPAA reasons,” I was told.)

***

In the intro text of his post, Josh wrote: “Reminder: We are in hurricane season NOW!”

(Note the ALL CAPS and the exclamation point, which, I guess is a reminder that makes everyone exclaim, “Oh my gosh - I forgot we were in Hurricane Season.”)

Josh did add, “All is quiet at the moment, but that could change in a matter of days.”

Josh is right about that. That’s one thing about the weather; it can change in a matter of hours or days.

And, to be clear, I do appreciate the work of people in Josh’s previous job of meteorologist, the weather babes and dudes who tell everyone that a tropical depression has formed off the coast of Africa, might grow into hurricane and might land somewhere in the Southeast or East Coast.

Due to this work, all citizens know we need to be alert; that we might need to go somewhere else (evacuate) and that the power could go off for days, which means we might need to get extra batteries and stock up on Vienna Sausages.

I didn’t know, but was educated by the AEMA press release, that we should also all “practice with your household and pets.”

At first, I didn’t understand how I was supposed to “practice” for a hurricane with our sweet dog, Annie, but one of the bullet points explained that we should “search on-line for local pet-friendly evacuation locations.”

As far as practicing with the rest of my household, my plan was always that if things looked like they might get bad enough, I was going to tell my wife and two kids, “Get in the car; we’re leaving.”

The “practice” would be getting the family to actually do what Dad said.

What I really think …

I’ve also always thought that impending or real disasters were just another excuse for bureaucrats and elected officials to act more important.

These developing weather situations are an excuse for governors and mayors to hold countless press conferences, telling everyone, “A hurricane might be coming - listen to us for more official guidance/orders.”

Citizens know these are important press conferences (and these are very important leaders) because these briefing always include a sign language interpreter.

Personally, I’ve always wondered how many deaf people are actually watching these press conferences and, even if some people can’t hear, can’t they read? (Also, doesn’t every TV show now come with close-captioning?)

Still, these events have provided me some of my greatest chuckles, especially when someone who can read sign language reports that the sign-language interpreter is signing complete gibberish.

Also, these events always include 20 other officials standing behind the governor with sombre looks on their faces. The governor/mayor will invariably instruct everyone to follow the instructions of the government’s disaster experts.

(Everyone needs to share this article so people know what to do when we have another hurricane.)

As I will never forget from Hurricane Opal in 1995, sometimes hurricanes do actually hit and do produce devastation even hundreds of miles inland.

When this happens, as a general observation (and with some exceptions), the people who rally to the occasion and rescue people are every-day good Samaritan citizens. Here I’m talking about people with fishing or air boats who mobilize on their own and ignore the guidance of the government or don’t wait for the National Guard to come save people in dire situations.

(Also, it’s always been amazing to me how good, old-fashioned capitalism kicks in and armies of people from all over show up with chain saws the morning after the storm.)

As an aside, my wife and I just watched a Netflix documentary about an Italian cruise ship that sunk in 2012 after the captain ran the ship into rocks. In that emergency, the crew kept telling everyone the ship had simply experienced a power outage and everyone should go back to their rooms. Fortunately, passengers knew this was a crock and went to work trying to save themselves.

(My wife pointed out that the same thing happened on 9-11, when people working in the second World Trade Center tower were told to go back to their offices and not evacuate the sky-scraper.)

This is good guidance - especially if your father happens to be a gasoline distributor …

Another expert hurricane preparedness pro tip is citizens should keep their vehicles at least half full with gasoline - which is good advice that nobody would think about except for the highly-trained experts.

As another aside, I’ll never forget the time a hurricane in the Gulf kept stalling and then changing directions, resulting in the Emergency Planners ordering three different evacuations, which they kept rescinding and then re-ordering.

As it turns out, my Dad was in the gasoline business in Troy, Alabama and owned two Gulf Stations on Highway 231. Both stations were right on the main official evacuation route.

Dad got to sell petrol six times to hundreds of thousands of motorists who were evacuating and un-evacuating, more than enough to fund a great beach vacation for our family as the hurricane never did any damage to the coast.

***

Who knows if the 2026 Hurricane Season will be a bad one or be another season where no hurricanes make landfall.

About 30 years ago, all the experts told us that hurricanes were going to become much more common and they would all pack much higher wind gusts because of man-made Global Warming.

That prediction was a bust as, per the official records, fewer hurricanes have made landfall and, when they did, they were about the same as the hurricanes that made landfall between 1900 to 1980, when Global Cooling was the big worry.

Which is not to say, we shouldn’t all take hurricanes seriously.

My main point is that, once upon a time, American citizens didn’t need an army of self-important bureaucrats and politicians to tell us to buy extra batteries and practice by checking for hotels that accept pets.

When Ronald Reagan and Barry Goldwater were running for president, they made fun of people who said, “We’re from the government and we’re here to help.” (Back then, “rugged, self-reliant” voters seemed to get the joke).

In Conclusion …

Once upon a time, adult leaders knew that adult citizens were smart enough to know what to do if a hurricane was bearing down on their towns.

Today, 80 percent of the population says, “Oh, thank you so much, Government, for helping us stay safe,” with politicians invariably adding, “We really need to increase the budgets for our Emergency Management agencies and our First Responders.”

As for contrarian Facebook posters like myself, I think “someone” is simply trying to condition us all to comply with our leaders and produce a population of ever-more-compliant sheeple.

Writer gratuities via Ko-Fi.

On July 8th - six days ago - I again stepped into the batter’s box here on the Substack diamond to take my swings.

The situation was dire for my team. It was the bottom of the 9th and Team Rice was down by three runs with two outs in the last inning. The good news is that America’s Team had three runners on base. However, adding stress, the pitcher quickly got two strikes on me.

The pitcher rocks, fires … Bill focusses as hard as he can, swings, ball hits bat on sweet spot and - I can’t believe it - that ball is out of here!

Walk-off, grand slam!

Play-by—play Announcer: “What a great column Bill posted today!”

Color commentator: “Wow! The crowd is going wild.”

Yes, indeedy - Holllyyy Cow! - Breaking a season-long slump, a Substack author who was hitting just .100 for the season and hadn’t hit a home run all season, stroked one that was still rising when it sailed over the left field fence.

In fact, that one Substack swing netted me 116 new free subscribers when I had been losing, on average, five to 10 subscribers every time I stepped into the batter’s box and hit “send” on a story.

The Rest of the Story …

In today’s follow-up plate appearance, I would like to provide the back story of a column that was the lead highlight on “Sports Center” and caused my wife to give me a big, wet kiss on the lips.

It turns out that Bill wasn’t the real hero of this game. The real hero was one of his loyal fans, Dr. Meryl Nass, a beloved (or reviled) contrarian physician who, after having her license to practice medicine revoked by the Commissioner (for allegedly posting dangerous disinformation), continued to publish a Substack newsletter.

Before I stepped into the batter’s box in the bottom of the 9th, my column (“Here’s what I think really happened with Covid”) had been read by approximately 3,500 people, but had produced only a handful of new subscribers, which was still three more than most of my articles had produced in the last 18 months.

While I was in the dugout, thinking about switching bats, Dr. Nass sent a message down to the dugout.

In a note (actually an email), she told me that she wanted to cross-post my column, but, for some reason, was having difficulty performing this routine Substack activity.

“I was not able to cross post your July 8 article with pic of Mad Men,” Dr. Nass said, adding, “The reason is there are no 3 dots in the upper right corner of the piece. Wanted to let you know.”

The note caught my attention because, on occasion, I too had wanted to cross-post an article I liked or thought was important and couldn’t do it for the same reason (no three dots) next to the story header.

Dr. Nass added in her note:

“Also, I don’t think I am getting your posts most of the time.”

This note actually angered me, although it also confirmed or reinforced a long-held hypothesis of mine:

“Somebody doesn’t want my Substack articles to reach hardly any people; someone is messing with my Substack.”

I scribbled a note in response, handed it to the bat boy who delivered it up into the bleachers to Dr. Nass.

My note (email) thanked Dr. Nass for taking an interest in this particular column and I added that if she could figure out a way to cross-post my piece ..

“I will also be able to tell how many more readers and subscribers I get when a colleague with a much-larger subscription base shares my story.”

(Note: Dr. Nass now, supposedly or reportedly, has 48K subscribers, which she told me is 5,000 fewer than she had a year ago.)

Two innings later I got another note (email) from Dr. Nass, delivering fantastic news:

“I had so much trouble finding your newsletter through Google, then trying to get to the archive page. Anyway, after several more clicks and false starts, I actually reached a page that allowed me to cross post it. Go figure.”

Dr. Nass added: “It is very hard to find Substacks (or maybe our kind of Substack) using search engines.”

In a nutshell, my column was now going to reach a lot more readers and prospective subscribers.

***

Sure enough (I had my device with me in the dugout), my story metrics immediately started to explode.

Without Dr. Nass’s assist, the story had produced 80 likes, which was very good compared to my previous plate appearances (which had been averaging about 40 to 50 “likes.”)

My teammates must have wondered what I was doing as a smile spread across my face while I spit out a few more sunflower seeds.

… 85 likes, 90 … 100! 120! … (Update: Last I checked, my story had generated 240 “likes.”)

And the emails started coming in from Substack: new subscriber, new subscriber, new subscriber …

“Boys,” I said, “I’m back in business. We ain’t dead yet.”

(Troy University has a baseball player named Jabe Boroff. For most of the season, this player was hitting under .125 and had only one home run. In one month, he blasted 10 home runs and is now known as “Jabe Ruth.” Jabe is my role model.)

Share

This was what I was battling …

As fans of my newsletter must know, for almost two years, I had been struggling with the dreaded loss of confidence.

“Casey (Bill) has lost his Mojo,” all the headlines read.

A former top prospect and candidate for Substack Rookie of the Year back in 2022, Rice, poor fellow, could no longer buy a hit, much less a home run.

I, of course, could read the writing on the wall - the analytics (metrics), don’t lie … or (keep reading, do they?)

A couple of games before this big game I even wrote a story saying my Substack ship, like the Titanic, was sinking. There was probably nothing I could do to stop this.

In a week, I’d be sent down to AAA in Nashville and next season I’d no doubt be in A ball in Beloit, Wisconsin.

Pundits had a field day speculating on what had happened to me.

Conventional wisdom seems to have agreed that I was a victim of “Covid fatigue” or “newsletter over-saturation” which was causing millions of Substack readers to cull subscriptions as fast as they received a new article in their in-box.

I meekly replied, “Well, I write about plenty of subjects that aren’t Covid” and couldn’t help but ask, “Why are only ‘Covid contrarian’ readers culling subscriptions at a furious clip? This isn’t happening to Kait Justice or Robert Reich …”

Others said I must have changed my swing, which accounted for all my strikeouts.

“No, I haven’t changed my swing,” I said. “My writing is the same as it was three years ago.” I even added: “I think it’s better.”

While I never said this publicly to the sports scribes who gathered around my locker after every game, privately, I thought my game experience had allowed me to polish my writing and that my brain synopses were firing at a higher clip, allowing me to connect dots I hadn’t been able to connect when I made my Major League debut on Substack.

For their part, the tabloids said I was clearly paranoid, just another wacko conspiracy theorist prone to whining.

Or, people said, “he’s getting what he deserves. He keeps posting dangerous and extremist articles that are going to jeopardize the public’s safety if people are allowed to read his content.”

All of this is back-story material that will come out in a “30-for-30” documentary one day, but these anecdotes show that I was feeling some pressure and was not working from an optimal mental state when I stepped into the batter’s box and wrote my first sentence of “This is what I think really happened with Covid.”

And then Dr. Nass cross-posted my article and I was able to tell my naysayers, “Take that,” except a classy, old-school ball player, I kept my mouth shut.

I might not have turned the corner …

I will add that the metrics that story produced still strike me as off, dubious or “curious.”

For example, Substack tells me that my play-of-the-day story ended up generating 6,400 “Page views.”

However, I just sent a follow-up email to Dr. Nass, who told me - per her metrics - 19,066 of her readers actually read the Bill Rice, Jr. story she cross-posted. (If one adds 3,000 of my readers that had already read this article, that story reached at least 22,000 readers).

Also, Substack tells me - with one metric - that this story produced 47 new subscribers (three paid and 44 free).

However, when I posted that story I had 7,509 total subscribers and I now (supposedly) have 7,625 subscribers. Per simple subtraction, I added 116 new subscribers.

Since I’ve only posted one original story since then (“Logic, Jim”) and that story “reverted to the norm,” and produced only one new subscriber, by deductive reasoning (“Logic, Jim”) I concluded that my prior story (my grand slam story) actually generated 115 new subscribers.

Per my logic or belief, one story produced 115 new subscribers when I’d been averaging losing five net subscribers every time I stepped into the batter’s box.

So the question I’m trying to conceive an answer for is “What changed?”

(When I was called up to the Big Leagues, the scouting report on me said, “Rice has a unique talent for detecting odd trend changes.”)

My answer is only one thing changed: Dr. Nass cross-posted this article.

That article actually reached far more people than all my other 2025-2026 articles had been reaching. (Back when I was a Rookie of the Year candidate, and metrics might have been more credible, I once wrote a story that got 74,000 Page Views).

And - at least to me, here’s the headline - when new readers are exposed to my writing - 115 of them decided they liked my writing style and decided they would become either a paid subscriber or a free subscriber.

For some reason, the phenomena of “Covid fatigue” or “subscription over-saturation” didn’t apply to this story or to this new pool of readers.

In effect, what happened (IMO) is that through a clever work-around, Dr. Nass figured out a way to get one of my articles around “the gatekeepers of the news.”

And, just like was the case for the first two years of my Substack, when new readers read my stuff, an impressive ratio of them decided to give this kid a chance and become free subscribers.

As “proof of readership,” - these readers also hit the “like” button at a rate that was four to six-fold more than my previous corpus of articles. The number of Reader Comments, which I value greatly, also exploded.

The flood of new free subscribers fed my ego and the $192 boost in “annualized revenue” brought my checking account back into the black.

However, what really made me feel like Alabama’s Tua Tongolovia had just completed a 40-yard TD pass to Devonta Smith (on 3rd-and-26) in overtime of the national championship game against Georgia in 2017 … is that this column seems to support my hypothesis that someone really has been messing with my Substack metrics to suppress my reach and take money out of my pocket.

It seems to me I was right all the time.

If people, or the algorithms, would just leave me alone and go back to the 2023 Status Quo, my Substack newsletter would be doing just fine and no readers would have to read any more “curious-metrics-on-Substack” articles.

***

While one should always celebrate life’s memorable victories, a little voice in my head did tell me, “This won’t last, Bill” … and it didn’t.

My “Logic, Jim” story - per official Substack metrics - was read by approximately 1,500 current subscribers and 1,500 non-subscribers.

For business-growth purposes, “the non-subscribers” have always been my “target audience” and this particular pool of non-subscribers produced one new free subscriber.

Here’s what I think is really happening (Part 2) ….

At the moment, my working hypothesis is that my total reader metrics are probably as dubious as Covid “case numbers” and the CPI’s official inflation rate.

It’s possible the vast majority of my target market - non-subscribers - are bots or made up out of thin air, which might explain why these readers are so different than Dr. Nass’s (real, live, human being) readers and never hit the subscribe button.

Still, the Titanic hasn’t gone completely under water and this case study (plate appearance) at least suggests that it might be possible for the Home Team to rally from a big deficit and slay Team Narrative Controllers.

In Conclusion …

When I was in the minors before I got called up to The Show, I once had a batting coach who gave me a great piece of advice.

“Keep swinging, Kid,” he told me. “You’ve got promise; don’t let any of the doubters stomp on your enthusiasm.”

Which became one of my Maxims or, these days, my guiding philosophy of life: “Post while you still can.”

Sometimes in life and even on Substack, you swing, look up, flip your bat toward the dugout and say, “Touch ‘em all, baby.”

Writer gratuities via Ko-Fi.

I don’t consider myself a genius, but I do try to use the same logic or deductive reasoning that authentic geniuses use in their thinking.

One talent real geniuses possess is they can take one observable fact and then proceed to formulate dozens of other conclusions that likely flow from said observation or one “known truth.”

In layman’s terms, such thinkers conclude: “If A is true, it follows logically that B, C, D and E must also be true.”

This is the exact same mental exercise I’ve employed in my research, thinking and writing on my “early spread” hypothesis.

Early on in my investigative journalism and research, I concluded that many people had contacted a novel coronavirus before the authorities said was possible.

This, in fact, must have qualified as a maverick/contrarian conclusion (although I think millions of people probably agree with me that this was the case … or at least was possible).

However, my conclusion that “some significant but unknown number of people had early cases of Covid” is not really a sinister or potentially “thermo-nuclear” conclusion by itself. The truly seismic (and I believe, “logical”) conclusions flow from the many other conclusions that must be true if this simple observation is, in fact, true.

In today’s dispatch, I’m going to list key conclusions that flow from one simple observation or belief. It is these firmly-held beliefs that, in turn, scare the daylights out of me when thinking about what must be the true character of our world or my assessment of the “leaders” who rule over us.

First simple observation: “Early spread” happened and was real.

(Note: As this essay reveals, I also use the Socratic Method to inform my thinking - thus the questions I have interspersed throughout today’s article) …

If this observation is true, what else must be true (or is probably true)?

For starters …

• Some important people must have known this and, for some reason(s), didn’t want the public to know this.

• Also, nobody (who matters) seriously investigated this possibility.

• Furthermore, a coordinated effort must have been utilized to conceal or dismiss/discredit credible evidence of early spread.

• And this: There must be a reason(s) that important truth-seeking organizations have not pursued this line of investigation.

What would/might these reasons be?

And:

What is/was the “authorized” conclusion from “origins investigations?”

Answers:

• Covid started in Wuhan, China.

• Covid was a naturally-occurring virus that “jumped species” from bats.

• (This, IMO, is very important): Covid, per the experts, did NOT start from any “gain-of-function” experiments or research.

• “Community spread” of this virus commenced in December 2019 in Wuhan, China.

This, by logic, would mean that:

• Nobody anywhere in the world who experienced Covid symptoms before mid-December 2019 could possibly have had Covid.

***

But what if all of these conclusions - usually couched as “settled science” - aren’t true?

Another good question IMO:

Why would “trusted” officials promulgate and disseminate false narratives?

One might also ask this question: Why does anyone who is covering-up something important … lie?

Or:

Would officials, or any important watchdog organization, actually participate in a conspiracy to conceal the truth from the public?

Editorial comment: Many citizens believe the answer to the above question is yes, they might lie. However, for some strange reason, most people in the world didn’t or don’t think such experts and authorities (people with great power and much to lose if they were exposed as brazen liars) would lie about the true origins of Covid.

This is another common-sense question: Why was it so important to Fauci and other important and prestigious scientists to promote the natural origins theory?

This answer, at least to myself, seems pretty obvious: Because they didn’t want the Science Industrial Establishment (or the U.S. Government) to be implicated in any “Crime of the Century” or “Crime Against Humanity.”

(Please see Bonus Content in today’s Reader Comment for text confirming the importance of popular writers cross-posting another author’s articles. Thank you, Dr. Nass!)

Share

The key take-away from the Proximal Origins Theory (read: cover-up) is that bats caused the Covid pandemic.

However, it should be noted (and hasn’t been) that this narrative also stipulates (as “settled science) that virus spread did not begin until mid-December 2019.

Fauci and his co-conspirators thus precluded/prevented any investigation into earlier cases of Covid. In effect, they set the birthdate of Covid or the “timeline” of when virus spread actually commenced, meaning the official Covid timeline has probably always been bogus …. And probably intentionally so.

I’ve always thought this is a good question: Would real scientists or investigative journalists be interested in dating the real start date of “virus spread?”

My answer: Yes they would.

Next question: Did such further credible and genuine investigations actually ensue?

My answer: No they didn’t.

Question: Why did this (credible origins’ investigations) NOT happen?

I can think of only four possible answers:

One, the belief every important truth-seeking person or organization will - and should - always accept the conclusions of the perceived experts.

(This, at least to myself, would be an extremely disturbing conclusion and would, in fact, mean the Scientific Method should NOT be utilized. That is, this would mean “real science” is, for all intents and purposes, dead.)

Two, most members of the public lack the intelligence to conclude that it’s at least possible trusted authorities might be wrong or, perhaps, lying.

(This would also be an extremely disturbing conclusion as it suggests the IQ of the vast majority of world citizens is too low to employ or utilize basic logic and deductive reasoning).

Three, this take-away, in turn, suggests that the “Powers that Be” know they can get away with lies and massive frauds because they know the population is effectively obtuse or incapable of exposing sinister plots … which would be yet another disturbing conclusion.

The fourth possibility is that “leaders” throughout the world know (or suspect) the official narrative(s) is false, but don’t care and will not do anything to expose this truth.

(This conclusion, at least to myself, would also be “beyond disturbing” and even suggest the existence of true evil … or that the number of evil people is much greater than most citizens previously understood.)

Another conclusion flowing from my Early-Spread Research:

Everyone (who matters) somehow all knew that “early spread” was a taboo subject of inquiry.

Addendum aside: The same people and “truth-seeking” organizations intuitively understand that the “embalmers’ clots” phenomena is another taboo subject to expose or investigate … which I mention only to make the point that there are countless taboo subjects that everyone who matters knows cannot be investigated and then, perhaps, confirmed.

I have also concluded that if officials know they can get away with one brazen lie or crime (which they now do), this must make them supremely confident they can get away with other lies and crimes, which is certainly not a positive precedent for mankind.

(To channel Don Henley: “Are you with me so far?” Do you see where I am going with all these New Abnormal Maxims - Maybe we can check out from this hotel, but we can never leave.)

Other conclusions:

Many people likely experienced early Covid or were infected by the virus that causes the symptoms and clinical presentation of Covid-19.

This was NOT a small number of people.

Unusually contagious viruses make larger numbers of people sick or symptomatic. (This, IMO, probably explains why 2,750 more U.S. schools closed “due to illness” in the months before official Covid compared to a previous five-year-average.)

Viruses that are limited, “isolated” or aren’t spreading widely don’t make people in all 50 U.S. states sick in a time period of several months.

Per my research, people who had early Covid symptoms and later tested positive for Covid antibodies had not recently been to China.

… Which quickly led me to conclude: Any virus spread among people who had Covid symptoms or later tested positive for Covid via antibody tests did NOT trace back to any outbreak in Wuhan, China.

Key (explosive) Take-away/conclusion:

Epidemiologists and public health officials did NOT note large numbers of “Covid deaths” until after mid-March 2020.

This, by logic, would mean that if the novel coronavirus was spreading across America and other countries that this virus was not uniquely or conspicuously “deadly” in its first four to eight months of spread.

One can also observe that this particular novel virus become supremely deadly only after lockdowns and NPIs were implemented to slow or stop spread.

Thus, it seems that lockdowns intended to prevent Covid cases and deaths somehow produced the exact opposite result.

Based on one simple observation dealing with evidence of Early Spread, it seems to me that it’s very possible that something else besides the virus must explain the hundreds of thousands of Spring 2020 “Covid deaths.”

Conclusion:

Via logic involving the process of elimination, the iatrogenic protocols used in hospitals and nursing homes must have caused the vast majority of deaths that were falsely labeled “Covid deaths.”

Also:

If many people people (probably tens of millions) had already contracted a novel virus by late February 2020, this would mean that many millions of people must have already acquired natural immunity.

Furthermore, if large numbers of people already had natural immunity and the virus was not deadly to 99.8 percent of the people who might contract it, there was absolutely no need for a rushed experimental “vaccine” that would allegedly prevent new infections and stop new deaths.

Also, while I’m no virologist, I’m confident that natural immunity is superior to any mRNA gene therapy in preventing medical cases.

“Confirmation” of early spread would confirm that Covid was nothing for the public to panic about and that the virus had, almost certainly, peaked and started to ebb by the time lockdowns were mandated in mid-March 2020.

From one simple observation - early spread is real and happened - I thus, quickly, concluded that …

• Officials must have known this and covered this up.

• The bat origins story must be a lie.

• If natural origins was a lie, this leaves only non-natural origins as the culprit.

• No person in government (or the Deep State) would want the public to know they were responsible for a pandemic, which would provide “possible motive” for a vast cover-up.

• Even if the novel coronavirus wasn’t overly deadly, a novel virus produced in a lab via “gain-of-function” research still killed a not-insignificant number of people and made many millions of people very sick.

• The December (or later November 2019) origins birthday was clearly a lie.

• The new Iatrogenic protocols - which enriched hospitals around the country - were required/necessary to produce the huge number of deaths that “confirmed” the “deadly virus” narrative.

• The fraudulent PCR tests explain the massive number of “cases.”

• The public should also also now know why large number of people couldn’t get a PCR test until latter March 2020 - and why only people who had been to China got the few tests that were administered.

• Censorship, reach-suppression efforts and bullying/fear tactics were intended to silence or mute the influence of people who could use basic and simple logic.

• The Covid “vaccines” caused millions of more deaths and adverse events than this respiratory virus did, which would mean “bats” didn’t kill millions of world inhabitants … democide did.

Other Key Conclusions from my Conclusions Column …

None of the above would have happened if the public simply knew that tens of millions of people had already been infected by this virus by the time authorities conspired to make everyone panic over a pandemic that was NOT “deadly” for the first seven or so months of its spread.

But this is not the most maddening or sinister interpretation that flows from my hypothesis that evidence of early spread was intentionally concealed from the public.

The most sinister conclusion I quickly formed is that every important truth-seeking organization in the world must be completely captured.

Nobody (who matters) cares about the truth and everyone who does matter ensured such a brazen crime against humanity could be pulled off.

Per logic, I don’t know what other conclusions I could make.

I do know citizens like myself are not supposed to reach these conclusions, but these conclusions - almost by process of elimination - are what they are.

The other possibility is that everything happened exactly like the experts said and our trusted authorities have been completely transparent and honest and have never lied about anything related to Covid.

While, like Mr. Spock, I’ve tried to use logic, I know logic and critical thinking are frowned upon by the world’s real rulers, no longer matter and/or make independent thinkers like myself a target or threat.

Which, if true, would also be a conclusion I find terrifying.

Writer gratuities via Ko-Fi.

Following my own advice to “post while you still can,” I might as well go ahead and publish a piece where I summarize what I think really happened with Covid. (I decided to make my version of events a little more colorful than a paper you might read in The Lancet.)

In roughly chronological order …

Years before official Covid, U.S. “mad scientists” probably led by Ralph Baric succeeded in creating a virus that was more infective and contagious. (This would be “gain-of-function” research, the amazing breakthrough where scientists try to make scary natural pathogens much more scary.)

Years before official Covid, specially-trained commandos of elite Deep State units began changing laws and regulations which made it easier/possible to declare a pandemic.

To the relief of everyone, conscientious public servants and freedom fighters in the Military Industrial Complex could now fully control the world-saving response to all existential threats to humanity (not just Global Warming).

Years before official Covid, people in the know on “the real state of the economy” understood and, no doubt stressed-out over, the possibility an economic crisis could spiral out of control, which could jeopardize the Establishment’s continued rule and control of America and thus the world.

“Someone” or some group of people decided they needed to create one crisis to camouflage (and/or delay) another crisis that was gurgling like lava just below the surface.

According to the Masters of the Universe, the world needed digital ID - and later digital currency - to keep the masses from going for their pitchforks and/or to keep them from revolting and/or to keep them mollified via direct deposits of digital incomes.

Per my theory, it was probably agreed that “Vaccine passports” or digital medical IDs would make it easier for the world’s real rulers to roll out much-needed future “digital solutions.”

Also, trillions of dollars of “stimulus” injected into the financial system would buy the world’s real rulers extra time (aka “kicking the can down the road”) and, as a side benefit, make many billionaires multi-billionaires.

More deadly vaccines would, over time, kill millions of people prematurely which would mean, in the future, pension funds had to pay out less money to retirees.

Also, given that the same vaccine would decrease fertility and reduce birth rates, in the future, this would result in fewer citizens, citizens who would not spend most of their lives drawing welfare or taking up space in public school classrooms.

Fewer people on the planet would also make future unemployment rates lower than they otherwise would have been (plus, plotters probably agreed, “AI can perform those jobs anyway.”)

The trillions of dollars in stimulus money produced by the Magic Printing Press would also ensure the stock market continued to soar.

(One of the great silver linings of the Covid Pandemic is that economists now know that Bubonic Plagues - as well as global wars - are, in fact, bullish for investors - at least for those who invest in the same companies BlackRock does).

Significantly, the Dow soaring well above 50,000 ensures the pension and retirement funds generate enough dividends and capital gains to ensure that the Peon and Proletariat Classes could keep getting their pensions (and keep watching the Hunger Games … check that, the World Cup).

Then ...

Someone proposed, “Let’s stage a pandemic.”

To which, all the right people squinted their eyes in thought, bit their lips in deep contemplation, twiddled their fingers on their desk tops and then said … “Okay.”

The plotters then ramped up narrative-control operations, telling everyone who would listen that a deadly pandemic was inevitable … but nobody should worry too much as the world’s trusted experts were on top of this possibility and, if this did happen, they already had their rejoinder ready: “We’ve got a vaccine for that.”

***

Someone also realized the masses might not go along with a pandemic that might be perceived as contrived or embellished. Or, the world still had a few intelligent people, some of whom would probably call-out any ruse.

“Such people will have to be censored and these people will have to be shamed into silence,” someone must have replied.

Everyone who matters agreed with this statement and The Censorship Industrial Complex was conceived, funded, staffed and sprung into action.

To assign everyone their designated roles, multiple table-top planning retreats were scheduled and held with all the right people attending and making valuable contributions.

“If the entire world isn’t going to be wiped out, we all have to do our part,” said the Gates-funded facilitator of Event 201: “Do I hear a second?”

“Second.”

“Thus, be it resolved.”

Before the group broke for cocktails, the Narrative had been written and everyone knew they should buy Moderna and Pfizer stock the next day.

As planners realized some trouble-making scientists would probably demand “proof of virus,” they knew they had to use a real virus, which they happened to have thanks to Dr. Baric and the generous financial support of Dr. Fauci’s NIH and American tax-payers.

***

Planners also knew a real “deadly” virus could kill them so they, first, tested the “gain of function” pathogen to make sure it wasn’t really super-deadly.

On some unknown date, someone must have said:

“Start releasing the virus,”… which is one of history’s most significant events and qualifies as the real birth of Covid.

Regarding my “early spread” evidence, I don’t know who “Case Zero” is or was. (I do know it wasn’t Mayor Melham nor was it Sung Si, the vendor who ran the ferret booth at the Wuhan Live Market in mid-December 2019.)

(It should be noted it’s possible there never was a novel virus at all, which, if true, would make the entire Covid Production even more impressive.)

Per the Pandemic Script, the cover story was that the virus would, at some future date, be “discovered” in China and all would agree that it had “jumped species” from Chinese bats - the story’s real villain.

The key part of the script …

The key to the entire operation was the creation and rapid approval of a new diagnostic test - a PCR test - that would, like magic, create hundreds of millions of “cases.”

In a departure from the norm, a person with this new disease didn’t have to exhibit any symptoms at all.

As one leader of one African nation later said, the PCR test would identify positives in door knobs, hubcaps, mangos and goats, which - for the purposes of the plotters - was perfect.

For the plan to be smoothly executed, it was important that the PCR test not be widely administered in America until latter March 2020 (which would preclude the possibility of any “confirmed early cases.”)

Also, I am confident that one planner piped up and said, “Let’s only test people who have recently been to China.”

To which all those in attendance probably replied: “Great idea, Jane.”

Except for the participant who was the Director of China’s version of the CDC. Per my imagination, this man probably said (in Mandarin, through a translator): “Hey, wait a damn minute.”

***

The novel virus also had to be perceived as being 10 to 100 times more deadly than the common flu and create shocking numbers of deaths so, at some point, huge numbers of deaths had to be observed somewhere.

One significant outbreak created (supposedly) three to 10 deaths of geriatric cruise enthusiasts. The first region of a nation to experience a deadly outbreak was Northern Italy. (Oddly, China - birthplace of the Plague - recorded very few deaths) … but beginning in the last 10 days of March 2020 in New York City, tens of thousands of people began to suddenly die from a disease that was now called Hey-19 (I mean Covid-19).

In late January 2020, one Chinese man apparently just fell-out dead on a Wuhan sidewalk, an event that happened to be captured by a photographer from Reuters, an image that was instantly disseminated around the world, causing every person who saw this picture to exclaim, “Oh, sh*t.”

Nobody advertised these component parts of the plan …

The use of ventilators, remdesivir, morphine, Midazolam; cutting the prescriptions of antibiotics in half; dehydration and starvation; patient panic; isolating patients - who could not be protected from doctors by their loved ones, and codes that attributed Covid mortality to people who died from motorcycle accidents … as well as a project to protect the public from certain medicines that were really “horse paste” …. combined to produce the all-important and shocking death figures … as did billions of dollars in payouts to hospital systems who followed the CDC’s life-saving protocols.

Lockdowns, masking and 75 other Non-Pharmaceutical Interventions further conditioned the masses to follow the guidance of their rulers.

Scientists, doctors and pundits who said, “something is off here” and questioned the origins narrative or the necessity of the unprecedented NPIs were censored, de-platformed, fired and/or their licenses revoked.

***

In China, officials protested that their nation had been framed and made into a Patsy for causing Covid, but nobody believed them and these arguments weren’t published by the Trusted News Initiative.

Still, in late January 2020, China imposed the world’s most draconian lockdowns in an effort to “stop spread,” which makes one wonder if the Chinese were also obtuse enough to think virus spread had just started.

Horse-out-of-the-barn or not, these proactive virus mitigation tools were held out as the model for the rest of the world and, per the script, the mantra became “lockdown until the vaccines save us all.”

(I should perhaps note that binge watching old TV series set viewing records for Netflix and I finally watched “Mad Men,” “The Wire” and “The Sopranos,” which I was happy to learn are not over-rated.)

In America, Anthony Fauci became the greatest national hero since George Washington and nurses and doctors who were killing tens of thousands of patients were feted as another group of national heroes.

Skip to a few scenes involving me …

Beginning in April 2020, I started saying or suggesting that the virus might have originated from an American lab and been circulating for many months before its announcement.

In late May 2020, I finished an article where I provided evidence of 15 Americans who had Covid in November and December 2019. I emailed my article to approximately 30 news organizations, none of which published my article.

This is also the approximate time I coined my first two New Abnormal Maxims:

“Every important truth-seeking organization in the world is completely captured.”

And:

“Authorities will never investigate that which they don’t want to confirm.”

Later in 2020, my Facebook account was suspended for the first of three times, prompting me to utter a few expletives I’ll delete, ultimately causing me to start a Substack newsletter.

Back to the rest of the world …

With “warp-speed,” American scientists created several vaccines that safety trials confirmed were 95 percent effective and 100-percent safe.

Most citizens lined up to get these shots, which were mandatory for approximately half of the world’s employees.

When more people (allegedly) “died from Covid” in the second year of the pandemic, these deaths were blamed on the “unvaccinated folks.”

There was no need to investigate possible early cases as the experts said there were no early cases …. just like today, the same experts say there are no embalmers’ clots, which beget the birth of another Bill Rice, Jr. Maxim:

“Never trust the experts.”

Once enough vaccinated folks caught Covid or Rebound Covid, officials explained that the “vaccines” were only intended to prevent death and severe cases.

When a spike in all-cause deaths occurred in vaccinated folks, only people who found articles in the alternative media learned this or were disturbed by this.

Also, celebrities who were being killed or harmed by the shots issued press releases thanking the Pharmaceutical Companies that were killing or injuring them.

After five years and the roll-out of seven or eight Covid boosters, most Americans quit getting their recommended Covid shots but half the country still gets their mRNA flu shots, which still don’t prevent the flu and probably cause it.

And I guess everybody knows the rest of the story from here …

Epilogue …

I’m still publishing away on Substack, where I am now setting records for lost subscribers. (See “Bonus Content” in today’s Reader Comments).

I never got invited to be a guest on Joe Rogan or one of Tucker Carlson’s podcasts and Sen. Paul or Sen. Johnson never asked me to testify in front of a Congressional Committee investigating the real birth date of Covid.

I still don’t know what person or persons said “release the virus” and no mainstream news organization has ever investigated any possible early cases.

Officials did try to implement digital vaccine passports but that trial balloon got shot down by a kid with a bb gun.

While the response to “Covid” might have delayed an economic or financial calamity, my strong hunch is that the effort to kick any financial crisis down the road will just make the inevitable meltdown more horrific.

While many people have offered educated guesses, nobody knows for sure who green-lit the Pandemic of the Century.

Whoever it was is still in power and, no doubt, is working on details of the next crisis, which will take our minds off the real crisis, which I still think is an economic catastrophe.

As we learned in Covid, most people don’t want to know the truth so these people won’t be overly upset when the accomplices in the next Crime of the Century again escape Scott Free.

For my part, I’ll keep posting while I still can (and keep adding this little red button at the bottom of my articles).

Subscribe now

Writer gratuities via Ko-Fi.

Two examples of recent reader comments germane to today’s dispatch:

Mary: I did not see a comment from you on the post by Christine. I tried twice to reply to that post but it did not register.

csofand: Me either Mary.

***

For all the articles I’ve posted about “curious trends on Substack,” I’ve yet to identify the main reasons this (possible) nefarious activity disturbs and angers me … tremendously. Today, I provide several of these reasons, which might make a few of my remaining readers better understand my keen interest in this subject and this “trend change.”

For purposes of this article, I assume the “trend reversals” I’ve observed on my Substack newsletter are not universal nor “organic” changes which have affected all Sustack content creators roughly the same. Instead, I assume these changes must have been intentional, have been orchestrated for a reason(s) and my newsletter has likely been identified as a “threat” and thus has been specifically targeted.

IMO, these reasons are designed to thwart the reach and influence of my articles and Notes. I will start with this point …

… These changes have caused significant financial harm to myself and my family.

For four years, producing this Substack newsletter has been my full-time job and the only source of revenue I derive for our family. (The vast majority of family income comes from my wife’s teacher’s salary).

As only I (and Substack/Stripe) would know, my monthly revenue stream has plummeted (from about $1,200 net income/month to now about $250/month).

Unknown is how much my Substack income might have been by now - or in the future - if my newsletter (IMO) had not been “targeted” for reach and revenue-suppression operations … or if such striking metric changes had not occurred.

To be clear, I can’t definitively “prove” my subscription (and Ko-fi “gratuity”) income is being adversely affected.

However, if this is happening, such a “conspiracy,” IMO, would qualify as an unfair trade practice and must violate myriad criminal statutes as well as constitute grounds for a legitimate civil lawsuit, qualifying me (and probably many other potential plaintiffs for compensatory and punitive damages).

(Share Request: To my fellow content providers, please share with others you think might be interested in this subject.)

Share

With this piece, I don’t want to bore readers with specific examples of my own changing metrics. However, for quick illustration purposes, I simply note that for the first 13 months of my Substack newsletter, I was averaging adding 16.5 new paid subscribers every month.

In the past 12 months, I have averaged losing 3.2 new paid subscribers per month, with this key metric declining from 271 to 232 - a loss of 39 net paid subscribers or a decrease of 14.4 percent. (My peak paid subscription number was 310 on September 7, 2024 - 22 months ago.)

According to Substack’s “Gross Annualized Revenue” metric, in the past 12 months my annual revenue has declined by “only” 13.1 percent. However, per my cash-flow accounting, the income deposited into my bank account in recent months has decreased by approximately 76 percent (from $1,200 to $250).

Significantly, the pace of lost subscribers (paid and free) is accelerating as I lost five paid subscribers in the past 30 days

For the first 12 months of this newsletter, I previously added, on average, 378 total subscribers every month. In recent months, I’ve been losing approximately three to five total subscribers every day.

As I’ve noted in previous “curious metrics” articles, the vast majority of my new articles now produce produce zero subscribers when, for the first two years of my newsletter, my articles produced, on average, at least 14 new subscribers every time I hit “send.”

I know this might come across as whining …

Some readers have politely informed me that readers don’t care about “metrics” stories, which I acknowledge might come across as whining. While some readers hold this opinion, this POV wasn’t always the case as the story that produced my record number of new paid subscribers (41) was my first big story on “curious trends on Substack.” So … go figure.

(For purposes of providing a basis of comparison between “then and now,” readers might click on this link and note that this particular story - published 28 months ago - produced 1,158 “likes,” and 657 Reader Comments in addition to netting me, over the ensuing 10 days, 41 new paid subscribers and 251 free subscribers.)

My working hypothesis is that “someone” has applied various unknown algorithms that have dramatically changed my key Substack metrics of paid-subscribers-generated, total subscribers, Page Views and number of “likes” and Reader Comments.

Also, as mentioned, it’s impossible to know how many total and paid subscribers I might have today (and in the future) if these changes had not occurred. My working theory is that my key Substack metrics would have continued to grow - and, with it, my income.

Per my estimate or belief, in the last two years stark changes in my Substack metrics have probably cost me, in the aggregate, tens of thousands of dollars, and perhaps a figure that would approach $100,000 by next fall (when, at one time, I was pacing to have 1,000 paid subscribers).

A better way to frame sentiments that might be labeled as “sour grapes” or “whining” might be to ask readers: “Would you be agitated if you thought someone had effectively “stolen,” say, $35,000 from you?

My level of frustration or sense that illegal or fraudulent mechanisms are being used to harm certain authors might not exist if the same metric trends were common across all Substack authors.

However, as I have documented ad nauseam, it is clear that more liberal authors - those more likely to defend the authorized narratives - are not experiencing the same dramatic trend reversals. Indeed, large numbers of Substack authors are experiencing the same impressive growth rates I once experienced, but even more so.

Based on analyzing my own metrics and the published numbers of other Substack authors, I have also reached the firm conclusion that any censorship or reach-suppression efforts seem to be different for different authors.

Why is always the best question …

If my reach-suppression hypothesis is accurate (or, at least for some authors, is occurring), the next obvious question would be why is this occurring.

To myself, the most likely reason would be that certain entities and powerful organizations are determined to suppress the reach of certain authors, especially those who focus on potentially “thermo-nuclear” or taboo topics that might threaten the Powers that Be or the “authorized” narrative(s).

IMO, this conclusion jibes with common sense and, as we move forward in our New Abnormal times, suggests that narrative-control operations will no doubt remain significant and will likely even intensify.

I’ve also concluded that those engaged in different varieties and levels of censorship would not have to focus on every potential influencer, but would instead likely focus their efforts on those they believe have the greatest potential to expose their past nefarious deeds and thwart their future projects.

If this theory is true, and I have been placed high on any “threat” list, my newsletter might receive more extreme counter-measures to ensure my theories and articles don’t reach a wider audience.

(The evidence that numerous government entities, NGOs, fact-checking organizations and corporate “news” organizations have conspired to do just this in the past is undeniable.)

Et tu, Substack?

One potentially-explosive allegation - or possibility - I keep raising is that such reach-suppression operations are now, very possibly, being employed on Substack.

If proven (which I doubt it ever will be), this change would be particularly disconcerting to champions of authentic free speech as, for years, Substack was clearly viewed, correctly, as a beacon of free speech and the place citizen journalists - by default - flocked to to avoid censorship.

IMO, efforts to suppress the reach of authors like myself - and amplify the reach of people who rarely agree with people like myself - have become far more sophisticated, ingenious/devious and almost impossible to “prove.”

If someone was somehow able to “prove” that the reach of their Substack newsletter has been suppressed, an obvious conclusion would be that such tools were not being employed to thwart or harm just one “contrarian” author.

If more people realized how many people had been surreptitiously targeted and negatively affected, the public might better realize the scope and scale of these Orwellian activities and know for a fact such operations had not been abandoned and, indeed, seem to have expanded to include new threats … of which Substack might be considered the most conspicuous potential threat.

***

As always, censorship programs have two goals: To prevent the exposure of past crimes and to make it easier to implement future “reforms” which will increase the control of the State or their oligarch/Deep State partners.

Such disclosures would suggest that the Powers that Be are more determined than ever to implement even more draconian and liberty-stealing initiatives in the future.

That is, greater awareness of possible “shadow censorship” projects on Substack should not be viewed as an insignificant development. This, IMO, would, qualify as an extremely ominous development.

Three areas of focus that might make my newsletter stand out and thus be viewed as a ‘threat’

One question I’ve asked myself is what might make my Substack different than other Substacks, even those of my fellow “Covid Contrarians.”

I’ve already outlined one of these areas - my focus on possible “funny business” on Substack itself. While other authors have expressed similar concerns, few Substack colleagues have devoted as many column inches to analyzing or exploring this possibility as I have.

The subject that probably first put me on the Substack map was my focus on “early spread,” which I continue to believe could be a thermo-nuclear revelation … if this hypothesis was ever definitively “confirmed” and then fully understood by large swaths of the public.

On a planet with approximately 8 billon inhabitants, I am confident no other writer has written more about this topic than I have (thus, I am “different” than almost all of my colleagues … at least as it involves my persistent efforts to highlighting these two “taboo” issues.)

Even today, the significance of early spread is difficult for most citizens to grasp or appreciate. However, if people realized that tens of millions of global citizens had already been infected by a novel coronavirus by the late fall of 2019 - with no increase in all-cause deaths - the entire narrative on the “deadly” virus would be completely different.

People might realize that everything they were told about this pandemic - and then the shots they were told they had to get to save their own life and the lives of millions of others - was wrong or a lie and that key officials must have known this all along.

(As a citizen journalist, my primary goal is to discredit and debunk bogus experts, who I believe cause far more harm than they prevent. My ultimate and most ambitious goal is to play a small role in creating a massive purge of obtuse or corrupt “leaders,” a result which, IMO, would make possible a much brighter future.)

Embalmers’ clots

I’ve also written probably 25 articles on the embalmers’ clots phenomena and referenced them in probably 500 posts at other sites.

I wouldn’t say I have written more about the embalmers’ clots than any other Substack author, but if Substack consists of 30,000 content creators, I’m probably in the top 1 percent of the top 1 percent who has tried to raise awareness of this potential scandal.

While it’s more challenging to explain the significance of “early spread” to the disinterested layman, my 10-year-old son could instantly comprehend the significance of the embalmers’ clots simply by looking at a few photos of actual “clots.”

As such, this subject continues to be the world’s most likely thermonuclear truth bomb - that is, if it ever detonated, which, apparently, it never will.

Only one reason explains why billions of people are not already outraged by our trusted officials’ refusal to investigate this “public health” nightmare. That reason: Mind-boggling levels of coordinated censorship.

In my opinion, the people and organizations who devise and implement censorship programs have figured out who poses the greatest threat to their continued rule and then have targeted these specific people.

As it turns out, there’s no need to censor, say, Robert Reich or Heather Cox Richardson; in fact, the reach of these influencers is no doubt artificially inflated.

However, even a “small-time” freelance journalist like myself might be identified as a threat to continued control of the world’s “real rulers” - not because of the number of readers I had on a certain date, but because of the number of readers I might reach if my audience continued to grow, something which, of course, did not happen.

In Conclusion …

IMO, the world’s growing number of censorship advocates obviously pay attention to circulation numbers of different authors or pundits. However, of more interest to them might be a project to identify the subjects these authors focus on.

Over the past two days, my subscriber Freedom Fox and I exchanged emails on today’s subject. FWIW, Freedom Fox agrees with my premise/hypothesis and is one of a not insignificant number of readers who has told me he’s detected ways that my newsletter seems to have been targeted for more proactive reach-suppression activities.

Freedom Fox says one goal of shadow-censors is to make sure authors like ourselves are, effectively, “speaking to an empty room.” (Another metaphor would be that all “contrarian” authors have effectively been herded into one insignificant corral.)

In previous dispatches, I’ve pointed out that one of the main goals of my articles is to simply point out significant changes (from past “norms”) that have occurred. Employing the Socratic Method, I then ask myself why these changes must/might have occurred.

One obvious and dramatic change I’ve observed involves the metrics of my own Substack newsletter. IMO, my metrics changed - at least in part - because of the subjects I write about.

As I told Freedom Fox, it also wouldn’t surprise me if psy-op or narrative controllers employ sophisticated assessments to perform psychological profiles on certain writers or pundits who might possess the character and communication skills to more effectively challenge scandalous narratives and, perhaps, galvanize larger numbers of citizens.

“This person is a greater potential threat than other writers,” might be one conclusion such sinister agents reach.

Or, it’s possible I am completely off base and am just another citizen who has been consumed by paranoia and become a believer in non-existent conspiracies.

However, I would like to conclude by stating it’s not paranoia if someone really is out to get you.

***

Note:

In today’s Reader Comments, I will add a flurry of “Bonus Content.” The first comment explains my interest in today’s Comment Section. Readers are invited to opine on whether these comments might qualify as good or interesting added value to them.

Writer gratuities via Ko-Fi.

Writing a story about my “cousin,” Courteney Cox, who I’ve actually never met, made me start thinking about all of the famous people I have met in my life.

Since I love lists and this might impress my kids one day, I’m going to go ahead and name these people.

I could be wrong, but my “brushes-with-famous-people” list is probably longer than similar lists many people reading this could also compile, which makes me feel my life - perhaps semi well-lived at certain points - might include one somewhat novel feature.

That is, whenever I start to feel a little blue and and might be beating myself up because I never became rich and famous, I remind myself, “Bill, you are friends with the stars; cut yourself some slack …”

I should explain that I met most of these famous or well-known people because, for much of my adult life, I have been a journalist. Even a journalist working for small community newspapers has the opportunity to meet a surprisingly large number of well-known or semi-famous people due to story assignments.

While some of these interactions lasted an hour or longer, other meet-and-greets might have spanned, say, 5 to 30 seconds … but, still, I did talk to these people.

A quick example …

Near the top of my list is my conversation with the lead singer of the Go Go’s - Belinda Carlisle. I met Belinda in the basement of the University of Alabama Sigma Nu house in 1983 (or ’84) after Belinda dropped by after a concert in Tuscaloosa.

At the time, I was a pledge. By rule, “new boys” had to carry a cigarette lighter in our pockets. (The thought was that pledges, as aspiring gentlemen, could light a cigarette for comely co-eds who might appreciate such chivalrous gestures.)

While waiting in the keg line, I looked to my left and, lo and behold, there was Belinda Carlisle, who had just pulled a cigarette out of her purse.

A good New Boy, I quickly lit Miss Carlisle’s fag, adding: “Here you go.”

To which Belinda replied, “Thank you.”

To which I replied, “You’re welcome.”

This event thus qualifies as a legitimate conversation with a person who was definitely famous.

***

I also met a a large number of famous former Alabama football greats through my late father, who played football for the Crimson Tide and two famous people because my great aunt was the office manger for a U.S. Congressman.

I also visited with several famous people as Mike Amos’s co-host on “Today in L.A.” (Mike himself is definitely famous in our neck of the woods). I got to meet a couple of well-known people because I publish two Substack newsletters and was, for a year, a fellow of the Brownstone Institute.

Several of my “brushes with greatness” were actually phone conversations and I technically didn’t meet the famous person in person. Some of these celebrities are/were known throughout the country (and world) and others are just Alabama or local celebrities.

I added a few anecdotes to add flavor and memorable details to my list column and, for my “national” newsletter deleted the names of people who might only be famous in Alabama or Pike County.

Musicians:

Belinda Carlisle

Hank Williams, Jr. (Bocephus) - who, I think, still owns a hunting lodge on the border of Pike and Bullock County. I once got to watch my buddy Bocephus record an album at the Almeria Social Club just outside of Pike County.

Merle Kilgore, Hank’s manager, who I later learned also co-wrote the classic country song “Ring of Fire.”

Lee Greenwood - Any person who is proud to be an American should certainly be proud of meeting Lee Greenwood.

David Allen Coe - Before DAC’s show at Harvey’s in Troy, his roadies threw me off the stage for taking photos of the crowd from said stage. I was a better athlete back then and, like a cat, landed on my feet.

Rudy Vallée - a crooner, actor and radio personality who was a “teen idol” in my grandparents’ generation. I met a much older Vallée when I was 9 years old at an officer’s club at a military base outside of Washington D.C. on a trip to visit my great aunt, who was office manager for Cong. Bill Nichols (who himself was fairly famous).

Alabama football coaches, athletes and administrators …

Paul “Bear” Bryant

Nick Saban

Gene Stallings

Ray Perkins

Mal Moore - former Alabama athletic director and long-time UA assistant coach (teammate of my late father’s).

Bill Battle - another teammate of Dad’s - former Alabama athletic director and former head coach of Tennessee. Founded Collegiate Licensing Company, America’s leading sports licensing company.

Lee Roy Jordan - Alabama and Dallas Cowboys great.

Johnny Musso - Alabama running back in the early 70s who once gave me his chin strap after a game when I was 6-years-old.

Golfer Jerry Pate, U.S. Open and U.S. Amateur champion. Pate later became a golf course architect. I interviewed Jerry while he was driving in a cart around Montgomery Country Club’s course, which he was re-designing.

Basketball coaches …

Wimp Sanderson

C.M. Newton

I’ve also met plenty of Auburn greats:

Coach Pat Dye - My late father actually got Coach Dye his first college coaching job … at Alabama, a random event that might have later changed sports history in our state.

Coach Terry Bowden - who I first met when he was head coach at Samford. (As many will confirm, Coach Bowden will chit-chat … for hours … with anyone.)

Pat Sullivan, former Auburn QB and Heisman Trophy winner.

Tracy Rocker, Outland and Lombardi Trophy winner who was later an assistant coach at Troy.

Chuck Person, NBA great from Brantley who I once interviewed in a night club outside of Troy.

Harvey Glance, gold metal sprinter (4 x 100 relay, 1976 Games) and former track great at Auburn. He visited my 6th grade class in Opelika after he won the gold medal. He brought his gold medal.

Other well-known coaches …

Legendary Coach Bobby Bowden - who held a high school football camp in Troy for about 7 years. (Coach Bowden is probably the most approachable and friendliest celebrity I’ve ever met.)

Coach Chan Gailey - who once lived across the street from my grandmother and later became head coach of America’s team, the Dallas Cowboys.

Indiana Coach Curt Cignetti - As recounted in a recent story, I “met” Coach Cig on the sidelines of an Alabama football game in 2007. I didn’t speak to him, but we had a memorable stare down and he told me, “Get the hell out of here!”

Miami Hurricane head football coach Larry Coker.

Hall of Fame athletes:

Hank Aaron

Bart Starr

DeMarcus Ware

John Hannah

Mike Ditka

Don Sutton - Major League Baseball Hall of Fame and Braves’ announcer.

Jim Bunning - Hall of Fame pitcher who later served in Congress and Senate from Kentucky. (I met this baseball great when I was 9 through my great aunt on the trip to D.C.)

Phil Neikro - Atlanta Braves great who I met at the Front Porch when Phil was hanging out with his son, who was on the Troy baseball team at the time.

Other former star athletes:

Bobby Bonilla, former Major League Baseball great - I was introduced to Bonilla in the clubhouse of the Florida Marlins by his teammate at the time, Troy’s Brian Meadows.

Cornelius Bennet, Alabama and Buffalo Bills great - who I briefly chit-chatted with when he visited a party at the Sigma Nu house. (As the story goes, my brother Rush kept “Biscuit,” who might have over-indulged on free beer, from pulling the “Sigma” letter off the brick wall at the front of the Sigma Nu house.)

Politicians:

Former Alabama Gov. and presidential candidate George Wallace - I spoke to Wallace on the phone when he called my grandmother, Lucy Rice, to express his condolences after the death of my grandfather. FWIW, Wallace was retired from politics at the time so he didn’t make this call to curry favor with future voters. The classy call meant a great deal to Grandmother.

Former Alabama Gov. Fob James, also a former AU football great although his nickname for the Tigers was “Fumbling Fob.” (Trivia: Gov. James’ youngest son was my brother Bobby’s best friend when we lived in Opelika.)

Current Alabama Gov. Kay Ivey. Gov. Ivey became somewhat famous nationally when she berated all the “unvaccinated folks” in our state.

Sen. Howell Heflin - I’ll never forget that I almost had to do the Heimlich maneuver on Sen. Heflin during an interview at Mr. J’s restaurant in Troy after he experienced a violent, 10-minute coughing fit. When Sen. Heflin finally stopped coughing, he picked up on his answer like nothing had happened. (See humorous Bonus story about Sen. Heflin in today’s Reader Comments).

Sen. Jeff Sessions - was also, for a couple of months, President Trump’s attorney general.

Sen. Richard Shelby

Cong. John Lewis - also an icon of the Civil Rights Movement. The late Mr. Lewis grew up in rural Pike County.

Judge Roy Moore - The “10 Commandment’s Judge.” This future chief justice of the Alabama Supreme Court later became the first Republican in decades to lose a senate race to a Democrat. Judge Moore once spoke at the Troy Exchange Club’s Prayer Breakfast and I interviewed him after his talk … What I remember about this interview is that this person gave me an acute case of the heebie jeebies.

Cong. Ron Paul - I interviewed Dr. Paul, one of my political heroes, for 30 minutes via phone for a story on “shrinkflation” that I wrote for The American Conservative.

Cong. Barry Moore - I met this native of Enterprise on “Today in L.A.” … Since he has President Trump’s all-important endorsement, Barry will soon be Senator Barry Moore (joining Katie Britt, also from Enterprise. It’s note-worthy that a little town in south Alabama will have produced two U.S. senators who will be serving at the same time.)

Community organizers civil rights leaders/cable TV pundits …

Al Sharpton - This back story is too bizarre to tell in a few sentences. I might circle back to it later.

Miscellaneous:

Dan Rather - My claim to fame with the long-time CBS News TV anchor is that I once subscribed to his Substack newsletter, then made a couple of posts Rather didn’t like and he promptly banned me from his site.

Dr. James Andrews - orthopedic surgeon to the stars. (Dr. Andrews operated on my left knee two times. Absent these two injuries, I would have become a famous football player … Not.)

Richard Scrushy, founder of Health South who later spent several years in prison for one alleged scandal I think was bogus charges. However, Scrushy was acquitted of accounting/share-holder fraud, when he was probably guilty so prosecutions can sometimes balance out.

Jimmy Rane, “The Yellow Fellow” and Alabama’s only billionaire. (Trivia: A fraternity brother of mine, Slats Slayton, came up with the “Yellow Fellow” advertising campaign which is well-known throughout the South.)

Mary Harmon Bryant - Coach Bryant’s wife.

Paul Bryant, Jr. - Coach Bryant’s son and a very successful businessman.

Deidre Downs, former Miss America who later became a physician. (Deidre, a very nice lady, later achieved more publicity for becoming the first Miss America to marry another female).

Dorothy (Doro) Bush Koch, daughter of President George H. W. Bush and sister of President George W. Bush. I interviewed this famous sibling/daughter when she was promoting a book on her father.

Mrs. Lewis Grizzard, widow of syndicated humor columnist Lewis Grizzard.

Richard Hirschman - The world’s most famous (and significant) embalmer and the person who made the embalmers’ clots a potential thermo-nuclear, world-changing story. As it turns out, Richard lives 35 miles south of me in Ozark. A trade embalmer, one of the funeral homes Richard works for is in my hometown of Troy. Richard and I enjoyed a five hour visit in my house a couple of years ago, which gave me a wonderful feature story.

Dr./Lt. Col. Theresa Long - Now retired, Lt. Col. Long is the most significant Covid whistleblower in the the U.S. military. I once interviewed her on the phone and then spent more time with her and her family at a Freedom Symposium in Huntsville.

Tom Haviland - Creator (with Laura Kasner) of the very significant embalmers surveys. While we’ve never met in person, we have exchanged several emails.

“Citizen Kane” - The owner/editor of Citizen Free Press, which replaced the Drudge Report as the go-to news aggregator for many conservatives after Drudge sold out and vanished from the face of the earth. CFP once ran dozens of my articles and I shared several emails with Kane. However, he no longer runs any of my stories and quit replying to my emails, causing me to conclude I did or wrote something that put me out of favor with this very influential influencer.

Writers/journalists of some acclaim:

Paul Finebaum - I once called his sports talk show and we, of course, both got into it on the air. (I would have won our debate, but he cut my call off).

Allen Barra

Warren St. John

Judy Woodruff, PBS, CNN and NBC News correspondent.

***

(For the first 16 or so months of my history as a Substack content creator, I thought I had an outside chance to break through to semi-famedome, at least in the niche category of “Covid Contrarian” (a term I might have coined). Alas, my momentum fizzled and then suddenly reversed. Kind of like John Travolta, I’m now working on my comeback and thus appreciate people who use this “share” button.)

Share

Through my work on Substack or affiliation with the Brownstone Institute ..

Mary Holland, executive director of Children’s Health Defense. Through Mary’s close relationship to RFK, Jr. I am just three degrees of separation from President Trump - a connection I might exploit one day to go ahead and save the world.

Jeffrey Tucker, founder of the Brownstone Institute and a widely-read and very influential columnist. (Trivia: For many years Jeffrey lived in Auburn, where he worked with Lew Rockwell at the Mises Institute, which is based in Auburn.)

Toby Rogers - Brownstone writer who I met at a Brownstone retreat.

Dr. Meryl Nass - Substack author and regular on CHD and other alternative media podcasts. Dr. Nass and I have exchanged several emails.

Sasha Latypova - A very well-known “Covid Contrarian” I used to exchange friendly emails with. However, we got sideways with each other after I made some posts in her Reader Comments section that made her mad, which made me mad and, before you know it, we had a robust Substack Cage Match - which happens sometimes.

Mark O’Shinskie - One of my favorite Substack authors who has become a good buddy. Mark loves making friends with his readers, which counters all the friends he lost because of his views on the “Scamdemic.”

Jenna McCarthy - Substack author who always makes you laugh.

Jeff Childers - A Covid Contrarian star (219K subscribers!) who I met at a “Freedom Symposium” in Huntsville, where he was one of the keynote speakers.

Local or regional celebrities:

The late Dr.. Ralph Adams - President of Troy State for 25 years. (Also, probably George Wallace’s best friend. Trivia: Dr. Adams can be seen in the movie “Forrest Gump.”)

Bobby Jon Drinkard - Troy native and contestant on “Survivor” in two different seasons.

“Sister Schubert” Barnes - Founder of Sister Schubert’s famous home-made rolls. (Carrie just bought us some!)

Scott Cross - Ultra-successful coach at Troy who is now the new basketball coach at Georgia Tech.

Skylar Meade - Baseball coach of the Troy Trojans who is now our town’s favorite citizen after leading our team to this year’s College World Series in Omaha. (Troy finished 6th in the entire nation!)

Note: For some reason, I never met Jon Sumrall, the former Troy coach and new head football coach at Florida who is getting ready to become much more famous.

Finally, I am quite close to my son Jack Rice, better known to everybody as “Pickle Jack McCoy” and our mischievous little dog, Annie who we don’t consider a canine.

In summary …

… Per a quick count, including people not listed in this “national column,” I have met more than 90 famous people. If I can hang on a few more years, I might increase this list to an even 100. If this happens, at my eulogy my pastor can say “… and in his always-interesting life, Bill became close friends with 100 famous people … one of whom (Pickle Jack McCoy) is with us today.”

***

See more Bonus Content in today’s Reader Comments. Readers are also invited to share some of their own “brush with greatness” stories.

Writer gratuities via Ko-Fi.

Author’s note: This story ended up being longer than I envisioned. However, I like this dispatch, which I think makes many original points that, in my view, are significant. Thanks for reading or skimming it!

***

As noted in my last story, officials in China feel that Western media coverage of origins theories constitute “vicious smears.”

Indeed, on November 7, 2021, China’s U.S. Embassy released a lengthy document which authors say provide the “facts and truth” about known evidence of coronavirus origins. The document also seeks to rebut numerous other points Chinese officials believe have been grossly unfair to their nation.

Since, unsurprisingly, this document, received little or no media attention in America, today I would like to summarize some of the 22 points (“vicious smears”) the Chinese authors summarize in this document.

As noted in my prior story, I agree that many of these points are significant and should have always been a central part of any credible origins investigations. However, I have also highlighted several areas that make me think China, for some reason(s), was also covering up evidence of early spread in their own nation.

In this piece, I also develop several of my own points where I am seeking to investigate the “crime of the century” via the lens of evidence that flows from my early spread hypothesis.

Summary of some of China’s points with a few of my comments and questions added

Emphasis added by myself.

The document opens by stating: “Disregarding science and facts, the United States has fabricated lies, and smeared and criticized China.”

“… A growing number of clues, reports and studies have indicated that COVID-19 cases emerged in many places around the world as early as in the second half of 2019. The outbreak in the United States occurred earlier than the officially confirmed cases …”

“…. In January 2021, the WHO global study of origins said that there was no indication of the transmission of the novel coronavirus before December 2019 in Wuhan, adding it was considered unlikely that any substantial transition of SARS-CoV-2 was occurring in Wuhan in October or November 2019.”

My first comment: IMO, this statement, which no doubt accurately reflects the consensus of WHO officials, also calls into question the veracity of this alleged truth-seeking organization as copious evidence of early spread existed in China (see my last story), with even more credible evidence of early cases outside of China.

One analysis from the Chinese Academy of Sciences states: “All of the dates indicated by the data are earlier than Jan. 20, 2020, the officially announced date of the first confirmed case in the United States, showing that COVID-19 pandemic in the United States started to spread around September 2019 (and/or August 2019) with a high confidence probability…”

No antibody studies of archived blood in China …

The Chinese “Rebuttal Paper” cites antibody and waste water studies in the USA, Italy, France and Spain. However, significantly to myself, the paper doesn’t cite any results of antibody studies from archived blood donor supplies in China.

That is, in America, the CDC at least tested two tranches of “archived” Red Cross Blood for antibodies (a study that found 2.04 percent of donors who gave blood in CA, WA and OR Dec. 13-16, 2019 already had antibody evidence of prior Covid infection at the time they gave blood, which means most if not all of these donors had been exposed to this novel virus in November 2019 if not earlier).

As far as I am aware, no retrospective analysis of blood samples collected before December 31, 2019 has ever occurred in China, which, to myself, is a giant Red Flag and suggests a possible conspiracy to conceal evidence of early cases in China.

(It should also be noted that the CDC delayed reporting findings of the “Red Cross Antibody Study” for nine to 12 months and, for some reason, never tested other tranches of stored blood from other time points and more sections of the country).

In point 16 of China’s “Vicious Slander” document, officials seem to address the question of why Chinese officials have yet to test saved samples of blood for antibodies. Per my reading, China is arguing that lawsuit and privacy regulations governing stored blood samples prevent the testing of any such blood for Covid antibodies.

Re: The omnipresent HIPAA Excuse …

As an aside: Such “privacy” issues - called HIPAA laws/regulations in America - were cited by American researchers in explaining why positive Red Cross blood donors in America were never notified of their positive antibody results, why none of the positive donors were identified by name and why no interviews were done of the blood donors who happened to test positive.

I should also add that my efforts to acquire pertinent data on a variety of Covid issues has been repeatedly thwarted by public health officials, who responded that such information could not be provided to a journalist for “HIIPA reasons.”

(Per Google AI, The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) is a federal law passed in 1996 designed to protect sensitive patient health information from being disclosed without the patient’s consent or knowledge.”)

According to the Chinese government, it was slander that “The Chinese government instructed the destruction of the serum of early cases, making it impossible to determine when the spread of the virus started.”

Quick comment: To myself, this is yet another admission that antibody tests are, in fact, perhaps the only way to identify or “confirm” early cases via a diagnostic test.

According to China authors, the “Facts and Truth,” are that “China did not destroy the serum of early cases. The China-WHO joint team on origins tracing has agreed that some serum researches would be conducted once the blood from the Wuhan Blood Center meets the relevant regulatory requirements.”

The paper also states: “A quite small amount of blood was preserved during the period. In accordance with Article 31 of the Measures for the Administration of Blood Stations, the term of preservation of a blood sample shall be two years after the whole blood component blood is used, and it can only be available for use when there is a medical dispute or lawsuit.”

My comment: Apparently, “a search for important truths in the name of advancing science” or investigating the origins of the Pandemic of the Century are not sufficient grounds to over-ride any privacy regulations. (FWIW, five years after this document was released, I’ve still not found any evidence China ever tested archived blood supplies of Chinese citizens for antibodies.)

The document’s second “vicious slander” point says the “outbreak has nothing to do with the WIV”

Regarding the Western media claim that three scientists at the WIV become sick and were hospitalized in November 2019, the authors write:

“China has repeatedly asked the skeptics to reveal the names of these three people in order to make the reports clear, but no one so far has provided a name.” (Note: A story published approximately 19 months later by Public/Racket news, co-written by Matt Taibbi, does name three scientists at the WIV who allegedly (with “100 percent certainty”) became sick in November 2019).

Author’s note: It is significant to me that the Racket/Public story is the only article or paper that, by name, cites (three) Wuhan residents who might have been infected before December 2019.

Compare and contrast to my reporting …

In contrast, my early spread articles have listed scores of Americans by name who had antibody-confirmed Covid cases in November and December 2019. Hundreds of other Americans had antibody evidence of early Covid but their names were not provided … For example, 106 antibody-positive blood donors who gave blood to the American Red Cross beginning Dec. 13, 2019.

(One of my Covid journalism take-aways is that possible early cases in China matter a great deal, but possible/likely early cases in America don’t matter at all.)

Subscribe now

Also, as I have previously reported, state public health agencies were required to collect data on American citizens who tested positive on antibody tests (once those tests became available). However, with a few minor exceptions, no names or figures of antibody-positive possible early cases has ever been released to the public.

That is, America actually has far more known or named individuals who experienced Covid symptoms (and later received a positive antibody test) who experienced these symptoms prior the first confirmed cases in the world.

Since the identify of these individuals is either known, or could easily be ascertained, this means these individuals could have been questioned and their possible early cases have been investigated by the CDC or public health authorities, a simple and common-sense task which, for some reason, never happened.

This is why I continue to insist that a wide-spread conspiracy - in America, other countries and no doubt in China - was implemented to conceal all evidence of early infections from the public. IMO, this conspiracy was perpetrated by officials simply failing to investigate that which they, clearly, do not want to “confirm.”

***

(As my Substack newsletter is currently sinking, I am trying to get as many significant stories out into the life boats while my dispatches might still reach a few human readers. Thanks for sharing!)

Share

Hospital Parking Lot Photos and World Military Games …

Regarding the hospital parking lot satellite photos, China’s rebuttal document simply states: “The relevant reports and studies are very absurd.”

The authors note that six hospital parking lots were full prior to global visitors arriving to the Wuhan World Military Games, which began October 18, 2019.

“It was impossible that the military athletes from all over the world that participated in the games felt nothing,” said one Chinese official.

However, as documented in several stories published by prominent news organizations and summarized in this story by myself, scores of visitors to these Games did report that they had become sick while in Wuhan.

China officials had to be aware of these reports … just like government and military sources in all nations of the world had to be aware of these reports.

However, officials never interviewed any of these sick visitors or, apparently, ever gave any of these individuals antibody tests, which were being administered as early as January 2020.

In fact, many athletes and visitors who reported they became sick in Wuhan were specifically instructed to not talk to the press - yet another giant red flag, suggesting a vast conspiracy to conceal possible evidence of early cases.

In my research, I read two articles (one from the BBC) that fact-checked the parking lot study and, not surprisingly to myself, found it unpersuasive. I also read a couple of articles that reported on the authors’ findings.

A valid critique made by one interviewed source is that authors who performed this analysis should have also examined hospital parking lot photos from other cities in China during the same time periods, not just in Wuhan.

It occurs to me that authors could have also done a similar analysis of hospital parking lots in America in the weeks and months before official Covid to ascertain if American hospitals might have been seeing more patients suffering from ILI (or Covid) symptoms in, say, November or December 2019.

For example, in my research into ILI outbreaks, I learned that one hospital in New Orleans saw more ILI patients in the month of November 2019 than the same hospital saw the entire six months of the prior flu season. I can’t help but wonder if parking lot satellite photos at this hospital might “confirm” that something different was happening in New Orleans in November 2019.

China fingers Dr. Baric …

The China Rebuttal Paper also strongly suggests that a modified virus could have come from the labs of Dr. Ralph Baric at the University of North Carolina.

(In other sections, the paper acknowledges that Baric did collaborate with China scientists on coronavirus research, but states that any “gain of function” work was done exclusively by Baric and/or American scientists).

China became the No. 1 Suspect simply because they first discovered a novel coronavirus …

The Rebuttal Paper correctly notes that China was “the first country to report the Covid-19 epidemic” and “discover(ed) this unidentified pneumonia.”

Here Chinese officials seem to be saying just because their nation was the first to discover and then report a novel pneumonia-causing virus to global health authorities does not necessarily mean any novel coronavirus originated in their country.

Per my speculation or “crime theory,” it seems likely or possible that one or more important figures in China might have worked with U.S. Pandemic plotters to identify alleged “case zeroes” in China and also date the first cases to mid-to-late December 2019 in Wuhan.

A question I posed in earlier stories in this series of articles is how did possible American “plotters” know that a novel coronavirus would eventually be “discovered” and then reported to the world by Chinese officials in Wuhan?

For example, if Wuhan hospital director Zhang Jixian had not reported a novel, pneumonia-causing virus to public health officials in China on December 27, 2019, Covid as we know it would probably have never happened. Thus, the Chinese official(s) who first “discovered” a novel virus is, arguably, the most important person in the entire Covid narrative.

Another question I’ve asked myself is why didn’t anyone else identify and then report a novel, pneumonia-causing coronavirus following the hospitalization of any of the hundreds or thousands of people (in America and around the world) who went to the doctor or a hospital after experiencing ILI/Covid symptoms between mid-2019 and December 2019?

That is, isn’t it possible that medical officials at the aforementioned New Orleans hospital could have also “discovered” a novel coronavirus?

I have found numerous anecdotes of patients who were sick with Covid symptoms before 2020 who report their doctors told them they were stumped as to what was causing their illness. Many citizens also report their symptoms were different than previous bouts with flu, bronchitis or other ILIs they’d previously experienced.

An additional question I’ve posed is how would the “Covid origins narrative” have changed if a novel, pneumonia-causing virus had been “discovered” in America (not China) in, say, October or November 2019?

While hypothetical or an “unknown unknowable,” it seems to me such a finding/revelation would, if nothing else, have rendered moot any significance attached to a lab leak at the WIV, or any outbreak at a Wet Market in December 2019 in Wuhan.

For me, it seems very likely such news would open the door to investigations of a possible lab leak or intentional release in America, especially if early cases happened in the summer or early fall of 2019 - before the traditional cold and flu virus season.

Thus, to myself, it would have been very important to possible “Pandemic Plotters” to make sure no such stories reached the mass population.

(Note: This might have happened anyway with a few stories that noted strange and deadly outbreaks at two Virginia nursing homes in the summer of 2019 and also a modicum of press coverage that was given to a mysterious ‘vaping” illness that had stricken hundreds of people in multiple U.S. states around the same time. While these odd epidemiological events received some press coverage, no public health expert or authority reported a :novel, pneumonia-causing coronavirus” to the WHO like China later did.)

China brags it altered the curve …

Also, China says unprecedented non-pharmaceutical interventions it initiated “contained the spread of Covid-19 in China, but also bought precious time for the world.”

My comment: With this statement, it seems China might be agreeing that the virus did originate in their country.

In one paragraph, China officials write that their aggressive virus mitigation efforts reduced spread “67-fold and likely prevented 7 million cases” in their nation. Another sentence says the virus “had largely been contained” in China, adding that by February 29, 2020, “over 1.4 million infections and 56,000 deaths outside of Hubei Province might have been avoided by national and provincial public health measures.”

As I wrote in my last dispatch, by the last week in January 2020, China officials said only 25 residents in the entire country had died from confirmed Covid.

Based on the above statement from China officials, I guess readers are supposed to believe that at least 56,000 people would have died in China after January 23-24, when China initiated lockdowns measures that critics have labeled as “draconian.”

If virus spread actually began in Wuhan in early or mid-December 2019 (or months earlier), for some reason the virus wasn’t killing hardly anyone in the early weeks and months it was being transmitted person to person (before the lockdowns) - a deductive reasoning extrapolation I find … curious, nonsensical or not credible.

Also, if lockdowns saved this many lives in China, why didn’t lockdowns in America - for example, in New York City - save similar numbers of lives?

One scary rejoinder to this question would be the take-away many public health officials gleaned from the “China example” - namely, America didn’t lockdown hard enough … like Wuhan did, which is something to think about when public health experts report the next emerging and deadly virus.

The Politicization of Covid-19 …

In Point 20, Chinese authors write that “the deployment of the intelligence community in origins tracing is itself compelling evidence of the politicization of the the issue.”

My comment: This, IMO, is an astute and valid observation … By, perhaps, Day Two of my investigations and research into possible early Covid cases in America I had concluded that nobody (who mattered) was likely to publish any story I wrote on this topic. This is because I instantly picked up on the “political” implications of my research.

That is, the dates any novel virus began to infect large numbers of people wouldn’t matter if the virus did indeed originate from bats (in China or America) or had “natural origins.”

However, if the virus might have been modified in a tax-payer funded lab by “mad scientists” (to become more infectious) and either escaped or was intentionally released and a giant conspiracy ensued - such a revelation might meet the threshold of a “thermo-nuclear” scandal.

Per my crime hypothesis, it seems clear that the authorized narrative had to be that this virus originated in China, didn’t emerge until latter December 2019, definitely didn’t start in America and virus origins can be traced to infected bats.

One also wonders what trusted public health officials like Dr. Anthony Fauci knew and when they knew whatever they knew.

Personally, I’m not sure what Fauci knew (or didn’t know) about a possible conspiracy to unleash a “contrived” pandemic on the world.

However, as soon as China officials called the WHO and alerted this agency to the emergence of a pneumonia-causing coronavirus on December 31, 2019, Fauci and a cabal of close colleagues sprung into action in an effort to vilify any person who might be espousing a lab-leak theory.

Here we have an example of the world’s most powerful public health bureaucrat who was not curious about discovering the real origins truth, but instead a leader who was leading a conspiracy to block a genuine search for the truth. By themselves, these actions suggest Fauci knew the truth might turn out to be thermo-nuclear. They also suggest that “Science himself” was terrified of real science being performed.

I find it very interesting, or quite revealing, that Dr. Robert Redfield, the director of the CDC at the time, was not chosen to be a part of the team Fauci organized to concoct the proximal origins cover-up story.

As reported in a prior dispatch, Redfield later told TV anchor Chris Cuomo that he (Redfield) had at least two phone conversations with the person who holds the similar job as Redfield in China’s version of the CDC. According to Redfield, this person, George Gao, told Redfield on New Year’s Eve 2019 that 27 people had become sick with what seemed to be a new virus and they’d all visited the Wuhan Wet Market.

Redfield said this didn’t make sense to him and he asked his counterpart to “look (for cases) outside of the wet market.”

“Two or three days later” the two men spoke again and Mr. Gao told Redfield, “Bob, we have hundreds of cases and it has nothing to do with the wet market.”

My Comment:

This means by January 2nd or 3rd, China’s CDC director had told a key American public health official that the so-called Case Zero “had nothing to do with the wet market.” Presumably, virus spread started earlier.

I believe Redfield has stated he did share details of this conversation with Anthony Fauci, who - not surprisingly - kept Redfield from his cover-up team of esteemed “scientists.”

In Conclusion …

Almost all parts of the authorized origins narrative deal with whether the first cases in Wuhan can be traced to a Wet Market (supporting a natural spillover theory) or to the WIV (which would suggest a possible lab leak).

However, no early discussions involving people who matter (which would include important corporate journalists who are supposed to investigate all possibilities) seriously addressed the question of when the first cases occurred. It was just accepted as “settled science” that case zero must have been someone who visited this market at some point in December 2019.

“Early Spread” never came up or was seriously considered or discussed.

IMO, this must have been by design.

FWIW, the authorized narrative took hold, worked as planned, and no credible investigation into virus origins has ever occurred.

I also think, somehow, Covid conspirators knew the research and investigative journalism of “contrarian” citizen journalists such as myself would be ignored and/or never reach a mass audience, which must have also been a part of a vast, coordinated Covid conspiracy.

Writer gratuities via Ko-Fi.

This author has probably written more stories citing evidence of “early spread” in America than any other journalist. However, I’ve yet to write a story that summarizes the abundant “evidence” (or claims) that a novel coronavirus might have been spreading weeks or months before the “Wuhan outbreak” in China.

As this dispatch should show, many sources - including U.S. intelligence sources and one former CDC director, are convinced that China - like the American government - may have also concealed evidence of early spread.

In a timeline format, today’s dispatch illustrates how the dates of possible case zero have kept moving backwards in time.

I should note that Chinese officials have adamantly denied that cases occurred in their country prior to December 2019. In a document I recently discovered, Chinese officials list 22 “vicious slanders” they claim have have been made against their nation as it regards any discussions on virus origins.

(It is not surprising to myself that China’s POV on the origins question would not receive extensive, or any, coverage in the Western press, which this Chinese document did not).

The Chinese rebuttal document list many articles and papers, which I have also repeatedly cited, showing cases outside of China that seem to pre-date the Wuhan outbreak of mid-December 2019.

While I find many of these “rebuttal” points convincing and significant, several claims made by Chinese officials also strike me as nonsensical.

For example, even if “Case Zero” didn’t occur in China in December 2019, a virus said to be as contagious as the novel coronavirus would have certainly spread across China by the fall of 2019 … even if the virus didn’t originally emerge in this country.

One key question I’ve yet to find a reasonable explanation for is why did China officials impose such a draconian lockdown on its nation beginning on January 23, 2020 if the evidence is so convincing that this virus had infected many millions of people around the world - and presumably in China - well before this date?

Timeline for likely Case Zero started in late December 2019 but now traces back to mid-2019 …

Source: U.S. Right to Know article by journalist Lewis Kamb, published February 6 of this year).

June 2019 lab escape in Wuhan -

“More than six years after COVID-19 emerged in China and killed millions worldwide, newly released intelligence records show that the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) was evaluating a detailed lab-origin scenario as early as March 2020 — weeks into the pandemic and well before the issue became a subject of public debate.

“… On a previously published slide headed ‘Hypothetical Laboratory Origin of SARS-CoV-2,’ the assessment … ‘then posits that an uncharacterized virus escaped in mid-2019 (me: which would have been June 2019) sparking the outbreak, and that the Wuhan institute later published disinformation that analysts speculated helped to bolster a natural-origin narrative.”

The article adds that: The “DIA has fully withheld hundreds of pages it deemed classified or otherwise exempt from disclosure, and many of the pages that were produced are nearly entirely blacked out, with heavy redactions obscuring key context, sourcing and internal discussions.”

Aside editorial comment: Note that journalist Kamb writes that “COVID-19 emerged in China and killed millions worldwide.” If I had written this story, I would have added two qualifiers: “the virus, which reportedly originated in China” and that “allegedly has killed millions world-wide.”

Or, Kamb could have written that a virus that originated in China in “mid-2019” for some reason didn’t kill any person until January 9, 2020 and for some reason didn’t produce large numbers of deaths until after mid-March 2020 - which, according to Kamb’s own story, would be approximately nine months after virus spread might have begun.

That is, Kamb - or no journalist - has ever explained why a non-deadly but very contagious virus suddenly became ultra-deadly in the spring of 2020.

August to October 2019 - Wuhan hospital parking lots were over-flowing …

according to a Harvard and Boston Children Hospital study of satellite images of six Wuhan hospitals compared to photos of the same locations taken in earlier years at roughly the same time period.

Per authors, their unique analysis suggests spread of a rare summer or early fall ILI … and possibly early Covid.

Summary/Excerpts:

“The novel coronavirus may have been spreading in China as early as last August, according to a Harvard Medical School study based on satellite images of Wuhan hospital parking lots and search engine data.”

According to researchers, the number of cars in the parking lots showed “spikes of 67 to 90 percent” compared to prior years in the same weeks/months.

Here is the study proper and here is ABC News’ report of the author’s findings. (See today’s Reader Comments for Bonus Content on this study).

August to Sept. 12 -

As stated in several interviews and his book The Wuhan Cover-up, the time period a novel coronavirus might have begun circulating in Wuhan, according to RFK, Jr. Citing intelligence sources, Kennedy has repeatedly highlighted a likely lab leak at the Wuhan Institute of Virology on or around Sept. 12, 2019.

August or September 2019 -

Dates that former CDC director Robert Redfield now believes virus transmission began in Wuhan, likely from an accidental lab leak at the WIV.

“We now know that the transmission of Covid-19 probably began between August and October of 2019 .. and clearly (Chinese officials) knew it. They were well-informed,” said Redfield in an interview with TV anchorman Chris Cuomo.

FWIW, on May 29, 2020, while he was Donald Trump’s director of the CDC, Redfield participated in a press conference where CDC officials stated they could find no evidence of “community spread” in America before February 2020. This finding seems odd given that Redfield later said this contagious virus was spreading around the world in the summer of 2019 - five to six months before February 2020.

Question: Does Dr. Redfield believe a very contagious virus would NOT have spread to America in a period of five or six months?

October 18 - 27 - Dates World Military Games were held in Wuhan.

Numerous media reports later said scores of visitors (from multiple nations) experienced ILI or Covid symptoms while at these Games.

Per my research, China has never admitted or acknowledged that anyone who attended these Games might have contracted “Early Covid.” Nor have any public health officials in any other nation. (As far as I have been able to ascertain, no visitor to the World Military Games ever later received a Covid antibody test, which I find very strange.)

An exclusive story published by The Washington Free Beacon in April 2025, claimed that “Biden Administration Concealed Congressionally Mandated Report on Earliest Suspected American COVID Cases” (at these Games).

Unspecified date in November 2019 -

According to a May 23, 2021 Wall Street Journal major exclusive story, the month three WIV researchers went to hospital experiencing Covid or ILI symptoms.

First two paragraphs of story:

“Three researchers from China’s Wuhan Institute of Virology became sick enough in November 2019 that they sought hospital care, according to a previously undisclosed U.S. intelligence report that could add weight to growing calls for a fuller probe of whether the Covid-19 virus may have escaped from the laboratory.

“The details of the reporting go beyond a State Department fact sheet, issued during the final days of the Trump administration, which said that several researchers at the lab, a center for the study of coronaviruses and other pathogens, became sick in autumn 2019 “with symptoms consistent with both Covid-19 and common seasonal illness.”

November 2019 - Three authors from Racket and Public News also published a story that purports to name “patients zero” (including a man named Ben Hu, who led the WIV’s “gain of function” research, according to authors.)

November 17 - According to a March 13, 2020 article from The South China Morning Post, the first person infected with the new disease may have been a Hubei resident aged 55, but ‘patient zero’ has yet to be confirmed. The article, cited “Chinese government data” … and noted that Chinese health officials told local media that the virus likely was spreading before they realized, “though they have offered no details.”

Late November 2019 - In April 2020, ABC News reported that the National Center for Medical Intelligence (NCMI) received word in late November that a contagion was sweeping through Wuhan, changing the patterns of life and business and posing a threat to the population.

Sources familiar with the reports said NCMI, a component of the military’s Defense Intelligence Agency, based the analysis on wire and computer intercepts coupled with satellite images similar to those used by Brownstein’s (parking lot analysis) team. After that story was broadcast, the NCMI’s director issued a statement, denying that a formal “product/assessment” was generated in November.

Author’s note: While the above articles and intelligence reports are interesting and worthy of coverage, I’ve dismissed any possible “blockbuster” significance of stories that claim Covid can be traced to a couple of reportedly sick scientists at the WIV in November 2019 … for the simple reason I have found many cases (in America and other countries) that happened prior to these possible events/cases. That is, IMO, these individuals were not “case zeroes.”

Moving to “official” or acknowledged cases …

December 1, 2019 - From various sources, the date the first Wuhan resident, who was later hospitalized at the primary Wuhan hospital treating Covid patients, reported the onset of her Covid symptoms.

December 16, 2020 - Date the first patient was admitted to a Wuhan hospital with Covid symptoms. (source: Lancet paper.) This lady was a vendor at Wuhan Wet market although many early patients had no connection to this live animal market.

Dec. 27 - Date a Wuhan hospital official first reported to local public health officials the existence of a “novel pneumonia-causing” virus.

Note: According to Chinas’s rebuttal document (referenced above), a man named Zhang Jixian, director of the the Dept. of Respiratory and Critical Care at Hubei Hospital of Integrated Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine, “was the first person to report Covid-19 cases on December 27, 2019” … and was “awarded for this contribution.”

(I’ve always wondered how the world would be different if Mr. Jixian had not made this report to anyone.)

December 31, 2019 - Date Chinese officials first reported a novel virus to the World Health Organization (official birthdate of the pandemic).

January 2, 2021 (From Lancet paper): By this date, 41 Wuhan residents had been admitted to one or more Wuhan hospitals and had been identified as having laboratory-confirmed 2019-nCoV infection.

January 9, 2020 - Date the first Covid death was reported in Wuhan (and the world).

January 23 - Chinese officials impose travel ban and NPI’s (lockdowns) on residents of Wuhan.

January 24-25 - 27 more Chinese provinces begin “Level 1” Response.

January 24, 2020 - In all of China, total number of fatal cases of Covid is reported as 25.

For context …

by April 29, 2020, New York City had experienced 12,571 total Covid deaths. The first NYC Covid fatality was recorded on March 14, 2020, meaning the city went from zero Covid deaths to 12,571 in a period of approximately 45 days.

The populations of Wuhan and NY City are almost identical. It’s unclear why a virus that, in roughly one month, would kill only 25 people in the entire nation of China could kill 12,571 residents of one American city in a little more than one month. Also, all NY City “Covid deaths” happened after lockdowns were imposed in New York City around March 14, 2020. (The first confirmed case in NY City was recorded as March 1, 2020.)

FWIW, I have found no reports - citing U.S. intelligence - which claim that Wuhan experienced many thousands of Covid deaths between Dec. 31st, 2019 and the end of January or mid-February (or before these dates when virus spread almost certainly began. That is, a virus that was not overly deadly in Wuhan was, a few months later, incredibly lethal in NY City).

January 31, 2020 - By this date, just 9,692 cases Covid cases had been confirmed in all of China (population 1 billion-plus). Source: New England Journal of Medicine

January 31, 2020 - Date President Trump, by executive emergency order, bans all travel to and from China.

DISCUSSION …

It is unclear to myself why Chinese officials decided to impose “draconian” lockdowns in Wuhan (and then in other provinces) beginning on January 23, 2020.

Per the above bullet points, it seems clear that any novel virus had already been spreading widely in this city - and presumably country - weeks or months before the lockdowns were imposed.

However, this mitigation response was extremely significant as it was held out as a model for other nations to follow in “fighting” virus spread.

The China mitigation response is documented in this paper published in the journal Science, first published at the end of March 2020.

The title of the paper is: “An Investigation of transmission control measures during the first 50 days of the Covid epidemic in China.”

My comment: The title of the paper is suspect as this was almost certainly not the “first 50 days of the epidemic in China.” (The paper dates “virus spread” in Wuhan to December 31, 2019.)

Covid seems to have stayed primarily in Wuhan …

According to Chinese officials, virus spread was “largely contained to Wuhan,” which strikes me as odd or implausible. (Wuhan, which has been described as “The Chicago of China,” is a major transportation hub in the nation.)

For example, “The reported daily incidence of confirmed cases peaked in Hubei province (including Wuhan) on Feb. 4th was 3,156 laboratory-confirmed cases (5.33 per 100,000 population in Hubei or 1-in-18,762 Wuhan residents).

However, by January 31, there were only 875 cases in all other Chinese provinces (0.07 per 100,000 population).

***

U.S. economist Jeffrey Sachs, head of the Lancet Covid-19 Commission, told a newspaper that “China has done an excellent job of suppressing the COVID-19 epidemic and that the world should have learned a lot more from China’s response. The United States should learn some ‘good manners to work cooperatively with China rather than trying to impose its will on that nation,’ “ said Sachs.

To give Chinese officials the benefit of the doubt, it’s possible no one in China was aware of the copious evidence of early Spread (or spikes in ILI cases) in America or other countries by late January 2020 and, thus, might have believed the virus started in their country (jumping from bats an not escaping from a lab).

However, at some point, Chinese officials became aware of this evidence, which suggests a virus that was spreading widely throughout the world beginning at some point between mid 2019 and the fall of 2019.

Per my conjecture, it’s likely officials in China sought to conceal evidence of early spread for the same reason American officials did - because this evidence, if confirmed, would prove that very few people had died from this virus, which would mean this was not a “deadly” virus or the next Spanish Flu or Bubonic Plague.

Since China imposed, arguably, the most draconian lockdowns in the world (at least in Wuhan), it seems unlikely that China officials would later want to admit to their trusting citizens that authorities were completely wrong about the lethality or mortality risk of said virus … or that the draconian measures ordered by their leaders were completely unnecessary.

For their part, China officials maintain that the government’s “strong intervention measures significantly changed the epidemic curve” and “also bought precious time for the world” (which seems to me to be a tacit admission the virus did start in China).

In its document rebutting “vicious smears,” Chinese officials said that over 1.4 million infections and 56,000 deaths outside of Hubei “might have been avoided” because of national public health measures.

Conclusion, circling back to where I started …

In Part 1 of this 4-part series, I speculated that American “pandemic plotters” might have sought to concoct a faux pandemic via a lab-created virus that was contagious but not deadly. I further speculated that officials might have wanted to frame the nation of China as the villain for a virus that did, in fact, acquire the nickname of “The Wuhan Flu.”

One possible motive would be to inject trillions of dollars of “liquidity” into a financial system that might have been approaching an undisclosed crisis.

Such a crisis would also, perhaps, grease the rails for a transformation to digital currency and digital ID and much greater control for the so-called Powers that Be. (Population control would be a more sinister motive.)

If one purpose was to cause economic harm to China, this result does not seem to have happened. Indeed, America probably suffered greater harm via a major and continuing spike in real inflation and consumers of the world continue to disproportionately purchase products manufactured in China.

More than six years after virus spread commenced, no officials or public health organizations are seriously or sincerely investigating the true origins of this novel virus and the “vaccines” that were rolled out in December 2020 (and later mandated for many citizens) are still considered “safe and effective” by public health experts.

For years or decades to come (and maybe forever), the key Covid questions will almost certainly remain unanswered, no doubt because the harsh truths would be far too shocking for most citizens to handle.

***

(The six-plus years of Covid have been a wild, roller-coaster ride for this Substack author. From September 2022, I grew my subscribers from zero to more than 8,000, including 310 paid subscribers. However, in the past 12 or so months, I have lost 500 total subscribers and 75 paid subscribers. Still, as this story hopefully shows, there’s plenty of important Covid stories still to be written.)

Subscribe now

Author tip jar:

https://ko-fi.com/billrice

Share

Thanks for sharing!

I learned via Facebook that actress Courteney Cox recently celebrated her 61st birthday, which was the perfect opportunity for me to make a Facebook post and let everyone know I am kin to Courteney.

We all have our claims to fame and this is one of mine, even though I’ve never actually met the beguiling and beautiful Ms. Cox and, truth be told, am not 100 percent sure we are technically “related. “

Still, it makes a good “brag story” and one might argue we are related.

As it turns out, Courteney Cox has an aunt - Ann Chapman Cox - who grew up in Troy in the 1940s and 1950s. Ann is my late mother - Marcia Chapman Rice’s - first cousin. This means my mother’s first cousin is Courteney Cox’s aunt.

Does your town have nicknames like these?

Ann, who lives in Mountain Brook, hasn’t lived in Troy in many decades but everyone over a certain age knew Ann’s brother, Brother Chapman.

Brother was one of hundreds of proud Trojans who went by a nickname - not his birth certificate name - his whole life. (Brother’s real name was Corley Chapman, Jr.)

My mother once wrote one of my favorite Troy Citizen columns where she listed all the many people in Troy who were known by their nicknames.

For example, great Troy characters of my youth included Trojans like Boy Motes, Rat McWhorter, Red Stinson, Junior Byrd, Tip Colley, Baba Hendricks, Teen Coleman, Sister Schubert, Whitey Whitman and my mother’s own father, Hickey Chapman. (One day I’m going to find that column and re-publish it. Mom broke the names down by categories - like “hues,” Animal Kingdom, verbs, familial relations, etc.)

My late grandfather, Hickey has been given credit for giving Dr. Tip Colley his nickname.

As the story goes, Tip (whose real name was, I think, James) had just moved to Troy when his father became director of the Alabama Baptist Children’s Home, which moved its campus from Evergreen to Troy at some point in the 1920s.

My grandfather was the manager of the Troy High football team. Dr. Colley went out for the team and was, in fact, the tallest player on said team.

Said Hickey: “Watch out guys, Here comes Tip-Top Colley!”

Like many nicknames, the first name was later shortened or modified and “Tip” Colley was born.

As an aside, “Hickey” is not a red mark one gets from someone smooching your neck in the backseat of your Ford Mustang - it is short for Hickory, which was Hickey’s middle name. (Hickey ended up marrying Kathryn Rushmore from Andalusia, but we all knew her by her nickname “KaKa.”)

Another Trend Change Identified …

I’m a professional observer of changing trends and one trend change I’ve observed is that, at some point, far fewer people were known only by their nicknames.

That is, in my generation I can think of only a couple of classmates who were primarily known by their nickname - For example, Steve Barras became “She Daddy” and Philip Walters was “Opie” but even with those names, plenty of people still called my friends by their God-given name.

It’s also strange to me how some people are known strictly by their last name. For example, nobody called Gary Rumph “Gary;” everyone called him Rumph.

Many “Bobby’s” later become Bob. My late father, Bill, was known for his first 18 years as “Billy.” My friend Candy Whitman is now Candace and Sandra Huggins is now Sandy.

At Alabama, Dad was roommates for a year or two with Bud Casey, who later became famous as Vincent “Bo” Jackson’s position coach at Auburn and then even more famous as “Famous” Amos’s sidekick on “Today in L.A.” (Lower Alabama).

Dad always called Bud “Travis” (his name for 20 or so years). However, I like Bud better.

(One of the movie lines I quote all the time is from Urban Cowboy: “That’s damn good, Bud!” When John Travolta’s character, whose real name was Buford, was riding the mechanical bull.)

I guess I can tell this story …

Several of dad’s teammates at Alabama also had nicknames, one of which created a great story even if it’s probably politically incorrect to share.

One of Dad’s teammate was named “Digger” O-Dell. The year after Dad graduated, Alabama played Oklahoma in the Orange Bowl. In 1962, Alabama’s roster had yet to become integrated, but the Sooners had at least one black player.

As the story goes, the referees stopped the game and reprimanded Alabama’s players and coaches for repeatedly using the most offensive of racial epithets.

The refs thought Alabama’s players were saying, “Get the … (N-word)” when the Tide players were actually saying, “Get him, Digger!”

Dad’s best friend at Alabama was James A. Patton, but nobody called Mr. Patton, who has never been to Japan, “James” … everyone did - and still does - call him “Jap.”

Of course, Dad’s coach had the most famous nickname in the history of college football - “Bear” Bryant.

However, as everyone who spent much time around this legendary figure knows, almost no one called him “Bear.” Everyone called him “Coach” Bryant.

The best-known nickname in the football world I can think of today is Clemson’s Dabo Swinney, which became Dabo’s name because his older brother kept calling the baby Swinney “Dat Boy” - when he was trying to say, “That Boy” … which became Dabo.

More on Courteney’s rise to stardom …

Courteney Cox doesn’t have a nickname, but her trajectory to stardom is interesting.

Courteney, of course, became an instant sensation when she was the girl Bruce Springsteen (“The Boss”) pulled out of the audience to dance with in his MTV video “Dancing in the Dark.”

I also remember when Courteney was Michael J. Fox’s girlfriend on “Family Ties.”

Then my cousin got the break of a lifetime when she was cast in “Friends,” which came on right after “Seinfeld,” where one of TV’s most eccentric characters went only by the name of Kramer.

Both shows are now considered classics and Courteney will no doubt be earning residuals when she is 98.

One could make the case that Courteney Cox is the best-known actress to ever come from Alabama. (Her competition would be Kate Jackson, one of the original “Charlie’s Angels” and Louise Fletcher, the actress who won an Oscar for playing Nurse Ratched in “One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest” or, maybe, going back even further, Tallulah Bankhead (I checked, this was her real name).

(BTW, growing up, the sister of Jimmy Gaskin, who was a long-time resident of Troy, was great friends with Kate Jackson, “the smart Angel.”)

Octavia Spencer, a graduate of Jeff Davis High School, has also had a fine career and Fannie Flagg had an outstanding career as an actress, a sharp-witted regular on the game show “Match Game” and then as a talented author, who wrote Fried Green Tomatoes. (Surely Fannie Flagg’s real name is not Fannie … I just checked - that’s a “stage name” - a good one - Fannie created.)

(You can share “Iran deal” stories with your friends or you can share riveting stories like this one …)

Share

Regarding my close relationship with Courteney, when I was a Sigma Nu at the University of Alabama, about 12 of my fraternity brothers were from Mountain Brook - and all of them went to high school with Courteney although, at the time, she was just another beautiful person from Alabama’s toniest community and, as far as I remember, she never attended any keg parties in our frat lodge basement. (At one Sigma Nu keg party, I did once light a cigarette for Belinda Carlisle of the Go Go’s, but that’s a “brush with greatness” story I’ll save for another day.)

Still, I’ve always thought that one day I might call Courteney and tell her we are close relatives.

I’m going to do this when I finally finish my first screenplay - or make my pitch to Netflix to produce my 8-part TV series - and need someone with Hollywood connections to get my script in front of the right people.

As we all know, we are all just six degrees of separation from any famous or important person. With Courteney I’m just two or three degrees from being in the door.

How I plan to save the world …

As it regards my efforts to save the world, I’ve actually thought a fair amount about the Six-Degrees of Separation Theory.

As my readers know by now, I would be flattered if I could one day play even a small role in exposing the non-safe and very dangerous Covid non-vaccines.

As it turns out, I once met Mary Holland, the director of Children’s Health Defense, at a retreat in Connecticut hosted by The Brownstone Institute.

Mrs. Holland was very nice to me and I enjoyed a 90-second chat with her and have even exchanged emails with her. It occurs to me that Mrs. Holland must be very close to Robert Kennedy, Jr. (two degrees of separation) who founded the CHD and must have hired Mrs. Holland. So Mary could easily arrange a phone or video chat with the director of the Department of HHS, who is a mere two degrees of separation from your humble Substack content creator.

“Bobby, Bill … How are you today?”

For his part, Bobby can pick up the phone any time and talk to his boss, President Trump, who is, thus, only three degrees of separation away from me here in Troy, Alabama.

“Mr. President, you need to expose these embalmers’ clots,” I will say.

I don’t know what Mr. Trump will say to my suggestion. If I don’t immediately impress him, I’m going to have to tell him that I am Courteney Cox’s second cousin three times removed by marriage.

I’ll also tell him I graduated from high school with She Daddy Barras and my grandfather gave Tip Colley his nickname.

Then we’ll just see what happens.

Writer gratuities via Ko-Fi.

I’ve written hundreds of thousands of words which present persuasive and compelling evidence a novel coronavirus was infecting Americans (and people in many countries) months before Chinese officials (on Dec. 31, 2019) first announced to the world the presence of a novel new virus that was causing pneumonia and flu-like symptoms.

As I’ve repeatedly theorized, for some reason American officials endeavored to conceal or dismiss all evidence of “early spread” in America.

However, as I’ve also developed in multiple stories, compelling evidence also exists that early spread - many people becoming infected well before the “Wuhan Outbreak” - almost certainly occurred in China as well.

As I will document in a future story, reports (citing numerous sources) have been published stating or suggesting that early cases had occurred in China in June, July, August, September, October and December 2019.

This evidence spurs several key, unanswered questions, including:

• What did Chinese officials know about early infections and when did they know this?

• Why didn’t Chinese officials announce the presence of a novel, contagious coronavirus months before Dec. 31, 2019?

• If a contagious virus had been spreading in China as early as the summer of 2019, why did China wait until late January 2020 to implement draconian and unprecedented lockdowns to “slow or stop spread” in hundreds of Chinese cities?

• If a deadly and extremely contagious novel virus was spreading in Wuhan many months before the first day of 2020, why did China experience only a tiny number of “Covid deaths.” (In a nation of one billion people, only 50 Chinese had reportedly died from Covid by the last day of January 2020.)

• Lastly, is it possible China officials, for whatever reason(s), also conspired to conceal early cases and might have conspired with other nations, including American officials, to advance the official narrative of virus spread - i.e. that spread began in late December in their nation?

***

In Part 1 and Part 2 of this series, I again summarized evidence which strongly suggests copious (definitely not “limited” or “isolated”) virus spread occurred in America. I also speculated that American officials must/might have wanted to “frame” China as the nation where a deadly plague originated.

A key unanswered question in my mind is how American officials (perhaps) knew that alleged “Case Zero” would be identified in Wuhan, China … and not until the final days of December 2019.

***

As it turns out, I covered many of the strange/unanswered “China questions” in a lengthy dispatch I published on Nov. 2, 2023 - 25 months ago.

Upon reflection, my article “The pandemic’s start date HAD to be delayed” might be one of my more significant dispatches I’ve written if only because I question many “origins” premises that few other journalists have highlighted.

As this piece is germane to my current series, I’d like to re-publish key parts today (with a few minor edits).

***

Given the overwhelming evidence of severe and widespread ILI in America before China’s world-changing announcement of December 31, 2010, the possibility such a virus might have already been spreading for months should have occurred to public health “experts” in America and the rest of the world.

For example, we know many athletes and visitors to the World Military Games held in Wuhan in October 2019 became sick at those games. This suggests a novel virus might have been spreading at least two months before the first person allegedly became infected at a live animal market in Wuhan in mid-to-late December.

However, if this contagious and supposedly lethal virus was infecting large numbers of Chinese months earlier (even before visitors started arriving to these Games), why didn’t anyone notice a spike of deaths before February 2020?

To me, the most credible answer is that the virus was contagious … but, for almost 100 percent of people who were infected by this virus, it wasn’t lethal. This latter point would explain the absence of a spike in all-cause deaths in Wuhan (and, for that matter, everywhere) before February 2020.

China is about as totalitarian a government as exists in the world. It’s also occurred to me that China could have simply never reported the possible existence of a new pneumonia-causing virus.

As very few people in China apparently died from Covid (and most who did were very old with co-morbid conditions), nobody would have known anything unusual was happening on the virus front.

But, for some reason, China did report this outbreak. And, as they say, the rest is history.

One can only speculate about the reasons China did report this novel virus to the WHO … thereby setting off a chain of events that today might be labeled the Mother of All Overreactions.

If we take China at its word, this government was simply doing the right thing. That is, if and when health officials discover a new (perhaps deadly and contagious) virus, they should, of course, tell the scientific and medical community what they’ve discovered.

It should be highlighted that China later locked down harder and longer than just about any country in the world. Plus, as we all know, China was ultimately blamed for producing the worst virus since the Spanish Flu (which, fwiw, did not originate in Spain.)

Speaking for myself, I can’t think of any good reason China would voluntarily assume the role of global pandemic villain.

Perhaps, even in this controlled society, Chinese decision makers knew they couldn’t prevent news of this outbreak reaching the rest of the world.

Perhaps they thought this virus was indeed “novel” and was perhaps even a “bio-weapon” that, perhaps in their minds, had been intentionally released in their country.

Also, it’s possible this country’s leaders didn’t know how bad things might get if they didn’t respond in a draconian (aggressive or pro-active) manner.

Or … Perhaps they knew the virus had started to circulate months earlier, but for whatever reason, China’s narrative-controllers wanted to date virus spread to late December/early January … just like American officials clearly wanted to do (and did do).

Maybe China and America’s official leaders were both covering up the same thing?

Today, it’s become much more widely accepted that scientists in China were - for some inexplicable reason - working with scientists from their adversary, America - and were very likely trying to manipulate bat viruses in a Wuhan lab.

However, given all the evidence of early cases around the world, it makes far more sense that any virus might have escaped from a Wuhan lab in September 2019 (or August, July or June 2019) and not December or November 2019.

Did officials in China - and America - have good reasons to push back the start date (virus escape date)? And, if so, what would those reasons be?

Assuming that some American officials were complicit in this infamous event, a couple of possible reasons occur to me.

Possibility No. 1:

The virus was released, either intentionally or by accident, at an American lab or a lab outside of America but not in China. America then tried to frame China as the culprit.

However, this “frame job” would not necessarily portray China as as world villain as the authorized narrative was that the virus was naturally-occurring. That is, it wasn’t China’s fault this pandemic began. The pandemic was instead the fault of a covey of bats that infected other animals which were later sold at a live market, which started the world’s Most Famous Pandemic.

The narrative, once sacrosanct, that the pandemic was definitely caused by a naturally-occurring virus is, at least, no longer considered “settled science.”

However (and importantly), this was THE authorized narrative for more than a year. In fact, many American scientists affiliated with the U.S. Government Science Complex still embrace this theory as the best answer to the virus origins question.

Even today, if anyone reads any story or study that mentions key details of this pandemic, this article will state - as 100-percent fact - that the virus originated in China. (That is, I’ve never read an article that states, “the novel virus is alleged to have originated in China” or “scientists currently believe the virus originated in China.”)

Significantly, if the narrative that infected bats were the true villain is accepted as “settled science,” virus-origin sleuths would have no reason to investigate possible lab escapes anywhere else in the world … or any possible lab escape before December 2019.

From the POV of the few Americans who might be “in the know,” this theory - if accepted - would effectively conceal any possible U.S. fingerprints regarding what might be the greatest crime in history.

Of course, China officials, who aren’t stupid, must have known that many skeptics would quickly blame their own virus lab (the WIV) as a likely source of this pandemic. However, knowing this possibility existed, China still made its world-changing announcement.

Expressed differently, if China had announced to the world that a novel new virus existed in, say, early September 2019, many people would have blamed the WIV at this time too.

It seems to me if China wanted to preclude such rampant speculation, the nation could simply have not made this big announcement. This thought thread, in turn, makes me wonder how possible Pandemic plotters could have known (for sure) that China would actually make this announcement … as, “no big announcement from China” = “No Pandemic.”

The real Covid story is what happened AFTER the virus escaped …

To myself, the more-important story involves government actions that followed the origination event.

For the directors of the “pandemic production,” the lockdowns and then the roll-out of the experimental mRNA vaccines are what really seemed to matter.

My Big Question: Would any of these events have happened if everyone realized that some new “bug” was circulating many months earlier?

My answer: No.

In my opinion, the main reason the birthdate of virus spread had to be pushed back is that this virus (regardless of what caused it) had not produced any known deaths. In China (just like everywhere else in the world), no noticeable spike in excess deaths occurred between summer 2019 and early March 2020.

How could the Bill Gates and Anthony Fauci’s of the world and the Science/Military Industrial Complex create the requisite fear needed for the lockdowns and then the vaccines … if nobody was dying from this new virus?

First a novel virus had to be identified, but this news was NOT enough …

It seems to me the narrative creators had to have a huge spike in deaths. As it turns out, they didn’t get the deaths (in large or eye-opening numbers) until a heavily-publicized outbreak in northern Italy and then an outbreak on a cruise ship full of octogenarians.

(As noted, as of the end of January 2020, only approximately 50 Chinese citizens had died from Covid and China didn’t record its first “confirmed” Covid death until January 11th, 2020 - which would be four to seven months after “virus spread” almost certainly started.)

For the purposes of “pandemic plotters,” the spike in deaths they needed arrived in late February 2020.

Share

One might ask why couldn’t the orchestrators of this production have “produced” the same panic and then, ultimately, the same number of (needed) “Covid deaths” a couple of months earlier?

My answer is that they couldn’t do this because a terrifying novel virus hadn’t been “identified” yet. Again, as it turns out, the key event was the “Wuhan outbreak” and then an official in China calling the WHO on December 31, 2019.

In effect, The Wuhan Outbreak allowed officials to identify where and when the virus originated.

In the mind of this narrative skeptic, the two most important points were that this virus definitely hadn’t been produced in America and the virus definitely hadn’t begun to spread when tens of millions of people in America experienced Covid-like symptoms, which, one assumes, were simply dismissed as a “coincidence” (although few if any virus experts even commented on or noted said coincidence).

Absent the “Wuhan Outbreak” seminal event, too many skeptics might have started looking harder at possible lab escapes in, say, America and more people might have started thinking about all the millions of people who’d already been sick with the exact same symptoms of those reported in Wuhan.

In short, officials would NOT have been able to blame the Mother of All Pandemics on bat caves located 1,000 miles from Wuhan.

***

Confirmed evidence of “early spread” in America would of course open up the possibility a lab-leak occurred in America (and, as far as I know, no public health expert has blamed any American virus on American bats).

Early spread that pre-dated the “Wuhan outbreak” would open up an entirely different line of inquiry into the “origin” question. While this would not rule out the WIV as the possible epicenter of pandemic, this lab would not be the only “suspect” or “lab of interest.”

Also, the official narrative insists this virus originated in China (probably Wuhan) and then spread everywhere else on the planet. However, it seems to me it’s just as possible a contagious virus could have originated in America … where, given a couple of weeks, it would would have also spread across the globe - including to China.

This was also important to the ultimate narrative …

Also, IMO, it was very important to the narrative that officials could say they’d identified the super flu in time … and thus lockdowns would save “millions of lives.”

The operative narrative became: “We have a novel virus that is actually spreading in late March and April (not, like normal, in the winter virus season), but we are now aware of this and we can protect you and your grandmother if you just do A, B, C and D and if you don’t do W, X, Y and Z.”

“Sheeple” need a good reason to panic and voluntarily forfeit all of their liberties. “Fear of death” provided this reason.

Thus, the key parts of the Covid program probably couldn’t commence until Major Proof of Death had occurred. Said evidence came, not in Wuhan or China, but in northern Italy, on one cruise ship and, later, in a few big-city hospitals in cities like, most significantly, New York … in hospitals that primarily serve the poor, plus, many nursing homes.

Per my hypothesis, the directors of the pandemic response had to wait for large numbers of deaths to occur before they could roll out the rest of their program/agenda.

Still, the hyper focus on China was very important to events that followed as China’s belated lockdown effort was widely cited as the life-saving, pro-active model that every nation should use to protect its citizens.

The odd difference between America and China is that locked-down China experienced very few Covid deaths, while New York City - after lockdowns were imposed - recorded more than 30,000 Covid deaths in approximately two months (from late March through May).

The Importance of the PCR tests …

IMO another reason the start date of virus spread had to be pushed back several months is that there wasn’t a PCR test when most people had experienced ILI symptoms.

Until this test became widely administered (after March 15, 2020), everyone who became sick was just … sick - perhaps from confirmed influenza or a flu-like illness.

That is, the PCR test was the real pandemic changer. Indeed, it became the official pandemic identifier.

As contrarian reports later verified, as many as 94 percent of “Covid cases” wouldn’t have been labeled Covid “patients” if the cycle thresholds on said test were set at 25 or 30 instead of 35, 40 or above.

Due entirely to the PCR Covid tests, Covid became the first major health threat where 20 to 80 percent of people who were labeled “medical cases” never even developed symptoms or needed any kind of medical treatment.

A key, undeniable, observation would be: When testing became widespread, Covid cases were suddenly identified everywhere.

If these same tests had been available in January or February 2020, I’m almost certain millions of people would have been “testing positive.”

Also, as I continue to highlight, the only Americans who received the very rare early PCR tests were Americans who had recently returned from China.

No PCR tests = No spreading virus and no pandemic. Widespread PCR tests = widespread Covid and the Mother of All Pandemics.

The vast majority of “Covid deaths” are also explained by the fact all of these alleged “Covid victims” had tested positive via a PCR test.

One of the greatest unreported scandals in history would be the distinct possibility the overwhelming majority of “Covid deaths” were actually caused by other co-morbid conditions in combination with iatrogenic treatments that contributed to these deaths.

Also, life-saving treatments that would have been used pre-Covid were often discarded in post-Covid times. (For example, prescriptions of antibiotics given to pneumonia patients reportedly decreased significantly. Also, proven and safe medicines such as ivermectin and HCQ were outlawed as treatment options via “official health guidance.”)

Another disturbing (and off limits) line of inquiry might seriously investigate the possibility these deaths had been caused intentionally, perhaps to create the requisite level of fear needed to justify the lockdowns and later the “warp speed,” experimental “vaccines.”

Even if there was no “intent,” the effect of the new treatment protocols (in my opinion) did cause a massive spike in deaths.

Also, trusted public health agencies like the CDC, WHO, NIH and prestigious medical associations did embrace these protocols and did smear and censor medical professionals who disagreed with key parts of the Covid treatment guidance.

Intentional or not, it was the sudden spike in all-cause deaths that cemented the narrative that this was a very contagious and lethal novel virus … and thus everything that followed was justified.

In Conclusion …

To myself, it’s immensely significant that no confirmed Covid deaths happened in either China or America before the second week of January 2020.

In my final story on this topic, I’ll present several possible reasons why China officials might have also covered up “early spread.” I will also summarize all the published reports of early cases in Wuhan (spanning from June through December 2019).

A head-scratcher that remains is why China was the first (and only) nation that, belatedly, identified a novel virus that was causing flu-like symptoms and pneumonia in some people.

***

(Subscriber Update: Since August 16th, 2025 to today, my newsletter has lost 438 subscribers (from 8,013 to 7,575). I mention this only because, if at all possible, I would like to reverse this trend, which maybe is not possible … but - Onward! - I’m going to “keep posting while I still can.”)

Subscribe now

Writer gratuities via Ko-Fi.

I recently stumbled across an article by NPR that chronicles the “Day Everything Changed” in the world due to Covid. This date was March 11, 2020. The article, which does identify the key events that changed the world, was published on the one-year anniversary of this date.

As the article documents, among other key events that happened on this seminal date were a prime-time address to the nation by President Trump, testimony of Anthony Fauci in front of a Congressional Committee, the cancellation of an NBA basketball game minutes before tip-off because one player had tested positive for Covid … and the big news that superstar actor Tom Hanks and his wife Rita Wilson had both tested positive for Covid while Hanks was filming a movie in Australia about Elvis Presley and his manager (played by Hanks).

***

Like probably most of my readers, I certainly remember the Hanks’ news. Hanks made his announcement (see text below) via an Instagram post that was viewed by 2.8 million people and was covered by probably every media organization in the world.

I’m sure the take-away of many citizens was, “Boy, Covid must be real and very serious - an epidemic of a now rapidly-spreading novel virus we should all move to the top of our fear radars … as this very contagious virus had now inflicted/stricken one of the world’s biggest celebrities,” etc.

At the time, this was probably my response as well. However, skip forward six-plus years and I now can’t help but wonder if this event might have been orchestrated, perhaps a planted story intended to evoke mass hysteria/panic and - if the world is a stage - to set the stage for the lockdowns that were days or hours away.

In several recent articles, including my last one, I’ve shared my opinion that “Covid” was a planned and coordinated event. In my last essay, I wrote that “plotters” must have created a detailed “Things-to-Do List,” which would also include an elaborate timeline of when different events would have to occur to produce the desired effect on the world population.

IMO, the impossible-to-ignore announcement that Tom Hanks and his wife both had Covid (on the same day an NBA game was cancelled, prompting, the next day, the suspension of the entire season) would certainly qualify as key events to ratchet Covid fear up to DEFCON 1.

Upon further reflection, several red flags or oddities about the Hanks’ news belatedly occur to me.

Parsing Tom Hanks’ Covid Post …

First, I would like to parse the text of Hanks’ announcement, and will add my own comments to highlight text that strikes me as maybe off or suspicious.

According to the NPR one-year-anniversary story, on Jan. 11, “Shortly after 9 p.m. ET, Tom Hanks posted a photo to Instagram of a surgical glove in a trash can, along with an announcement: He and his wife, actress Rita Wilson, were sick with the coronavirus.”

First comment: From my research, a “quirk” or “fetish” of Hanks is he often posts photos of odd random objects, including, for some reason, gloves. Personally, I don’t know what a photo of a surgical glove in a trash can might or might not symbolize or why Hanks decided to include this particular photo in making his big announcement. Still, this was the photo Hanks chose to include so it’s worth noting, I guess.

(While Hanks doesn’t say this, maybe he snapped this photo in a hospital examination room after he had just received his Covid PCR test?)

After telling his followers hello and noting he and his wife were “down here in Australia,” Hanks wrote:

“We felt a bit tired, like we had colds, and some body aches. Rita had some chills that came and went. Slight fevers too,” he wrote.

My Second comment: As symptoms go, this itemized list strikes me as about as mild as they come … and also somewhat vague. I also note that Hanks uses the past tense to describe these symptoms (“We felt a bit tired,” and “had” colds - not “we feel tired” and “have” colds) which, to me, connotes Hanks was not currently experiencing any symptoms.

Wearing my conspiracy theorist tin foil hat, the second paragraph is what particularly piques my interest:

“Well, now. What to do next? The Medical Officials have protocols that must be followed. We Hanks’ will be tested, observed, and isolated for as long as public health and safety requires. Not much more to it than a one-day-at-a-time approach, no?”

Third comment: It seems to me the real purpose of this post might have been to condition/manipulate/instruct the billions of people who would learn of this news to .. follow the protocols and trust the experts … not much more for anyone to do, no?

In my ever-skeptical mind, a cultural icon as honest and trusted as Forrest Gump himself is telling everyone “what to do next” and identifying the protocols that “must be followed.”

Hanks also tells his legions of fans and admirers that “public health and safety requires” that even people with a case of sniffles need to be “tested, observed and isolated.”

… which, as my research revealed, happened as at least several (but definitely not all) Australians who had a 15-minute interaction with Hanks and Wilson in prior days were quarantined for 14 days. Needless to say, filming of a major movie was shut down completely. (Filming of the Elvis movie has left the building.)

The text’s salutation:

“We’ll keep the world posted and updated.

“Take care of yourselves!

“Hanx!”

Fourth comment: Here we also learn Hanks has a cute and endearing nickname and that he wants us all to take care of ourselves.

Share

The story changes?

FWIW, I did find one more “update” from Hanks that provided more specific details of the couple’s bouts with Covid, details and descriptions which, oddly, don’t jibe with the Covid symptoms described in Hanks’ Instagram post and seem far more severe.

In a podcast interview posted on September 23 - six months later - Hanks said his bout with Covid made him feel like “my older brother was holding me down and punching me in the ass” and that he had body aches that felt like “my bones were falling apart” and/or “crumbling” like Saltine Crackers.

As a new detail, he added his wife suffered from “horrible nausea” and lost her sense of smell and taste and her symptoms lasted much longer than his own.

Per other reports, Hanks and his wife were admitted to a Queensland hospital for three or four days. (Hanks and Wilson apparently received their PCR Covid tests from the same hospital at some point on Jan. 11th, which due to the 14-hour difference in time, could have been the 12th in Australia. According to media reports, the couple were release from the hospital on the 15th and continued a 14-day quarantine period at a house they had rented in Australia.)

In his September podcast appearance, Hanks said that - excluding feeling like his bones were breaking up - his temperature while in the hospital was always normal (never spiked), that his his blood-oxygen levels were normal and neither patients’ lungs ever “clouded up.”

Thus, Hanks did not experience three of the signature symptoms or medical markers of Covid. I also note that Hanks never mentioned another signature Covid symptom - a chronic, painful or lingering bad cough, a symptom which would be particularly unwelcome to Hank’s wife, an actress who is also a professional singer who had recently performed at two concerts Down Under.

In his Sept. 23 podcast interview, Hanks also disclosed that hospital staffers would X-ray the chests of Hanks and his wife “a couple of times” every day (apparently for at least three days).

FWIW, in perusing YouTube reader comments, at least two readers questioned if Hanks’ statement that the couple received multiple X-Rays every day might be inaccurate.

It’s certainly possible this happened as lungs that quickly cloud over is, reportedly, an ominous sign of a rapidly-worsening case of Covid. However, receiving six to nine X-rays in a period of a few days also seems like a hospital protocol that might pose an unnecessary risk of radiation for patients.

As noted, Hanks and Wilson experienced none of the classic Covid clinical markers and it’s unclear to myself when the couples’ symptoms actually peaked and then subsided.

Based on my research for this story, I can also report that the “Good Morning America” report on the the Tom Hanks’ “positive” announcement included a closing anecdote by the show’s reporter, who stated the Hanks’ two sons reported on their own social media accounts (on the same day Hanks made his announcement) that their parents “aren’t even feeling too ill” - a statement that comports with Hanks’ Instagram post, but not with the later addendum details he shared in his YouTube podcast appearance.

More Discussion:

It seems strange to me - or maybe not so strange - that this big event/announcement took place in Australia, which is best known as the country with the fewest Covid cases in the first year of the Pandemic. (Hanks was one of 141 “confirmed” cases recorded in Australia by March 11th, 2020).

Despite being almost unscathed by Covid in the pandemic’s first couple of years, Australia is also infamous for imposing the most draconian Covid protocols.

(A nation once populated by prisoners from the UK became, IMO, a national prison of mandated Non-Pharmaceutical Interventions.)

To myself, if Pandemic Script Writers did want to stage an important Covid announcement (intended, perhaps, to stoke global fear), Australia’s leaders would probably be all in on such a project.

Follow the tests …

As I’ve documented in numerous articles and posts, Covid “outbreaks” seemed to always follow increases in the number of people who received the new PCR tests.

In America, I know that virtually no citizens had received a PCR test by March 11, 2020 (or, interestingly, only citizens who had recently returned from China).

In Australia, the first “confirmed” case in this island nation was recorded on Jan. 25, 2020. Forty-six days later (on March 11), Hanks and Wilson were among only 141 people who’d been given this test and tested positive, which suggests to me there wasn’t a lot of testing occurring in Australia either.

Still, both Americans got one of these few tests and, we’re told, both tested positive.

I also note the husband and the wife both tested positive at the same time, which might, indeed, connote a virus that was exceedingly contagious.

However, if they both tested positive, why didn’t either virus carrier infect any of the other hundreds of people they’d interacted with in prior days? If more people in their contact-tracing circles did test positive, contemporaneous or follow-up media reports did not include this detail. FWIW, I found quotes from officials who said extensive contact-tracing would occur but, again, the Hanks apparently didn’t infect anyone else while their virus might have been shedding, which strikes me as … odd.

Another key question to myself …

Ever the skeptic, one question I have is why did Tom and Rita even get one of these (then rare) tests?

From my research, neither person was battling a noticeable illness in the days before they got their tests.

From other stories, I learned that Rita Wilson - who I didn’t know is a professional singer - gave two concerts in Australia on March 5th and 7th (at the Sydney Opera House). At least on these dates, Ms. Wilson wasn’t too sick to cancel either performance, both of which her husband attended.

This story went global on Wednesday, March 11, 2020, meaning both Tom and Rita had already gotten their positive results by this date.

Rita must not have been feeling overly sick in the days just before receiving her test as, according to this article from The Sydney Herald, on Monday, March 9th she was a guest on an Australian TV show (to promote her future concerts). Several people reported interacting with her in the TV studio and nobody reported her as being noticeably under the weather.

Apparently, though, the couple’s minor body aches, feeling a “bit tired” and Rita’s brief episode of “chills” prompted both of them to go to a Queensland hospital on the 11th where they reportedly received Covid tests (which, apparently, didn’t need to be sent off to a CDC-type lab as the results must have been quickly ascertained.)

Presumably, almost instantly after receiving their positive test results, Hanks himself (not his own publicist or movie studio publicist) announced the results to the world.

I can only speak for myself (and the Hanks might be different than me), but, personally, I never go to the doctor one or two days after I experience mild symptoms of a cold … and, from my parsing of Hanks’ Instagram post, these symptoms might have already disappeared by the time Hanks and Wilson were admitted to the hospital, presumably for “observation” or as a “precaution.”

From another story, I learned from a video post made by one of the couple’s sons that his parents had been released from the hospital on the 15th and “were feeling a lot better.”

So what am I really suggesting here?

While admittedly speculation on my part, it seems at least possible to me that anybody who wanted to accelerate (or launch) the Covid Fear Narrative might decide that Tom Hanks and his wife testing positive for this new “disease”would, in fact, advance this goal.

What I don’t know is whether Tom Hanks (and/or Rita Wilson) could or would have been knowing and willing accomplices in an operation to ratchet up global fear of a pandemic and, perhaps, might have been recruited (by unknown individuals) to play this key role.

It is interesting to me that of all the people working on pre-production on a major film, the movie’s biggest star happened to be the person who did get a positive Covid test. (A grip or make-up artist who tested positive while working on a major movie would have probably produced zero global headlines and done nothing to advance the aims of possible Covid script-writers.)

Also, as mentioned above, the news both celebrities tested positive for this virus might not be the only significant take-away from this news event. For the purposes of Covid “script writers,” Hanks’ guidance on how people should comport themselves in the future (everyone do what authorities say) might have been just as important.

Plotters probably chose their MVP influencers for a reason

In my opinion, it was vitally important to Pandemic Plotters to use the most-respected influencers to shape the coming Covid narrative.

For example, in Table Top planning sessions like Event 201 and Crimson Contagion, participants noted that physicians were the world’s most respected profession (based on opinion surveys and focus groups). Thus, getting key doctors and physicians groups to lead the national response was vital to the operation.

IMO, an ultra-popular celebrity like Tom Hanks would have also probably been at the very top of any list of potential and respected global “influencers.”

Some people have questioned Hanks’ affable persona

While I’ve always liked Tom Hanks and admire his impressive body of work in films, I should also note that some people have speculated, alleged or suggested that Hanks might have a dark, secret life.

For example, his name has come up as a possible “Epstein client,” although I should stress his name is not mentioned in any Epstein files that have been released to date. (Multiple “fact checkers” have “debunked” this claim, which apparently was spread widely on the Internet.)

While it might be unfair to impugn any person’s character based on the the behavior of family members, it is well documented that one of Hank’s children (Chet) has reportedly experienced major mental health and substance abuse issues and has been described as “troubled” and “emotionally disturbed.” (Chet Hanks also once attended a drug-rehab boot camp program in the “wilderness of Utah” that has been described as “abusive.”)

While I’ve found no credible evidence Hanks has hidden a sinister alter personality, if it is possible Hanks was used (knowingly or unknowingly) to cultivate a massive fraud, it might be worth noting that more than a handful of people have questioned Hanks’ public persona as one of Hollywood’s most admirable personalities and have suggested he might have a much darker side.

(The host of one podcast show outlined several of the conspiracy theories surrounding Hanks, with the host ultimately concluding none of these claims have merit. This podcast also mentions Hanks’ possible glove “fetish.”)

Much more plausible to me, however, is the possibility the “positive” Covid cases of Tom Hanks and his wife could have been intentionally produced to stoke Covid fear and paranoia, as well as to instruct the public to trust the guidance of the Covid experts.

In Conclusion …

While I think it’s certainly possible Hanks and Wilson did contract Covid as Hanks has described and he was not a participant in any sinister conspiracy, I did want to post a story that outlines a few reasons I question certain details of this, at the time, major and significant news event.

I do think Pandemic Producers definitely rolled out a script and, FWIW, Tom Hanks is one of the world’s great actors, someone who might fit central casting for such a role.

While I hope Hanks didn’t play such a role, knowing what I think I know about the people and organizations that gave the world Covid, I wouldn’t rule out this possibility.

Also, if it is true that some kind of contrived plot was orchestrated to produce Covid cases for two celebrities, such a revelation would also suggest the entire pandemic was an “op” and relied on certain contrived events … and might qualify as more possible “evidence” the Pandemic of the Century was coordinated and planned.

That is, Tom Hanks and Rita Wilson going public with their Covid cases would be just one short chapter in an elaborate script, but a scene that would probably qualify as pivotal if Covid was, in fact, a staged production.

***

(Subscription note: As I’ve written, IMO articles that speculate about possible events should not be off limits if the author labels these claims as speculation and can provide a few plausible reasons why such thoughts occurred to him. I appreciate anyone who can financially support more-original stories such as today’s dispatch and, as always, welcome feedback from those who have different opinions.)

Subscribe now

Writer gratuities via Ko-Fi.

Author’s note: In this dispatch, I identify several questions that still leave me stumped. If any of my readers have theories that might answer some of the questions in this piece, please share your thoughts in the Reader Comments section. Also, any possible whistleblowers can contact me via email at: wjricejunior@gmail.com.

***

There’s a reason I haven’t published Part 2 of my article that seeks to, perhaps, largely “solve” many of the mysteries of when, who, where, why, what and how the Covid Pandemic actually happened.

The reason Part 2 has been delayed is that I haven’t come up with a decent answers to several questions I think are vitally important and need answering.

As a re-cap, Part I of my thought exercise seeks to answer many of these questions by filtering them through my “Early Spread” hypothesis. In a nutshell, based on six years of research, I’m convinced that persuasive evidence exists that wide-spread early infections happened and, for some important reason, such “cases” were covered up or dismissed by U.S. and global officials.

As I also noted in Part 1, I think “Covid” was planned and coordinated. Furthermore, the logistics of putting this operation into action must have required numerous actors working in unison, a scenario which would meet the definition of a sinister and elaborate conspiracy.

The questions that are still gnawing at me include the following:

• When did someone or some group of people (all of whom must have been very powerful) give the “Go-Order” to launch the Covid op?

• If this was a lab-created virus, how was it released into the population?

• If a vital part of the plan was that Covid must be understood to have started in China (which per my hypothesis, was likely “framed” as the Patsy or fall-guy nation), how did plotters know that China officials would be the first people to discover a novel new virus?

• And did anyone know the all-important “virus discovery” wouldn’t happen until late December 2019 in China? If they knew this, how did they know this?

• Another question that’s always intrigued me ponders an alternative history where nobody ever reported a novel corona virus. IMO, if China never reported any kind of novel outbreak, Covid as we know it would have never happened. (But, very importantly, China did report this to the world).

Via various means, I’m confident I’ve established that millions of citizens (many in America) already had Covid symptoms from mid 2019 to the end of December 2019.

As I developed in Part 1, my working theory is some kind of novel virus, almost certainly created in a lab, had been released (or maybe “escaped”) many months before China first reported a mysterious, pneumonia-causing virus to the WHO on Dec. 31, 2019.

My research definitely rejects and, perhaps, debunks the accepted or “authorized” theory that a novel coronavirus jumped species and originated from Chinese bats - the “natural origins” theory pushed so hard by Anthony Fauci, and, really, everyone (who matters) in the science and health establishment.

My current working theory is also that early cases of Covid must have been the result of a “field test” or experiment to gauge how contagious and lethal (or non-lethal) this virus really was.

Based on my own research, it’s far more likely that early Covid cases were far more prevalent in America than in China.

A question that gnaws at me is why would “Covid plotters” have released a virus in America if it was very possible that nobody would even know anything special or different was happening as it regards possible “spreading viruses.”

My best answer (guess) has two components:

One, as already mentioned, the plotters wanted to first test and observe how many people became sick and how many died … or didn’t die. (As pointed out in Part 1, my assumption is that plotters would not want to release a genuinely “deadly” virus as this might end up killing themselves or people they care about).

Two, per my speculation, plotters must have known if they were going to spread the Fear Narrative of a novel coronavirus they would have to provide evidence that such a novel virus actually exists.

That is, scientists apparently can look at viruses in a microscope and they knew, at some point, they would have to produce evidence that, yes, this particular virus was definitely different - aka “novel.”

While beyond my understanding of virology or science, the novel coronavirus - at least according to numerous sources - has a distinctive spike protein.

I know a fair number of skeptics dispute this, but independent and erudite scientific writers like Nicholas Wade and Nicholson Baker seem to agree this virus was different. Also, not insignificantly, several members of the cabal of scientists Anthony Fauci recruited to debunk the “lab leak” theory at one point told Fauci this virus definitely had novel features.

Also, based on my research, it would be much easier for mad scientists to make a contagious or “infective” coronavirus in a lab than to create a “super-deadly” coronavirus, a type virus, which per my research, has never been alarmingly deadly.

It would thus ‘fit” my early spread hypothesis that mad scientists created such a contagious virus that, IMO, was probably intentionally released.

(Where I disagree with Wade and Baker is they seem to accept the authorized narrative that this virus killed “millions” of people, while I think it killed far fewer people and probably had/has an infection Fatality Rate roughly equivalent to the flu, said to be 0.1 percent. Also, neither author ever mentions any of the copious evidence of “early spread” I’ve documented and, erroneously IMO, make the assumption “Case Zero” definitely happened in Wuhan in latter December 2019.)

***

One can dismiss any debates on the validity of antibody tests and simply note that there was, indeed, an obvious spike in the number of sick people who experienced respiratory symptoms (some symptoms apparently different) beginning in the fall of 2019 or, probably, even earlier.

The kicker, though, is that nobody knew anything different was happening as millions of people experience the same type symptoms virtually every “flu season.”

Nobody even noticed …

Which begs the question: Why would Pandemic plotters unleash a lab-created virus on the world if nobody was even going to notice anything potentially sinister had happened?

The only answer I can come up with is that plotters must have known, at some point, the world would be notified of an event that would be quickly labeled as an unprecedented plague, which would give them the excuse to spring into action and save the world.

Furthermore, it would almost certainly qualify as a “thermo-nuclear” scandal if many people reached the conclusion such a novel virus had originated in an American lab, funded by our tax dollars. This potential scandal would be triple thermonuclear if enough people concluded such a virus had been intentionally released.

Also, as I’ve noted 500 times, if “early spread” was ever “confirmed,” everyone would know this virus was NOT “deadly” as people would notice that no spike in all-cause deaths had occurred during all the months millions of people had (IMO) been infected by this contagious virus.

Returning to one of my first questions, I would still like to know when the world’s most influential and dastardly decision maker(s) made the decision, “Let’s go ahead and do this.”

Evidence the Pandemic was planned

In Part 1, I briefly noted that years of advance work must have preceded this world-changing decision, which surely would be the most stunning and audacious clandestine operation in history.

Prior to the first Covid announcement, approximately a half dozen table top planning exercises had already been held, the most famous (and, perhaps, most important) being Event 201 held in mid-October 2019. Crimson Contagion, which began in January and concluded with four days of table-top sessions held August 13-16 2019, might have been just as important for planners.

Also, numerous key laws and regulation had to be changed or created, patents filed, etc. - events which also suggest a longer-range goal or agenda.

IMO, the Moment of Truth arrived when a group of people (which, presumably, must have involved the CIA, certain government operatives and, see below, perhaps elements of the military) said, in effect, “Release the virus.”

Since I’m assuming plotters were not only devious and amoral but highly intelligent and efficient, they must have created a “Things-to-Do-List” and a timeline of when different key events would be rolled out.

If my theory is correct, having a novel virus at their disposal was probably the first pre-requisite of plotters. (In the absence of distinctive virus “markers,” knowledgeable scientists would say, “this is just another harmless coronavirus or bug. This is NOT a “novel” virus.”)

The lab-escape theory, not in China but America …

An alternative theory would be that a contagious virus escaped from a lab, perhaps from Maryland’s Fort Detrick, which, quite interestingly to myself and my research partner Laura Mueller, was shut down for many months in in early August 2019 due to safety issues.

This theory could posit that an accidental lab-escape produced numerous outbreaks of Covid, which the government then went to great lengths to cover-up and, perhaps, decided to blame on China a year to a half year later.

While I think such a scenario is certainly possible, for now, I lean more to the intentional release theory.

My reasons …. IMO, Covid planning must have been well under way months and years before a heavy rainfall and flood might have triggered an accidental release at Ft. Detrick.

(As Laura shared with me in an email, her theory postulates, “I think they were building a SARS universal vaccine at Fort Detrick, and they didn’t expect a thunderburst to take out the rest of their crumbling steam to contamination plant” in 2018, which is how a virus might have escaped from this facility.)

However, if my conjecture is correct that Covid had been pre-planned for years, I’m not sure how plotters could have known that a virus might, legitimately, have escaped from Ft. Detrick, perhaps due to a flood that damaged the facility’s containment systems.

Also, even if an accidental lab escape spawned “early Covid,” officials didn’t have to worry about this as nobody (who mattered) was talking about any strange spring and summer virus outbreaks in America.

I don’t know why these events never registered with virus sleuths …

It is true at least a few people noted a spike of summer deaths and sicknesses at two Virginia nursing homes (June 30 to July 17, 2019) and a strange “Vaping” illness in the summer of 2019 that received a modest amount of media coverage. (As Laura notes, no other strange vaping illnesses were observed anywhere else in the world at the same time).

While the nursing home outbreaks and vaping illnesses remain “unexplained,” nobody was connecting any dots to a lab leak at Ft. Detrick or any of the scores of other bio-labs operated by the government.

Expressed differently, if a novel coronavirus did escape from a lab, mad scientists and government officials dodged a bullet because this event was no where close to being a national “news” item.

While I lean to the intentional release theory, I do think it is an outrage that no serious investigations into a possible lab leak in America has ever occurred - either conducted by the government or our Cracker Jack (sarc) “watchdog” press.

***

For many Covid Contrarians, it seems likely that Event 201 was the final event for plotters to perform all of the necessary prep work and assign many participants their job responsibilities.

The assumption is that at least a few of these participants already knew what was getting ready to happen (and, probably, had already begun). This event was held October 18, 2019 in New York City (perhaps a coincidence, the date of the Opening Ceremonies of the World Military Games in Wuhan.)

But as Laura pointed out to me this couldn’t have been the “go” date as the key date was actually when organizers sent out invitations to participants, which Laura tells me happened in early August 2019.

The invitations were issued by event hosts Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security (what a name), the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the World Economic Forum - all of which would top my list of “organizations of interest” in any legitimate origins investigation.

How did they actually “release” a contagious virus?

The next big, still-unanswered question is how would plotters actually “release” a virus?

My subscriber and frequent poster Freedom Fox has argued for years that the mechanism might have been the new type of flu shot that citizens began to receive in early September 2019 - a theory I’ve always thought was inspired and could be valid.

(If I was lead Scandal Detective, I would also take a strong look at the flu shot of the following year as the huge spike in Covid cases and deaths actually, and nonsensically to me, occurred in the second year of virus spread … after 55 percent of the American pubic got another flu shot beginning in early September 2020.)

Other observers, like Sasha Latypova, seem to think it’s possible some kind of chemical dispersement could have been used that would produce Covid symptoms.

I’ve also read posts by people who wonder if “chemtrails” could have been used or maybe even 5-G radiation played a role.

Also, a surprisingly-large and perhaps growing number of citizens think there was no novel virus as they don’t believe contagious viruses even exist. While I am not in this cohort of skeptics, I’ve always thought it might, indeed, be possible to produce a pandemic where no causative agent existed. (Utilizing the fraudulent PCR tests and “re-branded” flu might suffice to stage a faux pandemic.)

Share

An even closer look at the claims of the 4chan whistleblower …

Recently, I’ve been thinking more and more about the “whistleblower” who made an eye-opening post on the 4Chan website on Sept. 5, 2019.

This poster, who called himself an “operative,” noted that the plan to roll out a deadly pandemic was already well under way by early September 2019 and the goal was to get everyone inoculated with a new “vaccine,” which he warned nobody should get.

The poster also said fellow operatives already knew the virus was NOT deadly (or “may” be deadly only to “elders” - and “babies.”

Upon further contemplation and closer parsing of this series of posts, I picked up other clues this whistleblower might have provided the public.

Wrote the anonymous poster: “It will originate from a pharmaceutical company working with military op’s in a west coast state.”

My Comment: Note this person doesn’t say “it” (the virus that leads to millions of coming deaths via a vaccine) will originate in China, He also states a pharmaceutical company working with the military will be the organizations that produced whatever was “planted” into society.

The reference to a pharmaceutical company makes me think a vaccine might have been the vector of infection and then spread.

“It will be accurately planted in major cities and it will cause flu like symptoms and may be deadly to elders and babies but the media will report it as deadly for everyone but it’s a hoax. The vaccine will be the real killer with copious amounts of toxic metals.”

My comment: This person writes it will be “accurately planted” in major cities, which, to me, suggests this seeding event will occur in the future and, perhaps, hadn’t occurred at the time he made this post.

It’s interesting to me this person, somehow, already knew the media would falsely report on the pandemic, which would be a “hoax,” which suggests key people in the media must have already been assigned their roles (probably at prior table-top planning exercises) … or plotters knew how easy it would be to dupe and manipulate the press.

Also, this post was made before Event 201, the final presumed planning session. However, the Crimson Contagion Table Top exercise had been held in August, which would be before he made his posts.

In response to the post of a skeptic, the “whistleblower” might have left his most intriguing clues.

“I do not know any details on the actual genetics of the virus sorry. But I know they have tested it multiple times already but in different “brand” names.

My comment: The whistleblower “know(s) they have tested it multiple times already but in different ‘brand’ names.”

The reference to “different “brand names” is what intrigues me.

Different “brand names” as in different brand names for vaccines? Maybe different flu vaccines, which were made available at almost the exact time this person made this post?

Had operatives tested several different formulas or ingredients (that is, all the “brands” were not identical), perhaps suggesting that different “brands” produced different symptoms or might have been more or less infectious?

I also note the reference to the military being involved and would note that U.S. military personnel are required to get more annual vaccines than any other profession in the world.

Lastly and FWIW, the whistleblower admits he “doesn’t know the genetics of the virus,” which infers he does know that a “virus” was going to be used and somehow released.

(FWIW, he also made no reference to any virus that had accidentally escaped from a lab).

I hadn’t thought enough about this question …

For all the thousands of words I’ve written about “early spread,” I admit that I haven’t spent enough time thinking about how a contagious virus would actually be spread or introduced into the population.

If virus spread started in America, we can probably rule out domestic bat caves or wet markets as a vector of spread.

The Wuhan lab-leak theory postulates that infected lab workers might have spread the virus simply by breathing once they left the lab.

Upon reflection, people receiving a shot might seem like the most obvious vector of spread. (Previously I must have thought some conspirator might have taken a vial of “virus” into a crowded room and then taken the top off the vial and waved it around, but that’s probably not the way any seeding or planting would happen.)

Anyway, how a contagious virus would be introduced into a population should definitely receive far more scrutiny … and from professional journalists or public officials with far more resources than Bill Rice, Jr.

Per my research, something made tens of millions of Americans sick in the fall and winter of 2019-2020 … before an anonymous official from China picked up the phone and called the WHO on Dec. 31, 2019.

In Part 3, I’ll grapple with the question of why China (or nobody else in the world) didn’t discover this novel virus until the latter weeks of 2019. As I will develop, China’s virus/pandemic response also features numerous details that seem very strange to me.

Writer gratuities via Ko-Fi.

If I’ve accomplished anything of significance with my Substack newsletter, I hope I’ve written many articles that illustrate that most of the narratives that determine important policies are not only bogus, but intentionally so.

Another point I’ve tried to make is that it actually doesn’t matter if a narrative is completely inaccurate; all that matters is if enough people believe the widely-dispersed storyline is true.

In the Iran War, an important “fact” cited repeatedly by those who favor a war to change the “tyrannical” regime in Iran is that Iran’s leadership murdered 30,000 to 45,000 (or more) Iranian protestors in a period of a few days or weeks just prior to America and Israel launching a surprise attack on Iran on Feb. 28th.

The claim that at least 40,000 Iranian citizens were murdered/slaughtered by Iranian forces has been repeatedly citied by President Trump, other members of his cabinet and prominent politicians as well as countless American citizens who have made social media posts defending the war started by America and Israel.

With today’s article, I will try to illustrate why this claim defies logic or common-sense (and, perhaps, should insult the intelligence of any person with basic critical-thinking skills) … not that this effort to debunk a false claim will make any difference as, read above, the “official narrative” has already been set in stone.

Still, it’s perhaps a good use of a Substack dispatch to identify yet another piece of “official” or “conventional wisdom” data that, IMO, does not stand up to even the mildest scrutiny.

The Basic (and rapidly-changing) Narrative …

Beginning around December 28, large numbers of Iranian citizens took to the streets to protest elements of rigid Iranian rule as well as ever-worsening economic conditions that were unpopular with perhaps millions of Iranian citizens.

Early reports, circulated in February, stated that “The Iranian security force crackdowns on the demonstrations (have) killed at least 2,586, the U.S.-based Human Rights Activists News Agency reported.”

(For its part, Iran officials claim approximately 3,000 people were killed in the protests).

However, this figure soon increased more than 10-fold, with reports by Time, The Guardian and other media outlets stating that at least 30,000 Iranians had been “slaughtered” by Iranian military and police forces in the matter of just two days between January 8th and 9th.

Once America and Israel began their non-stop bombing across Iran on February 28, President Trump stated that 32,000 Iranians had perished in the previous two months, a figure that, approximately a month into the war, had ballooned to at least 42,000 Iranians.

In response to a question from a reporter asking if bombing Iranian bridges and power plants might constitute a a crime against humanity, President Trump defended the war against Iran by stating:

“They (Iran’s regime) killed 45,000 people in the last month,” he said, adding “(the figure) could be more than that - maybe 60 (thousand).”

Indeed, as one Time article noted, the death total/massacre - produced almost entirely by rifle fire and machine guns (and some alleged stabbings) - was the worst of its kind in more than a century.

“The only parallel offered by online databases occurred in the Holocaust,” wrote Time. “On the outskirts of Kyiv on Sept. 29 and 30, 1941, Nazi death squads executed 33,000 Ukrainian Jews by gunshot in a ravine known as Babyn Yar.”

In other words, Iran’s leaders ordered a massacre (by gunfire and not explosives, bombs, etc) that killed approximately 9,000 to 12,000 more innocent Iranian citizens than the worst war-time atrocity committed by the Nazi’s in World War II.

However, if one employs alternative exercises in critical thinking, the claim that more than 40,000 Iranians were murdered in such a short period of time seems extremely dubious or, to me, even preposterous.

Here, I would note that, as far as I know, no fact-checking organization has published any kind of analysis that would question or definitively debunk the 32,000 to 45,000 death figure.

(Time did include one sentence that stated, “… the precise toll is difficult to verify” and in other sentences writes that the eye-opening death totals “could have been” more than 30,000 people or “may” have produced this number of deaths.)

A few examples that can provide “context” …

In 10 years of the American war with Vietnam, approximately 58,000 American troops died in combat.

In just two days, Iran’s government, per numerous sources, killed at least 30,000 of its own citizens and, according to President Trump at least 45,000 Iranians perished in one month - a death tally that would equate to approximately 77 percent of the total American KIA figure in 10 years of the (terrible) Vietnam War.

According to Iran officials, approximately 3,200 Iranian citizens have been killed so far in a war with daily and nightly carpet-bombing of Iran cities and military installations in all areas of this nation.

Thus, Iran’s own security forces killed 12.5 times more Iranian citizens than all the bombs and missiles fired by Israel and America for 40 consecutive days and nights.

The same governments that inflate enemy deaths probably deflate their own casualty figures …

If American casualty figures are to be believed, only 13 American troops have been killed from the hundreds or thousands of missiles and drone attacks launched by Iran against American military installations in the region.

Israel claims that it has suffered fewer than 30 deaths from non-stop Iranian drone attacks and missile attacks - which is 1/1,333 of the alleged death figure Iran produced with its violent response to protests.

Expressed differently, Iran’s most lethal missiles and drones killed fewer than 43 people associated with its main enemies of America and Israel. However, Iran killed 977 times more people with rifles and machine guns in a period of just two to 30 days.

According to Wikipedia, approximately 72,000 to 75,000 citizens of Gaza have perished since Israel began bombing this region almost non-stop in October 2023, which, if true, would mean that the Iran killed 56 percent of this total in a couple of days with machine gun and rifle fire unleashed on protestors.

Personally, I would at least double the Gaza death figure, which illustrates that “official” death figures can also be undercounted by massive amounts.

(In recent articles on Thomas Massie, I opined that the “Israel lobby” controls American government and policy. Those articles were probably as popular with this Deep State Regime as today’s will be. Still, brave readers might share this essay with other contrarian thinkers.)

Share

What percentage of protestors were killed or wounded?

Another way to parse, or critically-assess, the 40,000-plus death figure would be to ask what percentage of protestors were killed by Iranian forces?

To ascertain an estimate of this figure, one would have to first gauge how many Iranian citizens actually took to the streets in these various protests.

Iran’s population is said to be 92 million, but many of these citizens would be children and the elderly who were not likely to participate in a protest against the government.

Iran’s population of citizens aged 15 to 64 is approximately 64 million, an age demo that would probably comprise 95 percent of any citizen protest.

However, one assumes not every Iranian citizen in this age cohort took part in a protest. In fact, a protest where 15 percent of 64 million people participated would, to me, be an eye-opening percentage of citizens. (For example, as large as American protests criticizing the Vietnam War ultimately became, I doubt 15 percent of America’s population age 15 to 64 ever personally attended a protest to criticize this war.)

If this 15 percent estimate is close to accurate, that would mean 9.6 million Iranian citizens participated in a various protests across Iran, a figure I will round up to 10 million total protestors.

(One Time article - citing a source attributed to Iran’s National Security Council - said “protests took place in around 4,000 locations across the country.” This figure also seems dubious to me as, according to Google AI, “According to … the 2016 Census by the Statistical Center of Iran—there are exactly 340 cities with a population of more than 5,000 residents” in Iran.

That is, locations of various anti-government protests (approximately 4,000) exceeded the number of Iranian towns with a population of at least 5,000 citizens by a factor of approximately 12.

If 10 million Iranian citizens participated in government protests and 40,000 of these protestors were killed this would equate to 0.4 percent of all protestors being killed (1-in-250 protestors.)

However, it should also be noted that if 40,000 people were killed/murdered, far more citizens must have been shot, wounded and survived (or were harmed when the crowd stampeded in panic).

According to statistical data from recent wars and mass-shootings, for every one person who was fatally injured, at least 8 to 10 survive their wounds. If this ratio is accurate, if at least 40,000 Iranians were killed, 400,000 might have been wounded - which would produce a total casualty figure of 440,000.

For example, a sniper firing from a Las Vegas hotel in 2017 killed 60 people at a nearby concert and wounded 643 others, meaning for every fatality, 10.7X other victims were wounded, but not killed.

In America’s most recent war in Iraq - 3,777 American service members were “killed by hostile action,” with a total of 31,994 wounded in action, meaning for every fatality there were an additional 8.4 people who suffered wounds or injuries.

If my 440,000 “total casualty” figure is close to accurate, 4.4 percent of recent Iranian protestors were killed or wounded, which would be 1-in-23 or those present at the protests … which does NOT strike me as plausible or believable.

Time based its 30,000-plus death figure, in part, on alleged sources or records from Iranian hospitals.

This prompts this question: If approximately 440,000 Iranians were either wounded or later died from their wounds, does the nation of Iran have enough hospitals and hospital beds to treat almost a half million wounded citizens (with most victims wounded in a period of just two days)?

I also wonder if at least 30,000 Iranian citizens were killed in the protests of January 8 and 9th (and maybe 8 to 10 times this figure suffered wounds), why did so many Iranian citizens keep attending future protests? In my mind, citizens attending any subsequent protests must have known their chances of being killed or wounded might be around 4.4 percent.

More context examples ….

Another way to parse this data is that approximately 13.5 more Iranians died (40,000-plus) while participating in a series of protests than Americans who were killed on 9-11 (2,960).

Also, as mentioned, the death toll from a couple of weeks of protests was far greater than a year’s worth of non-stop carpet bombing of citizens in Gaza.

In researching this article, I read an editorial from The Jerusalem Post published yesterday (Sunday). The authors of the editorial are alarmed (and outraged) that President Trump may be close to “making a deal” with Iran and ending America’s involvement in this war. Per the editorial, if this is the case, President Trump would be “betraying” the citizens of Iran, who he’d previously promised to “liberate” from tyranny.

This editorial also noted that an “estimated” 30,000 to 40,000 Iranians had been “slaughtered” in Iranian government protests in the weeks before the start of the war.

I for one noted that the editorial didn’t cite estimates of the number of Gaza citizens who have been “slaughtered” in the past 30 months since Israel began bombing (and shooting) Gaza residents almost non-stop, purportedly as revenge for the October 2023 Hamas attack on Israel (or maybe to liberate them?)

According to my research, an estimated 72,000 to 200,000 citizens of Gaza - probably more than half of whom were innocent children, women and elderly - have died in an on-going siege many are now calling “genocide.”

Of note, until very recently, few corporate or legacy media organizations or governments have registered any outrage about this mass-casualty event. Nor has President Trump or his cabinet members of most of his supporters demanded that this mass-killing stop or that the guilty be brought to justice.

This is also a head-scratcher …

Common sense suggests that if, in a very short period of time, a nation’s government murdered 30,000 to 45,000 citizens (and wounded maybe 10X as many people), the people of this nation would probably not be quick to forgive and forget such a massacre.

At least according to my version of common sense, a government or a regime this evil would be highly unlikely to receive an overwhelming show of support just days after another nation allegedly tried to “liberate” them from the mass killers in their government.

However, approximately 48 days after the unprecedentedly brutal Jan. 8-9th “government crackdown,” millions of Iranians were rallying in the streets in support of the exact same government after America and Israel launched a sneak attack on the same nation.

While many neocons confidently predicted the people of Iran were on the verge of over-throwing its rulers, the exact opposite occurred as far larger rallies occurred across the country even as American and Israeli planes, bombs and missiles were flying over major Iranian cities.

As it turned out, Iranians were apparently far more outraged by the slaying of their Supreme Ruler (who they’d previously wanted to dispose?) as well as much of his family and scores of other regime leaders.

Also, the death of 165 school children (a tiny slither compared to the 40,000 who were allegedly murdered at protests) seems to have left Iranian citizens far more incensed.

Share

Maybe the protests really were a CIA or Mossad operation …

One imagines that the vast majority of Iranian citizens, perhaps, believe that the deaths at the protests might have been, largely, created by protests that were infiltrated by anti-government instigators recruited by either the CIA or Mossad or both.

A Reader Comment made after a YouTube video clip might summarize the views of many Iranians and observers of events inside Iran.

“The US tightened sanctions to crush the Iran currency, which led to a protest and the US-ISREAL armed protesters,” wrote the commenter. “CIA-Mossad agents started a violent protest in order to make the people overthrow the government (regime change). Scott Bessent, Trump, and Pompeo said this out loud. It’s no secret they tried to use the protest to topple the current regime.”

Even casual observers of world events must acknowledge that America’s CIA has a voluminous history of staging “false flag” or coordinated uprisings to cultivate coups of regimes that were not aligned with America’s goals and agendas.

(For what it’s worth, many people - myself included - think J-6 was very possibly a government-created “Insurrection.”)

Indeed, as the protests grew to impressive size, President Trump was encouraging an uprising of Iranians at the same time.

As President Trump posted on his Truth Social site in January (as reported by al Jazeera):

“Iranian Patriots, KEEP PROTESTING – TAKE OVER YOUR INSTITUTIONS!!! HELP IS ON ITS WAY.”

In my research, I found several experts and Iranian ex-pats who predicted the days of the evil Iranian government would soon end.

For example, Maryam Rajavi, President Elect of the National Council of Resistance of Iran, said:

“Following the January uprising, no one in the world doubts the certainty of the clerical regime’s overthrow.”

Time quoted one one exiled journalist,who stated, “I don’t know if this is the final episode of the Islamic Republic. But it’s the final season.”

If war plotters envisioned a scenario where massive numbers of Iranians would flood the streets to thank Israel and America for their liberation, this obviously did not happen.

In fact, the opposite clearly happened.

Indeed, it’s possible Iran’s “regime” has never been more popular with Iranian citizens or garnered more empathy from world citizens.

Also, if a core source of agitation that inspired the January-February protests was continuing economic hardships, such economic anxiety must be exclusively explained by 47 years of ever-more-stringent economic sanctions - imposed by America (and its allies.)

Which also begs the question of whether Iranian citizens would be likely to thank American leaders who produced decades of economic hardship. (Citizens of Cuba might now be asking the same question).

In Conclusion …

While there seems to be no doubt that at least a couple thousand of Iranians were killed in protests gone bad, the true figure is almost certainly no where close to 30,000 or 45,000 dead.

What’s also troubling to me is that the U.S. “intelligence community” must also know the 30,000 to 40,000 death figure is non-sensical.

However, if any intelligence analyst reached this conclusion, nobody has said this and gone out on a limb and become a whistleblower.

For his part, President Trump either believes the 42,000 to 45,000 figure (as he keeps citing it as a partial justification for the war) or, perhaps more alarming, he also knows these figures are false and dramatically inflated, but doesn’t care.

IMO, society has now reached the point where “leaders” can throw out any dubious statistical figures and at least half the population is going to believe it … which is disturbing. What’s even more more disturbing is the same people are going to constantly repeat these same dubious assertions as incontrovertible facts.

As Hitler’s propaganda master Goebbels allegedly said, The bigger the lie, the better … or, false or not, officials should keep repeating their lies as, soon enough, almost every citizen will believe them.

The world will probably never know how many Iranian protestors were really killed in two days or four weeks in the run-up to the Iranian War … just like global citizens will never know how many people really died from the response to Covid and the “safe and effective” “vaccines,” which the same experts, authorities and trusted media members said “saved millions of lives.”

At some point, more citizens might begin to understand that their trusted leaders never tell the truth.

Writer gratuities via Ko-Fi.

Today, supporters of President Donald Trump and the nation of Israel are celebrating as Congressman Thomas Massie was (at least temporarily) knocked out of the ring of national politics following an emphatic victory of a former Navy Seal named Ed Gallrein.

With President Trump going all-in to defeat his most prominent Congressional critic and the “Israel lobby” and its billionaire supporters kicking in at least $20 million to ensure Massie’s defeat, Massie did go down for the count.

In the end, it wasn’t even a close match as Massie secured just 45 percent of the vote to Gallrein’s 55 percent.

While the MAGA army celebrates another Trump scalp, Republicans like myself who admire Massie and were pulling for him in this race are feeling as disconsolate about politics as we perhaps ever have.

This depression, which one hopes passes, is explained by several incontrovertible take-aways from yesterday’s rout in the Blue Grass state.

To preface my analysis, I note again my core (very dark) political belief, which is that all important organizations in the country and the world are completely captured.

As many times as I’ve written this “maxim,” I probably haven’t defined the entities that, I believe, have actually “captured” every important organization in the world and government.

At the top of this list would be the “Israeli lobby” or Jewish billionaires who support the projects and agendas of the nation of Israel.

According to Cong. Massie and many other sources, at least 90 to 95 percent of elected U.S. Representatives and Senators receive significant financial support from said “Israel lobby.” All recent U.S. Presidents, including (now, most conspicuously, the current president) have received huge financial backing from the same lobbying groups and billionaire class of donors.

The first reason I’m feeling the blues today is I now know that said lobby cannot even tolerate one elected official who challenges or criticizes these organizations.

(To be clear, I know “Politics 101” states that presidents should reward one’s supporters and, perhaps, punish those who don’t support you. I simply didn’t know Massie’s views - and my own views - were this far out of the mainstream or this repugnant to voters.)

The time period in which this wipe-out election occurred also leaves me seriously discombobulated.

For all intents and purposes, the election in this Kentucky Congressional district was a proxy race between Massie, a critic of the Iran War, and President Trump, the man who (with Benjamin Netanyahu) started this war 75 days ago.

While polls show more than 60 percent of Americans do not support this war, yesterday’s election results showed that 55 percent of Kentucky Republicans must support this war.

According to earlier polling, Massie was actually leading the race several weeks ago.

However, in a 10-week period where gas and diesel prices exploded and many economists are predicting an impending economic Depression and even more-frightening inflation, Massie’s opponent surged in popularity.

I don’t know about anybody else, but what this means to yours truly is that most people in “my” political party don’t think anything like I do.

Even with surging gas prices and even with the news that 165 Iranian school girls were murdered in a “double-tap” missile strike and even when all predictions of a quick and easy victory have been overwhelmingly debunked, this war still seems to be good idea - and “necessary” - to at least 85 percent of MAGA Republicans.

Also, at one time (not that long ago), Massie was almost universally heralded as the one member of Congress who wanted all relevant information about the Epstein sex-trafficking and blackmail operation released to the public.

Instead of being rewarded for this Herculean and complex legislative effort to bring “transparency” and “justice” to some of the “perverts” listed in the files, Massie was politically punished by President Trump and his supporters.

Of course, the race actually became a referendum on whether American policy should be set and enforced by a “lobby” representing four or five million Jewish citizens in a nation with a population of only nine million people.

Yesterday’s election results gave us/me our resounding answer, which is … Yes! We should all support Israel!

It’s okay for key backers of Israel to meddle in U.S. elections …

In reading post-election analysis on the Internet, I noted one astute post made in a Reader Comment.

This poster pointed out that President Trump was impeached and, indeed his entire first term effectively scuttled, by the charge that he had been elected via “Russian (foreign) influence” in the 2015-2016 presidential race.

This poster noted that Russian PR “trolls” somehow used $200,000 in paid Facebook posts to swing a national presidential election from Hillary Clinton to Trump.

His simple point was that this “foreign meddling” in an important U.S. election was compromised by these Russian efforts and expenditures.

He then simply noted that foreign interests - who want the Project for a Greater Israel to be brought to fruition - just spent at least $20 million to defeat one Congressman.

“Good point there,” I thought to myself, 100-percent confident there will be no impeachment hearings or Congressional or national outrage regarding Israel’s efforts to shape American policy (or “steal” an electoral seat).

While I can find no evidence that Donald Trump changed any policies to favor Russian interests, nobody would deny that America did participate in and instigate two recent wars that have already cost $200 billion and claimed many thousands of lives - at the behest of Israel.

Of course, the main take-away from yesterday’s election results is that any Republican who disagrees with even a few Donald Trump policies is going to be taken out by the “orders” of Donald Trump, orders that millions of Americans, as good MAGA foot soldiers, will enthusiastically follow.

My (fairly recent) criticism of President Trump isn’t based exclusively on my differing views on the Iran War (or the kidnapping of Venezuela’s leader or the bombing/instant execution of Venezuelan “cocaine smugglers.”)

Once upon a time, many MAGA supporters opposed regime-change and unnecessary wars. However, other issues are important to me and, yesterday’s election results make me even more depressed because I know I’m in a maligned and impotent minority on these issues too.

The issue of greatest importance to me might be my desire to see the exposure of and justice for the Science/Medical/Big Pharma Complex that gave us “Covid,” the response to Covid and an extremely dangerous non-vaccine.

Massie has also been a strong critic of these toxic, democide-producing, liberty-eviscerating governmental responses.

President Trump, on the other hand, has done nothing to highlight these travesties of justice or stop the shots, which he still thinks “saved millions of lives.”

Like President Eisenhower once upon a time, I’m also a major critic of the Military Industrial Complex (MIC) - as is Massie.

Regarding the MIC and the Science/Medicine/Big Pharma Complex, almost every supporter of these cancers on American life are also avidly supported by Big Israel.

Said differently, the three “issues” most important to me are NOT major issues to any other politician (who matters) or, apparently, the vast majority of voters - even in a district that had previously re-elected Massie by huge margins.

So this self-awareness also explains today’s Massie Massacre Blues.

(There might be a few Massie supporters or admirers who share my thoughts, but being “Pro-Thomas Massie” wasn’t good Substack business in the Covid Contrarian Cohort).

Share

If Massie had won …

Even to someone as cynical about politics as myself, I did take some solace from the fact that at least a couple of principled politicians like Thomas Massie existed in Washington and highlighted issues I thought were important, even if clearly taboo.

If Massie had won, the main take-away for myself would have been that enough voters still exist who will support someone like Massie, even if they have been repeatedly instructed by the president to get rid of this “moron” and “the worst Congressman in U.S. history.”

Even before he became infamous for standing up to the Israel lobby and trying to bring more sunlight to the Epstein Regime, Massie was best-known as a Ron Paul successor who believed in limited government and as someone who was constantly screaming about the mind-boggling and ever-growing national debt.

With Ron Paul and now Massie both gone from Congress, I don’t know who will highlight these issues (maybe Sen. Rand Paul, who, alas, is the next prominent politician on President Trump’s hit list).

A possible Silver Lining?

It is possible a couple of positives might have come out of this recent campaign.

Even though he got creamed at the ballot box, Massie did make the nefarious activities of the bullying and ruthless “Israel” lobby a political issue for more people.

In his concession speech, Massie noted that voters ages 45 and under voted for him in overwhelming numbers.

Alas, the major voting bloc for Republicans continues to be what Massie calls the “Fox News demo” (and others are calling the “boomers”), a demo that probably broke 5-to-1 for the retired Navy Seal who eschewed all debate invitations.

(It’s a surreal world as I can remember how most Trump supporters allegedly swore off Fox News after it called Arizona for Biden a couple minutes after the polls closed and after the network fired Tucker Carlson … in retrospect, probably because the Israeli lobby wanted him gone ASAP.)

It’s possible that Lindsey Ghaham, Mark Levin and all the Fox viewers who were pulling for the “warm body” that was recruited to run against Massie might end up regretting this election outcome.

At this writing, it’s unknown if Massie will retire to the off-the-grid farm house he built with his own hands, and, in the future, will now refrain from criticizing the neocons and Israel lobby.

Massie might follow the lead of Marjorie Taylor Greene, who saw what treatment she was getting ready to receive from the same Israel lobby and President Trump and simply resigned from Congress before she also suffered a 10-point election defeat in her Georgia Congressional district.

Still, Greene, like Tucker Carlson, hasn’t gone gentle into the night and, today, arguably has an even higher profile as a private citizen who - who knows? - might run for president in two years.

Now one of the best-known politicians in the world (with millions of admirers), Massie could do the same thing.

Either potential candidate would provide a stark contrast to the current perceived successors to President Trump, Marco Rubio and Vice President J.D. Vance (both Israel lobby approved.)

Especially if the Iran War continues to “break bad,” it’s impossible for me to believe any conspicuous “cheerleader” for this war will benefit from a groundswell of support.

If I was advising potential presidential candidates Greene or Massie, I might recommend they run as Independents as one of my other take-aways is that the Deep State uses a “Uni-Party” to control American politics. (Indeed, we can ask RFK, Jr. how hard it is to qualify as an Independent … probably because the Israeli lobby has blocked the ascension of a candidate not aligned with the two political parties they clearly “own.”)

On second thought, don’t listen to me …

Actually, I would recommend that no reader put any stock in any of my political predictions.

I’m the guy, who about six months ago, thought Thomas Massie was a lock to win re-election. At one time, I also thought RFK, Jr. would easily get on all 50 ballots in the U.S. and win at least 25 percent of the national vote post-Covid debacle.

***

I guess my main take-away from yesterday’s election is that no viable political constituency exists that thinks anything like I do.

If you’re like me, you might have seen a few T-shirts that say, “Ron Paul was Right.” To make extra money, I could copyright a new T-shirt which might be popular in the future: “Thomas Massie was right.”

Of course, in politics - as in punditry - being right doesn’t matter a hill of beans if you happen to have attracted the ire of a certain nation’s all-powerful political lobby.

Writer gratuities via Ko-Fi.

One of the most-watched and anticipated Congressional elections in many decades is now less than 16 hours away with the race between 7-term Kentucky Congressman Thomas Massie and political newcomer Ed Gallrein.

The race has attracted record interest and political spending as it pits President Trump’s best-known Republican critic, Massie, against a candidate supported by President Trump.

While most news stories about the race focus on Massie’s support of legislation to release the “Epstein files” and Massie’s opposition to the Iran War, the “elephant in the room” is clearly Massie’s willingness to stand up to the ultra-powerful “Israel lobby.”

According to recent polling, Gallrein, a dairy farmer and retired Navy Seal, has surged in recent weeks and is now, perhaps, favored to unseat Massie, a result which would send a double message to all Washington politicians - do NOT challenge President Trump and do NOT challenge AIPAC.

On the eve of the election, I perused the Internet to highlight several issues in this heated battle.

The Elephant in the Room …

An article from USA Today published this morning, mentioned said “elephant in the room” at the bottom of a lengthy article:

“The other elephant in the campaign has been (Massie’s) criticism of the U.S. relationship with Israel …”

“Several MAGA-aligned figures have called out the administration’s cozy ties with the foreign ally, which reportedly urged Trump to launch this year’s war against Iran. Former Fox News host Tucker Carlson called the president a “slave” to Israel back in April, for instance.

“It was last summer when these ads were starting and at that point, I realized this is probably above President Trump and (Speaker) Mike Johnson’s pay grade to even stop this attack because it’s motivated by the Israeli lobby,” Massie told USA TODAY.

According to various sources, several Israeli “Super Pacs” and billionaires who support Israel have raised and spent from $10 million to $20 million to defeat the 7-term Congressman.

Also, President Trump has targeted Massie for defeat ever since 2020, when Massie voted against and criticized “a $2 trillion Covid relief package” (dubbed “Save Our Workers.”)

Among other serial pejoratives and insults, Trump has called Massie a “moron,” “a pathetic loser,” “a major sleaze bag,” “the worst person,” a “total disaster” and an “embarrassment to Kentucky” and someone who is “disloyal to Kentucky and to the United States.”

“I predict that ‘Representative’ Thomas Massie will go down as the WORST Republican Congressman in the long and fabled history of the United States Congress, even worse than Crazy Liz Chaney [sic], Cryin’ Adam Kinzinger, and Marjorie “Traitor” Brown (Remember, Green turns to Brown under stress!). They are all misfits and losers, but Massie, who is running against a great American Patriot in the Kentucky Primary, will hopefully lose BIG,” Trump wrote on March 11.

When Massie got re-married 13 months after the death of his first wife, President Trump wrote on Truth Social:

“Did Thomas Massie, sometimes referred to as Rand Paul, Jr, because of the fact that he always votes against the Republican Party, get married already??? Boy, that was quick! No wonder the polls have him at less than an 8 percent chance of winning the Election. Anyway, have a great life Thomas and (?). His wife will soon find out that she’s stuck with a LOSER!”

Since President Trump partnered with Israel and launched a surprise attack on Iran on February 28th, many prominent former supporters (such as Tucker Carlson, Candace Owens and Joe Rogan) have broken ranks with the President, who had campaigned for years on a pledge to keep America out of foreign wars.

“Influential right-wing commentator Mike Cernovich underscored another aspect of the contest in Kentucky – a showdown gauging the influence of podcasters who support Massie against campaign spending and traditional conservative media outlets.”

“Massie’s primary is an interesting one to watch because it’ll show if podcasters and social media can drive out the vote in a material way. It’s unlimited money on the other end,” Mike Cernovich wrote on X.

The election is also occurring after another prominent former Trump supporter in Congress, Marjorie Taylor Greene, announced she would not seek re-election, largely because President Trump had pledged to defeat her just like Trump has pledged to defeat Massie.

Per a common analysis, “the contest … could be a litmus test for the faultlines emerging within the Republican base, including over military interventions and support for Israel.”

“If Massie loses, every Congress member will be cowed into fear. If he wins, it’s a new media era,” said Cernovich as quoted by Al Jazeera.

Basically, tomorrow’s race might be framed as a referendum on who the nation trusts the most - Donald Trump (and the neocon policy-makers and Israel lobby) … or prominent politicians and pundits who now are willing to criticize the leader of the MAGA movement.

Gallrein seems to be closing fast …

According to a Newsweek article published the day before voting day, “The race is viewed as competitive, with recent surveys suggesting a tight contest.

“Gallrein led the latest poll from Quantus Insights. It found that 53 percent of respondents planned to support him, compared to 45 percent who planned to vote for Massie. Only 2 percent were undecided. It surveyed 908 likely voters May 11-12 and had a margin of error of plus or minus 3.3 percentage points.

This morning Newsweek reported that “GOP Representative Thomas Massie’s chances of winning against challenger Ed Gallrein … have plunged one day before the election.”

“Early Monday, Massie, who had previously been the favorite on prediction markets, slipped down to a 42 percent chance of victory on Polymarket, and 43.2 percent on Kalshi, down from 61 percent and 56 percent respectively as recently as Saturday, as in-person early voting ended.”

“… Shauna Reilly, a political scientist at Northern Kentucky University, told Newsweek that there has been a “shift” toward Gallrein in the past few weeks amid polling showing his surge and an increased ad buy in the district.”

The race could be seen as a referendum on Trump or a “cautionary tale for folks who want to oppose his agenda or stand up to him,” Reilly said. “,,, Should Massie lose, it will be clear that Trump still has a hold on the Republican Party even in the twilight of his presidency,” she said.

D. Stephen Voss, professor of political science at the University of Kentucky, previously told Newsweek that the fallout occurred as Trump “shows little tolerance for dissent, including when it’s motivated by conservative principles.”

“By the time the Epstein files started stealing headlines, Trump had targeted Massie so many times that it just made sense for the congressman to take the gloves off and fight back,” he said.

“Most (Republicans) are terrified of saying or doing anything that doesn’t 100% conform to whatever Trump’s diktats are at any given time,” Republican consultant Liz Mair said in a USA Today article.

Massie got sideways with the wrong lobbying group ….

In a recent two-hour podcast interview with Tucker Carlson, Massie said he has never been popular with AIPAC but became the organization’s No. 1 target when he made remarks in a previous Carlson interview where he noted that every member of Congress has a “minder” from different Israel lobby groups.

According to various on-line sources, approximately 90 to 95 percent of members of Congress receive campaign donations from different Jewish lobbies, primarily AIPAC.

Massie told Carlson the lobby is obviously seeking to make an example out of him as, even if he wins re-election, 90 to 95 percent of every other elected official is Washington will still support the issues important to Israel.

In other words, Massie is saying his lonely, contrarian voice in Washington probably won’t matter given how outnumbered he is by pro-Israel representatives in both parties. (However, I would argue Massie is viewed as a major threat to the Israel lobby because he is such an able communicator and gives so many interviews where he has the potential to influence large numbers of citizens.)

Massie told Carlson he could easily lose, but he owed it to his supporters to fight as hard as he could to retain his seat and not be cowed by what he views as sinister bullying tactics.

Massie has certainly gone all-in to win even with Trump and AIPAC doing the same thing to defeat him.

Both candidates have received the vast majority of their donations from people who do not live in Kentucky or Massie’s district.

A recent article said approximately 33,000 individual donors have given to Massie’s campaign. A Google AI query did not reveal how many individual donors have given to Gallrein, but as of February, Massie’s fund-raising efforts “have heavily outpaced Gallrein’s grassroots donor count.”

According to an on-line site called “AIPAC tracker,” AIPAC has spent $15 million on Gallrein per “Trackaipac” yesterday.

Just yesterday, Massie said Israel lobbying groups have poured another $3 million into Gallrein’s campaign.

Democrats are giving to both candidates …

Both candidates have made claims the other person’s campaign is being heavily funded by Democrats. (Massie became popular with many more Democrats when he co-authored legislation to release the Epstein files.)

According to The Daily Caller, as of March 20th, “Gallrein has received a number of high-value donations from people who have previously given to Democrat candidates.

“Of the 141 donors identified in the fourth quarter who contributed the $3,500 primary maximum or more to Gallrein, 120 of them had previously donated to Democrats. 112 of those donors are also high-dollar contributors to Democratic campaigns, meaning roughly 79% both maxed out to Gallrein and have made substantial donations to Democrats.”

In another interview, Massie said that, in a previous donation filing period, no Kentucky resident from three of the largest counties in Kentucky’s 4th Congressional District had made a campaign contribution to his opponent.

Still, much of Gallrein’s campaign “is being underwritten by three pro-Israel billionaires with deep pockets, including GOP megadonors Paul Singer and John Paulson. Another major donor against Massie’s reelection has been Miriam Adelson, widow of the casino magnate Sheldon Adelson, who was a fierce defender of Israel” as well as President Trump’s most prominent donor and supporter.

Massie has also received more than $1 million from a PAC funded by libertarian-leaning billionaire Jeff Yass, a long-time supporter of Sen. Rand Paul, who is also from Kentucky. Yass, according to Bloomberg, is the 27th wealthiest person in the world.

Massie, who holds two degrees from MIT, is seeking his 8th term in Congress. In his recent races, he has won his Republican primary by vote totals ranging from 75 to 80 percent.

President Trump won Massie’s Congressional District by 34 percent in the 2024 Presidential Race.

Given that the election is clearly a proxy to gauge support for President Trump, “support for Israel” and the Iran War - and whether it’s possible for any prominent Republican politician to win an election after going toe-to-toe with Donald Trump - political junkies will no doubt be watching tomorrow night’s election results with intense interest.

Writer gratuities via Ko-Fi.

Author’s note: While today’s dispatch isn’t as long as a typical article written by, say, a Midwestern Doctor, it’s about twice as long as one of my typical articles.

Still, I hope readers might read the whole thing or at least skim its contents as I think the article’s main theme or conclusion is important. For years, I’ve wanted to present this information for the same reason I write many of my articles - namely I know nobody else has done this or will publish such evidence.

… Off topic, at the end of the article, I publish photos of two more “chemtrails” that I took this morning while taking my son to school. One of the photos is of an eye-opening chemtrail pattern above Jack’s school.

***

In a recent dispatch, I wrote that everyone who matters in public health, government and the press must know that the embalmers’ clots exist. In the same story, I also wrote that key public health officials must have known that early spread of the novel virus had occurred in America.

Furthermore, I wrote that I would “prove” this in a future article. Well, this is the article where I’m going to prove this.

IMO, if officials at the CDC already knew copious evidence of early spread existed and intentionally concealed this information from the public (or dismissed it via a conspiracy of actors), this should qualify as a major scandal.

For myself, the bottom-line conclusion would be the public should NOT trust our public health experts and shouldn’t have trusted them from the early days of the official Pandemic.

More specifically, I believe this article will “prove” that “trusted” public health officials committed “lies of omission” by neglecting to cite copious and (to me) undeniable evidence that would refute or debunk their main conclusions.

***

The lead virus-origins detective organization in America is the CDC.

I want to begin by reporting what the CDC’s top experts said about the start dates of coronavirus spread in America in a press conference held on May 29, 2020 - a “media briefing” devoted entirely to the topic I’ve been researching for more than six years.

As NBC reported at the time, the press briefing was “the first comprehensive federal analysis of when COVID-19 took hold in the U.S.” (Note: On the same date, the CDC also published its own, non-peer reviewed paper on when virus spread began in America.)

This NBC article also notes this was the “first media briefing from the CDC in more than two months,” a point I believe is not insignificant for reasons I present at the bottom of today’s dispatch.

The high-points/key conclusions from the May 29, 2020 press conference …

According to the lede paragraph as reported by NBC (boldfaced text added for emphasis by myself):

“The coronavirus began quietly spreading in the U.S. as early as late January, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported Friday — before President Donald Trump blocked air travel from China and a full month before community spread was first detected in the country.”

As I’ve written many times, studies or “investigations” can be manipulated via the manner they are structured or performed. That is, if an important agency prefers to NOT “confirm” something that might be scandalous, there are ways to achieve this goal.

Helpfully for my research purposes, the NBC article lists the mechanisms/data CDC virus sleuths used to determine when community spread actually began in America:

“The CDC traced the early spread in several ways, including what’s called syndromic surveillance of emergency department records, tests of respiratory specimens and analyses of the virus’s genetic sequences from early cases.”

I often write that skeptics should look for information that is NOT presented to the public or activities that did NOT occur.

In this example, note that the CDC did NOT include any analysis of American citizens who had tested positive for Covid antibodies, including people who received positive antibody tests after experiencing definite Covid symptoms in the latter months of 2019.

Nor did the CDC’s virus sleuths consider the significance of numerous “early outbreaks” of illnesses where the symptoms exhibited by Americans perfectly matched Covid symptoms.

Nor did the agency mention its own weekly ILI Surveillance reports, which showed cases of ILI - beginning in early November 2019 - had exploded far above the expected “baseline.”

Instead, “genetic sequencing” and “syndromic surveillance” seemed to be the primary tools for “confirming” early Covid cases.

As we will see, the “early cases” identified via genetic sequences weren’t nearly as early as the cases I easily found from reports published two or more weeks before this press conference.

Per the CDC’s experts:

“Information from these diverse data sources suggests that limited community transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in the United States occurred between the latter half of January and the beginning of February, following an importation of SARS-CoV-2 from China,” the authors wrote.

The article also reports the first “confirmed” case of Covid in America, which occurred on Jan. 21 - a “patient” in his 30s who lived outside of Seattle, “flew home on Jan. 15 after traveling in Wuhan, China, where the pandemic originated.”

My comment: If I’d written this story, I would have at least added a key qualifier “… Wuhan, China, where the pandemic is believed to have originated.” (Here one sees an example of how “authorized narratives” are written in stone and thus, quickly, become “facts” not theories.)

Elsewhere in the paper, officials wrote and repeated at the press conference:

“… Three separate COVID-19 cases in California confirmed “cryptic circulation of the virus by early February …”

The Key Finding …

Most significantly to myself, as summarized by NBC, the lead author of the paper and a top CDC official who spoke at the press conference stated:

“There was no indication the virus had been introduced into the U.S. earlier, in November or December.”

“We looked for evidence of early widespread transmission and could not confirm it,” Dr. Jay Butler, deputy director for infectious diseases at the CDC, said during the media briefing Friday.

***

In a nutshell, there we have it - The definitive conclusion on virus spread in America - from the country’s leading health and virus experts:

“Limited” virus spread might have begun in America in the “latter half of January 2020” and had become “cryptic” spread (whatever that is) by early February.

The headline pronouncement was that no spread had occurred anywhere in America in any months of 2019 (before the Wuhan outbreak) … or, to perhaps cover their fannies from possible subsequent revelations - no “widespread transmission” that experts could “confirm” had been uncovered … although Dr. Jay Butler told his audience (the nation) that the CDC’s experts had “looked” for such “evidence.”

IMO, the CDC’s virus detectives didn’t look very hard, nor have I found any subsequent evidence that the experts kept looking for said evidence.

(A better headline for this article might be: “What didn’t the experts know … and why didn’t they know this?”)

By May 29th, 2020 - when this big press conference was held and officials reported “no evidence” of virus spread existed before mid-January - a freelance journalist in Troy, Alabama had already found the following evidence, all of which had to be known to every key CDC official at the time …

(If anyone knows RFK, Jr. or Sen. Rand Paul, please forward this article to them.)

Share

Does anyone at the CDC read significant and eye-opening public health stories on the Internet?

April 30, 2020 - Belleville, NJ Mayor Michael Melham went public with the fact he received a positive Covid antibody test (and later got a second positive AB result) after experiencing definite Covid symptoms while attending an Atlantic City Conference Nov. 19-21, 2019. The story was widely reported by news outlets including Fox News and NJ.Com.

As an aside germane to today’s critique of America’s awful corporate press corps, I still shake my head at this NJ.Com headline, which, to me, is a perfect example of America’s captured news media: “N.J. mayor makes unfounded claim that he had coronavirus in November.” Two days later, an opinion columnist for New Jersey’s leading news organization wrote a column with the scolding headline: “Stop saying you think you had coronavirus.”

***

First week in May 2020 - Birmingham, Alabama TV station WBRC aired a segment in its nightly newscast, later shared widely on Facebook, reporting that a couple from Sylacauga, Alabama (Tim and Brandie McCain) had both tested positive for Covid antibodies in late April after experiencing Covid symptoms in December 2019 (Tim was hospitalized in ICU for 28 days).

***

May 14, 2020 - The Seattle Times, in a Page-1 article, reported that at least two residents of Snohomish County Washington had tested positive for Covid antibodies in late April or early May after experiencing definite Covid symptoms in December 2019. A follow-up story a couple days later said that many more local residents may have also tested positive for antibodies, although local officials were too busy to fully investigate these claims.

Significantly, state and county officials did investigate at least two early cases, which they labeled “probable” (but not “confirmed.”) Presumably, someone in Washington state must have given a heads-up to colleagues at the CDC about these “probable” cases and, as this story was picked up by other major news outlets, someone at the CDC must have taken note of likely cases that happened before the Wuhan Outbreak.

(One theory that might excuse the CDC officials is that this giant agency includes no employees who read newspapers or monitor news reports dealing with eye-opening public health news.)

***

May 16, 2020 - The Palm Beach Post published a Page-1 article that reported that 11 residents who all lived two blocks from one another in one neighborhood in Delray Beach all tested positive for Covid antibodies after experiencing definite Covid symptoms in November and December 2019.

The story also mentioned that a Boca Raton medical clinic had begun to give antibody tests at some point in March 2020 and 200 (out of 500) people had tested positive for Covid antibodies by early May 2020.

The story quoted the lab’s manager as saying she reported these positive antibody results to the Florida Department of Public Health, which presumably would have passed this info onto the CDC before the May 29, 2020 press conference where officials stated they’d found no evidence of early cases in 2019.

***

May 12, 2020 - The Cincinnati Enquirer reported that seven Ohioans who had Covid symptoms as early as January 7th and all seven had tested positive for Covid antibodies. These positive cases, per FDA mandates, had been reported to state public health officials who, one imagines, must have forwarded this info up the chain of the public health bureaucracy to the CDC.

If we count the 200 antibody-positive residents of South Florida, these possible early cases involve at least 212 American citizens in at least five states, all of whom were featured in major stories by prominent news organizations two to four weeks before the CDC’s May 29th press conference.

(As I developed in this recent article, all of the evidence cited in today’s article does not connote “limited” virus spread as I have identified antibody and symptom early cases from at least 21 far-flung states.)

(I wrote this story in a couple of hours but it took years of research to compile this information.)

But, wait, there’s more - Numerous Antibody studies had already been completed by May 29th …

Apparently, the CDC origins sleuths placed no great weight on antibody results, but if they had, officials at the CDC must have been extremely familiar with several eye-opening studies that had been completed before this May 29th press conference. (As you will see, two of these studies were conducted by the CDC!)

***

Red Cross Antibody Study (Dates CDC knew antibody Results ????) - The most famous, and probably significant, antibody study was commissioned and performed by the CDC, which tested approximately 7,000 units of “archived” Red Cross blood for antibodies. Blood donors gave this blood between Dec. 13, 2019 and early January 2020.

Among donors from the Northern California Region of the Red Cross who gave blood Dec. 13-16, 2019, 2.4 percent tested positive.

Significantly, to this day, it is unknown WHEN these vials of blood were actually tested for antibodies. What is known is that the CDC paper announcing the results was published Nov. 30, 2020 - almost 12 months after donors had given blood.

At least for myself, it’s almost impossible to believe that 150 days after China first reported a mysterious coronavirus to the WHO (on Dec. 31, 2019) that these 7,000 vials had still not been tested for antibodies.

That is, I believe these results were already known by the CDC by the time it held its May 29th Press Conference. (The other possibility would be officials intentionally delayed testing these archived blood samples, which, IMO, would qualify as a scandal or an act of professional malfeasance.)

***

From April 20-24, 2020 the CDC (and Navy) tested 382 crew members of the USS Theodore Roosevelt aircraft carrier for Covid antibodies. Sixty percent of this sample tested positive for antibodies. A paper outlining the results of the study was posted online on June 9, 2020 by the MMWR (where the CDC publishes its own papers).

Since it takes only a few days to test 382 vials of blood for antibodies, numerous officials at the CDC must have been well aware of these results weeks before the final paper was submitted and published (and before the organization’s May 29 press conference.)

As I’ve written previously, it’s highly unlikely that every crew member who tested positive for antibodies had been infected a couple of weeks before they donated blood for this test. Indeed, two of the 228 positive sailors reported via written questionnaires that they had experienced Covid symptoms on or before January 17 when the ship left port (which was four days before the first “confirmed” Covid case in America).

I should also highlight that authors of the Roosevelt study defined a “confirmed” case as any person who tested positive via a PCR (swab) test OR an antibody test. In my research, this is the only study I have found that labels a positive antibody test as a “confirmed” case as all the other studies define a confirmed case as being a positive result on a PCR test.

I should also note that one other “voluntary” antibody study was done of crew members of the USS Kidd destroyer. This study - where blood was collected on April 28 and May 13 - found that approximately 42 percent of crew members tested positive for antibodies.

Again, these tests were administered 16 to 31 days before the CDC Press Conference.

(Also, an antibody study was done at approximately the same time of all crew members on a French aircraft carrier and this study found that 60 percent of these French Naval crew members tested positive for antibodies. Here, one presumes the CDC might also be in contact with public health officials from other nations, including France.)

***

A third eye-opening antibody study was also completed six weeks before the CDC’s press conference of May 29th.

An antibody study of 285 healthcare workers (HCW) in the New York City Mount Sinai Hospital System was conducted March 24 - April 4 2020. This study found that 36 percent of HCW already had antibodies by these dates.

As Mount Sinai is one of the most prestigious hospital systems in America and this was a relatively early antibody study, it also seems impossible to me that officials at the CDC were not aware of these eye-opening results by May 29th, 2020.

A paper publishing the results was received by the scientific journal that published the results on April 17, 2020 and “accepted” for publication on May 12 - 17 days before the CDC press conference. (Note: It took only 13 days for these antibody results to be known and published in a paper).

Given that 102 HCW (36 percent) tested positive - with cases/infections that must have pre-dated the first confirmed case in America - a scenario where virus sleuths would completely dismiss these findings would strike me as very curious.

***

In the same story, I mentioned a much-larger antibody study that was done by the New York Department of Public Health between April 19-28, 2020.

This study - which tested 15,100 random visitors to New York grocery stores - found that 13 percent of state residents had antibodies at the time with a “positive” rate of 21 percent in New York City.

By late April, practically every prominent news organization in the country and in New York had published or aired stories about the “preliminary” results of this antibody study.

At least to myself, it seems almost impossible that all the thousands of positive donors had contracted this virus after mid-February 2020.

In Summary …

According to multiple stories that were published weeks before the May 29th CDC press conference by prominent news organizations, large numbers of Americans in far-flung states had tested positive for Covid antibodies with cases that, based on symptoms and serological results, occurred weeks and months before the CDC’s experts said “limited” spread had begun in America.

Furthermore, multiple antibody studies also provide copious evidence of early cases. Per my assessment, officials at the CDC must have also known about all of these study results at the time of their May 29, 2020 press conference. (As noted, two of the studies were commissioned and performed by the CDC.)

As I recently discovered, the FDA required all labs and clinics offering antibody tests to report any positive results to public health agencies.

To me, red flags (suggesting a cover-up) present themselves when one considers that America’s public health bureaucracy would require the reporting of this data … and then the CDC and most state health agencies never reported this raw data to the public.

***

In this story, I haven’t included the overwhelming “symptom” evidence which, to myself, confirms that the “flu season” of 2019-2020 (just before official Covid) was one of the most severe in many decades.

To cite one more example, I find it impossible to believe that nobody at the CDC knew that the number of schools that had closed due to illness in the months before “official” Covid was unprecedented in U.S. history (by a massive degree).

This would seem even more unlikely given that the CDC itself - in April 2024 - published another paper quantifying the record number of school closings in 2019-2020 (2,886) when a previous five-year average had seen 170 schools close in a given year.

Is it really plausible that nobody at the CDC ever considered the possibility that such a huge spike in the number of schools closing due to rampant illnesses might have, at least partially, been caused or explained by millions of students and teachers who had been stricken by Covid?

Speaking for myself, I seriously doubt this.

(Another “sickness” metric I’ve documented is that, for some reason, the number of “flu tests given” was far greater in the flu season of 2019-2020 than all previous flu seasons.)

Instead, as of May 29, 2020, I believe that officials with the CDC knew that evidence of early spread was voluminous and if not undeniable, almost undeniable.

However, these officials must have also known they could conceal this evidence from the public (by manipulating how they presented their “evidence”) … and by omitting the most persuasive or compelling “early spread” evidence, including thousands of likely early cases the agency never “investigated.”

Why no CDC press conferences for more than 2 months?

Which brings me to members of the American “watchdog” press who covered this press conference and, thus, had ample opportunities to ask questions that might cite any or all of the evidence I’ve cited in today’s article.

Alas, no reporter pointed out this information or asked any questions casting doubts on the experts’ conclusions regarding the date virus spread had commenced in America.

To me, this means America’s science and health reporters must have been either shockingly uninformed … or they somehow knew that early spread was a taboo topic where the “authorized” narrative could not be challenged or debunked. (And, six years later, still can’t be challenged.)

I’m almost done …

At the top of this story, I included a sentence from NBC’s story on this origins press conference that mentioned this was the first media briefing hosted by CDC officials in “more than two months.”

The Press Conference was May 29th, 2020, meaning the CDC’s last press conference on issues of massive importance to the public was held in the days before March 29th (14 days after the lockdowns were implemented).

This would mean that in, arguably, the two most society-changing months in U.S. history, the organization considered THE nation’s public health authority didn’t make any of their key employees available to answer any questions, at least in a press conference setting.

At a time when every assessment and piece of guidance from such a powerful agency should have been subjected to intense scrutiny, the public received crickets.

And when this “public” agency did finally hold a press conference, nobody in the working press asked a single astute or important question … or challenged any claim made by this agency’s alleged experts.

All of the above explains how and why virtually every American citizen was clueless about the voluminous and persuasive evidence of “Early Spread” in America.

As noted, today’s article provides even more reasons that no discerning citizen should blindly trust the pronouncements and claims of our country’s alleged public health experts.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

CHEMTRAIL UPDATE …

I snapped these two “chemtrail” photos this morning.

This pattern of clouds or trails struck me as odd as they were only present in one small quadrant of the sky (the Southeast part of Troy’s skies). When I spanned the sky and looked in all other directions, I noticed the sky was largely cloudless and just brilliant blue sky.

The first photo is the sky above Troy Elementary School at around 7:40 a.m. The other photo is the same “trails” but taken from the parking lot of a convenience store a couple of miles away.

I also spotted about five jets in the sky. One was definitely making long “trails” that didn’t instantly evaporate (a likely “chemtrail” IMO). However, I saw two or three jets, apparently flying at approximately the same altitude, that looked like they were making “contrails” - exhaust patterns that quickly evaporated.

Oddly, one plane was producing no trails behind it.

Again, it was strange to me that these clouds or trails were largely restricted to just one quadrant of the sky.

FWIW, my 10-year-old son, Jack, also thought the streaks above his school were conspicuous (a different sight) and likely “chemtrails.”

Writer gratuities via Ko-Fi.

As you might imagine, my ears perked up when I heard that Sen. Rand Paul was going to chair a Senate Homeland Security Committee meeting this morning about the “Origins of Covid” at a hearing that featured a “CIA whistleblower.”

Fox News provided a link to the hearing, which I watched in its entirety. Possessing a keen interest in the “Early Spread” hypothesis, I was particularly interested in seeing if the purported “whistleblower” or any senators might discuss the timeline of virus spread in China and in nations outside of China.

Unfortunately, the CIA “whistleblower” nor any of the Republican senators mentioned any of the evidence of early virus transmission I’ve presented in the past six years. (Note: No Democrats on the Committee even bothered to attend).

In an upcoming article, I will present more evidence of why I think “Case Zero” of Covid could not have occurred from a lab leak in Wuhan - at least in the months of October, November and December 2019 - which is the “authorized” origins narrative. I thus think Covid’s “origins investigations” still aren’t comprehensive and have ignored or failed to pursue significant alternative theories.

Still, this was an interesting hearing and I thought my readers might enjoy reading one summary of events. The following article was written by staffers from TrialSite News.

I was very flattered the author of this article included four paragraphs of text that referenced the “early spread” theories espoused by myself and Laura Mueller, a citizen researcher who has collaborated with me on several areas of “early spread” research.

Note: I added bold-faced text to emphasize sentences that I also found particularly interesting or that capture the main themes or take-aways from this morning’s hearing.

***

The Deep State Under Trump? CIA Whistleblower Ignites Explosive Senate Clash Over COVID Secrecy, Fauci, and the Limits of Oversight

trialsitenews

TrialSite Staff | Making Biomedical Research Evidence Accessible to All

May. 13, 2026, 11:43 a.m.

In a Senate hearing that often felt less like routine oversight and more like a stress test for the credibility of the American state itself, CIA whistleblower James Erdman III delivered sweeping allegations Wednesday, accusing intelligence officials, public health elites, and federal bureaucracies of suppressing or distorting critical information surrounding COVID-19 origins, gain-of-function research, and pandemic-era decision-making.

Led by Senators Ron Johnson and Rand Paul, the hearing mixed serious constitutional questions about secrecy and accountability with the increasingly combustible politics of post-pandemic America. Yet beneath the fireworks hovered an irony nobody fully resolved: Republicans now control the White House, Congress, and much of the executive apparatus itself. If a “deep state” still governs Washington beyond elected authority, then it presently operates under President Donald Trump.

The Allegations Were Extraordinary

Erdman, a career CIA operations officer formerly assigned to the Office of the Director of National Intelligence’s Directors Initiative Group (DIG), did not speak cautiously. He alleged that intelligence leaders “downplayed” the possibility of a laboratory origin for SARS-CoV-2 and that the resulting failures produced “a cover-up, wasted resources, and a failure to properly inform policymakers.”

Most explosively, Erdman directly accused Anthony Fauci of intentionally shaping the intelligence community’s analytical process through a network of allegedly conflicted scientific advisers tied to federally funded biodefense and public health ecosystems.

He further alleged that CIA managers retaliated against analysts who supported the lab-leak hypothesis and illegally monitored investigators involved in the DIG review.

None of these claims were independently verified during the hearing. No documentary evidence was publicly introduced substantiating the most severe allegations. But the testimony itself was extraordinary both in scope and in tone. This is because the whistleblower came forward at great risk and asked that his report remain with the Senators for the time being and not the public.

Beyond Wuhan: A Broader Biodefense State

The hearing’s most important theme extended far beyond Wuhan.

Erdman repeatedly argued that post-9/11 biodefense expansion blurred the lines separating:

• intelligence agencies,

• military biodefense programs,

• public health authorities,

• federally funded gain-of-function research,

• and academic scientific networks.

According to his testimony, this created an “oversight-resistant ecosystem” sustained by overlapping grants, national security priorities, scientific prestige, and institutional self-protection.

That point deserves serious attention.

For years, debates over COVID origins have been flattened into simplistic binaries: “natural spillover” versus “lab leak,” science versus conspiracy, patriotism versus dissent.

Erdman’s testimony instead described something more structurally complex — a sprawling transnational biodefense infrastructure in which intelligence agencies, universities, contractors, pharmaceutical interests, and public health bureaucracies increasingly overlap while meaningful oversight struggles to keep pace.

The Contradiction at the Center of the Hearing

Yet the hearing also revealed the growing instability of the “deep state” narrative itself.

Senators Johnson and Paul repeatedly invoked entrenched bureaucratic resistance and called for a new “Church Committee” style investigation into intelligence agencies. But unlike during Trump’s first presidency, Republicans now control both Congress and the executive branch. Arguably, Trump has more power than any president in history, at least modern history.

That reality complicates the politics considerably.

If agencies continue resisting subpoenas, withholding records, or slow-rolling transparency efforts, responsibility can no longer be assigned solely to prior administrations or ideological opponents. The permanent machinery of government — intelligence structures, classification systems, contractors, regulatory networks, and career bureaucracies — now ultimately operates under Trump-appointed leadership.

The implication is uncomfortable for both parties:

America’s accountability crisis may no longer be reducible to partisan control at all.

What About Other Theories?

Notably, the hearing did not delve into broader alternative theories surrounding SARS-CoV-2’s emergence and early spread beyond the singular focus on Wuhan.

In a controversial January 2025 TrialSite News opinion essay, Laura Mueller and Bill Rice Jr. argued that influenza-like illness spikes, delayed antibody testing, archived Red Cross blood samples, and suppressed early respiratory data may suggest the virus circulated inside the United States earlier than officially acknowledged.

The article further questioned whether U.S.-linked biodefense, gain-of-function, and pandemic preparedness programs received insufficient scrutiny compared to Chinese laboratories.

Importantly, the piece was published as opinion analysis—not verified investigative reporting—and many of its conclusions remain speculative and inferential rather than proven. Still, the article underscores a growing reality: public distrust now extends not only toward Beijing, but toward the entire transnational ecosystem of public health agencies, biodefense networks, intelligence structures, and scientific institutions that shaped the pandemic response.

Oversight or Political Theater?

Watching the hearing carefully, at times, the hearing drifted toward a somewhat populist spectacle:

• sweeping corruption insinuations,

• emotionally charged rhetoric,

• generalized attacks on media,

• and broad claims about institutional betrayal.

Still, several questions raised remain legitimate and unresolved in this important hearing, thanks to Senators Johnson and Paul:

• Why do key COVID-era records remain classified years later?

• Why does Congress struggle to enforce subpoenas?

• Why was no comprehensive bipartisan COVID after-action review ever completed?

• Were conflicts of interest involving gain-of-function oversight adequately examined?

Notably absent from the hearing: Democratic lawmakers. Their absence allowed Republicans to dominate the narrative unchallenged, but it also reinforced Erdman’s own warning that the country remains incapable of conducting a truly bipartisan pandemic reckoning. Senator Johnson was shocked by the lack of interest, and TrialSite concurs that it’s a disturbing signal.

Yes, COVID did not merely intensify America’s crisis of institutional trust.

It ripped the façade off the machinery itself.

Source: Senate hearing led by Senators Ron Johnson and Rand Paul featuring CIA whistleblower James Erdman III, May 2026. C-SPAN transcript and video testimony.”

Writer gratuities via Ko-Fi.

A memorable scene from Jaws ..

Ms. Kinter (grieving mother of a young boy who had just been killed in a shark attack): Chief Brody?

Chief Brody: Yes?

(Ms. Kinter slaps Chief Brody … hard.)

Ms. Kinter: “I just found out that a girl got killed here last week, and you knew it. You knew there was a shark out there. You knew it was dangerous. But you let people go swimming anyway? You knew all those things … But still my boy is dead now.”

Aftermath: Following the slap, Mayor Vaughn attempts to console Brody, saying “She’s wrong, Martin,” to which a guilt-ridden Brody replies, “No, she’s not.”

***

“Officials will never investigate scandalous events they would prefer to not ‘confirm.’ ” - “Maxim” often cited in articles of Bill Rice, Jr.

***

By now, Tom Haviland, the retired Air Force Major who created the embalmers’ clots surveys, must have given at least 100 interviews on alternative media podcasts.

Yesterday I watched a 20-minute interview Tom did with Polly Hommey of CHD.TV. In this interview, I zeroed in on Tom’s comments regarding all the embalmers associations that refused to distribute his surveys to their members.

Which begs an obvious question: Why wouldn’t these groups want to distribute a simple and very important survey to their members?

My (obvious) answer: They knew/know what the answers to Tom’s survey questions would reveal. They would reveal that the embalmers’ clots are/were being found by embalmers all around the world … and these organizations do not want the public to know this.

***

Tom and his partner, my friend and Substack colleague Laura Kasner, hit pay dirt with their very first embalmer survey (done in 2022).

As Tom says in his latest interview, the citizen researchers sent their questions to every state embalmers’/funeral home association in America, plus several other similar organizations outside the U.S.

For a while, the partners received no answers to their survey. However, out of the blue, Tom and Laura received 152 responses - all from embalmers in Pennsylvania.

As Tom reveals in his latest interview, apparently a secretary for the Pennsylvania embalmers’ organization did send out the questionnaire to all of this state’s members.

The key finding from this first survey, as well three subsequent surveys, was that approximately 70 percent of embalmers who responded to the survey did report they had found the “white fibrous clots.”

According to Tom, on average, about 225 to 300 people have responded to his four surveys, which is not a big sample.

However, since by now at least 1,000 embalmers have participated in these surveys, this sample size is large enough to make some obvious conclusions.

For example, if 70 percent of 152 Pennsylvania embalmers said they were finding these “clots” in bodies in 2022, it’s extremely doubtful this was the only state where these never-before-seen substances were being found in decedents.

Tom also, again, explained why he took on this project.

He noted that he watched the documentary “Died Suddenly” (that was viewed by more than one million people) and noted that half of the movie focussed on claims made by six embalmers, all of whom reported that they were routinely finding these “clots” in bodies.

While his interest was clearly piqued, even Tom thought this might have been mis or dis-information.

So the next morning Tom (who had been fired from his military contractor job because he wouldn’t get a Covid “vaccine”) called the embalmers’ association in his home state of Ohio and spoke to the organization’s vice president, a funeral home owner who performs his own embalming.

Per Tom, this man told him, “Yes, I’m also finding these white fibrous clots” in bodies.

Since it was obvious to Tom that nobody in the government - or nobody in the “science” or medical community - was investigating this new phenomena, he decided he’d do it himself (with Laura’s help).

However, in the 20th interview I’ve watched Tom give, the anecdote that jumped out at me is the huge number of embalmer organizations that wouldn’t help him advance the cause of science or any kind of “search for the truth.”

(According to Google AI, America has approximately 4,000 “licensed” embalmers with 18,000 people employed in the funeral mortician business - almost all 18,000 of whom, IMO, must know about the existence of these “white, fibrous clots.”)

Tom also told Polly that the numbers of people who responded to his different surveys hasn’t increased much in subsequent surveys.

In fact, he noted that organizations that had originally participated - like the Pennsylvania association of embalmers - refused to participate in subsequent surveys.

Tom said he reached out to the U.K.’s national embalmer organization, which wouldn’t send out the questions to its members.

In fact, he said one nation (I think in the UK) is trying to pass a law or regulation that forbids embalmers from saving evidence from the embalming process.

(If such legislation was passed in America, the world’s most famous “whistleblowing” embalmer, Richard Hirschman from Ozark, Alabama, would not be able to keep saving these “clots” in hundreds of vials which he is shipping to rogue scientists and displaying via photos and video clips at his social media sites as well as in the interviews Richard does).

Tom also reported that many whistleblowers who have provided evidence of the existence of these clots are now no longer doing this … or no longer participate in surveys or give public interviews.

Tom specifically cited examples of embalmers who have told him they have been instructed to not talk to him anymore or should quit exposing this evidence.

He also reported that he and Laura have tried to do a similar survey of cardiovascular surgeons and “cath lab” managers - the people who, almost certainly, are routinely extracting these white, fibrous clots from living patients in emergency surgeries.

Not one of these medical groups have distributed one survey to any hospital-employee members, Tom said.

Tom again referenced one surgeon that, for a while, seemed like he was willing to go public with Tom and confirm that he was removing these substances from living patients.

However, this surgeon later contacted Tom and said, paraphrasing, he had been pressured into saying nothing.

In his latest interview, Tom, again, referenced the explosive claims of, perhaps, the world’s most significant whistleblower, an anonymous “cath lab manager” who told Dr. Phillip McMillan that he and his team were removing seven to 10 of these clots every week from living patients in just one hospital.

This claim was reported on a Substack podcast with approximately 11,000 subscribers.

One can’t help but wonder about the magnitude of the outcry in the country if the same man had made these claims on, say, “Sixty Minutes,” which is routinely watched by tens of millions of Americans.

One also wonders why producers and executives at “Sixty Minutes” would not be interested in publicizing such an explosive claim.

(Re: The Embalmers’ clots non-scandal, all Substack Contrarians can do to increase exposure and try to get around the “gate-keepers of the news” is use this tool).

Share

The Mother of All Taboo Subjects …

Clearly, the white fibrous clots that many embalmers were and still are finding in 30 to 50 percent of the bodies they embalm is a taboo or off-limits topic to “journalists” in corporate “watchdog” “news” organizations.

However, this is not a taboo topic in the alternative media, which means that tens of millions of people world-wide are aware of these clots.

It, thus, seems impossible that every official in the CDC, NIH, NIAID, FDA, HHS, White House and the halls of Congress has never heard of the “embalmers’ clots.”

Also, in answer to a question from Polly, Tom noted (again) that, yes, he does send the results of all his surveys to all the national public health organizations.

Per common-sense conjecture, all of these public health officials (or almost all of them) must know these substances (via statistical extrapolations) are or were in the veins of probably tens of millions of Americans. (Also, more than half of deceased Americans are now cremated, meaning any clots in these decedents would not be discovered.)

Two prominent public figures who “know” …

Every one of these officials must know these things cannot be healthy (or benign); they must all know they have caused numerous emergency clots, heart attacks and strokes - and must have contributed to the deaths of hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of people … and, like Chief Brody, they have all done nothing.

I should also note that current HHS secretary RFK, Jr. also knows all about the existence of the embalmers’ clots. I know this because in an interview I did with Richard Hirschman two years ago, Richard told me that Mr. Kennedy found him and called him, and in a 30-minute phone conversation, both men discussed Richard’s findings.

(Tom Haviland has also reported that Tucker Carlson knows all about the embalmers’ clots because Tom met Tucker at one of his speaking events and gave him two vials of actual embalmers’ clots. These are two prominent public figures who have the potential to make the embalmers’ clots a “thermo-nuclear truth bomb” but, for whatever reason(s), have so far chosen not to do this.)

Other examples proving the validity of the Maxim “Never investigate what you don’t want to confirm …”

As I will point out in a future article, the same number of people “who matter” must also know that “early spread” definitely happened. As I will prove (or have already proven), these important public health officials must know this as well … and have lied about this overwhelming evidence (and/or covered it up or dismissed its significance) for more than six years.

Indeed, the maxim that officials will never investigate that which they don’t want to confirm applies to bogus narratives that don’t involve public health.

For example, officials must have known that, for decades, Jeffrey Epstein was running a sex-trafficking and kompromat operation that involved many of the most powerful leaders in the world.

Key leaders in every department and intelligence agency in government must have known this … and covered it up.

Also, every senior or mid-level official that worked in the Joe Biden White House must have known that this “president” was suffering from ever-worsening dementia … so must have every member of the White House press corps … and (almost) every one of them covered this up (refused to report or seriously investigate this) for at least four years.

Before the second Iraq War, every important national leader must have known, or strongly suspected, that Iraq did not have “weapons of mass destruction” … but still this “truism” was cited as the main justification for invading a country in a war that caused approximately 500,000 deaths.

My main take-aways:

Regarding the embalmers’ clots, every official who matters must know all about the embalmers’ clots.

An even more sinister take-away is that the same officials clearly know that no “watchdog” journalist organization, public health official, prominent scientist or doctors’ group is ever going to bring up or investigate this phenomena.

Basically, if something terrible or terrifying is never “confirmed” by “official” sources, it’s like the event never happened (or is still happening.)

The reason officials don’t worry about the embalmers’ clots (or early spread) being “confirmed” is they obviously know that every important truth-seeking organization in the world is completely captured (another Bill Rice, Jr. maxim).

At least Chief Brody felt terrible guilt for not closing the beaches, which he, belatedly, did. (He even killed the shark).

However, regarding the administration of the shots that cause the embalmers’ clots … just like the Mayor said in Jaws, “The Beaches are open …Everyone come on in!” (Everyone keep getting your life-saving shots!)

I’ll probably be long gone, but one day a contrarian director might make a movie about our New Abnormal Covid Times and will no doubt highlight the embalmers’ clots. This will be a horror story for the ages.

Writer gratuities via Ko-Fi.