UPDATE 20. March 2021: REFUSE TO ACQUIESE ! Independent, Indigenous communities and livelihoods are earmarked to be annihilated first.
UPDATE 10. March 2021: A call to Canadian Parliamentarians to take concrete measures to implement the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People in Canadian law and policy
UPDATE 29. December 2020: Facebook shields Wounded Knee Massacre photos on anniversary, subverting history
UPDATE 28. December 2020: Native American tasered for hiking to sacred site. Indigenous people the world over must stand up against totalitarian regimes, neo-colonial governances and their "measures' as well as their stooges.
UPDATE 26. December 2020: What Does It Mean to Be Colonized?
UPDATE 28. November 2020: MYTH BUSTERS IN MONTREAL
ICYMI: Unceded Land: The Case for Wet’suwet’en Sovereignty + State of Emergency Can’t Bar Access to Justice, Ecuador’s Constitutional Court Upholds Rights During Covid-19 + All Roads Lead To Dark Winter
PROLOGUE: Shun, boycott and send all the heinous players from the "Great Reset" off to where they belong and join "THE GREATER RESET" !
Prediction: The Trans Mountain Pipeline, desecrating Indigenous, uceded land and Aboriginal territory will ultimately fail, while the Trudeau regime and governance collapses. The "Dark Winter" games of those who worship a NWO will backfire against their key-players.
What we mean when we say Indigenous land is 'unceded'
By Emma McIntosh - 24. January 2020
You might be living on unceded land.
To be more precise: the Maritimes, nearly all of British Columbia and a large swath of eastern Ontario and Quebec, which includes Ottawa, sit on territories that were never signed away by the Indigenous people who inhabited them before Europeans settled in North America. In other words, this land was stolen. (It's worth noting that territories covered by treaties also weren't necessarily ceded — in many cases, the intent of the agreements was the sharing of territory, not the relinquishing of rights.)
What to do about it, however, is deeply complex — and legal questions about how to handle claims to unceded land have become a subject of public discussion as members of the Wet’suwet’en Nation in northern British Columbia have reoccupied their territory and attempted to block the Coastal GasLink pipeline. Similar cases over Indigenous land titles are moving through courts across Canada.
Canada’s Constitution is clear that Indigenous land rights exist, said Benjamin Ralston, a lecturer and researcher at the Indigenous Law Centre at the University of Saskatchewan. But in practice, fights over exactly what those rights are can take decades to resolve in court or in treaty negotiations, revealing “cognitive dissonance” in the system.
“The real problem is, what do we do about it now, while these slow processes are proceeding?” he said.
In the case of the Wet’suwet’en and Coastal GasLink, at issue is a divide between the traditional Wet’suwet’en legal system, Canada’s legal system, those who have stood to protect the land in question and those who want to see the pipeline built.
Under Wet’suwet’en law, authority over the nation’s 22,000 square kilometres of unceded territory lies with hereditary chiefs from five clans, who oppose the pipeline. However, there are also five elected band councils created by Canada’s colonial Indian Act, and some of the councils have supported the project.
A 1997 Supreme Court of Canada decision affirmed that the provincial government can’t extinguish Wet’suwet’en rights to their land. However, the court also sent the case back from a second trial that hasn’t yet happened, leaving key questions unresolved.
Last year, the RCMP violently arrested Wet’suwet’en people and supporters in the disputed area, with the Guardian reporting late last year that police had been prepared to use lethal force. Earlier this month, the RCMP set up a checkpoint to control access to the area after a B.C Supreme Court judge extended an injunction to force out the Wet’suwet’en in the camps and allow construction on the pipeline to continue.
Inside the Gidimt'en Checkpoint on Wet'suwet'en territory in December 2019. The camp was dismantled by Coastal GasLink contractors in early 2019, and then rebuilt and reoccupied. Photo by Michael Toledano
“We are not trespassing,” Ta'Kaiya Blaney, one of several Victoria, B.C., activists arrested and released after a protest supporting the Wet’suwet’en earlier this week, said in a video posted on Facebook.
“Coastal GasLink is trespassing, those cops are trespassing. They have no jurisdiction to violate Indigenous Peoples and Indigenous youth on stolen land.”
Wet’suwet’en Nation territory in northern British Columbia is just one example of a dispute over unceded land.
'Duty to consult' an imperfect solution
The Wet’suwet’en are far from the only ones asserting their title to their traditional lands.
In Nova Scotia, Mi’kmaq people have pushed for recognition of their unceded territory. In Ottawa, several Algonquin groups claim the land that Parliament Hill and the Supreme Court of Canada sit on. And in 2014, Tsilhqot'in Nation in B.C. became the first to prove title to their land in court.
In 2017, about 140 groups of Indigenous people who never signed treaties were negotiating with Canada’s federal government, the New York Times reported.
Several court cases have reaffirmed that the Canadian government has a duty to consult Indigenous people in cases that will impact their rights, which is meant to be an extra protection while land-title cases get resolved. But that protection is imperfect: duty to consult “is not necessarily going to give you the full benefit of stopping a project,” Ralston said.
In general, courts have also been reluctant to allow Indigenous land claims as a reason to block injunctions.
In a broader sense, however, there are international considerations as well. In November, B.C. passed a bill aligning its laws with the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), a landmark document that, among other things, protects Indigenous Peoples’ right to self-government and right to consent to resource-development projects on their territories.
B.C. is the first Canadian jurisdiction to implement UNDRIP — the document was passed by the UN General Assembly in 2007 over Canada’s objections, and the country has so far been reluctant to formally implement it. It's not clear how the document could play in future disputes.
In the case of Coastal GasLink, B.C.'s independent Human Rights Commission, Amnesty International and the UN Committee on Racial Discrimination have all criticized the provincial government, saying Coastal GasLink violates UNDRIP principles.
B.C. Premier John Horgan, meanwhile, has said the province’s law is not retroactive and Coastal GasLink will go ahead.
REFUSE TO ACQUIESE !
Independent, Indigenous communities and livelihoods are earmarked to be annihilated first.
"I'm Not Supposed To Talk About This" | David Icke
•Mar 20, 2021
"I'm Not Supposed To Talk About This" | David Icke 🛎️
For more mind-opening and motivation videos please subscribe to our channel: https://bit.ly/2PkGNfI
“The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples is the framework for reconciliation at all levels and across all sectors of Canadian society.” – Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada, Principles of Reconciliation, Principle # 1.
Parliament has an historic opportunity to advance reconciliation
The UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples is a consensus global human rights instrument, elaborating minimum standards for the “survival, dignity and well-being of Indigenous peoples.” Implementation of these standards is vital to improving the lives of Indigenous peoples in Canada and around the world, and to upholding Canada’s solemn and urgent human rights commitments.
Members of the House of Commons and Senate must ensure that Bill C-15, An Act Respecting the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, passes into law before this session of Parliament concludes.
The UN Declaration affirms the inherent rights of Indigenous peoples and the corresponding obligations of States. The Truth and Reconciliation Commission was right to put the Declaration at the heart of its vision for reconciliation. The Declaration condemns the racist and colonial doctrines, laws and beliefs that continue to cause so much harm to Indigenous peoples. It also provides the principles and mechanisms needed to redress these
harms, as well as safeguards critical to ensuring these violations are never repeated.
Canada has repeatedly committed to implement the UN Declaration. The federal government has even stated this commitment in the preamble to recent Acts of Parliament like the Indigenous Languages Act. Bill C-15 is about putting these commitments into practice.
- Bill C-15 underlines and reinforces the UN Declaration’s rejection of racism and other forms of discrimination, colonialism, forced assimilation and destruction of culture.
- The Bill requires the Government of Canada to work with Indigenous peoples to establish priorities and processes for implementing the Declaration’s diverse provisions – and to report annually to Parliament on the progress made.
- The Bill provides clarity around the fact that the Declaration, like other international human rights instruments, is already being used by courts to interpret Canadian law.
- In particular, the Bill also requires a collaborative process of legal review and reform to bring federal laws into line with the human rights affirmed in the Declaration.
These are important, practical and achievable measures that deserve the support of all Canadians.
We are mindful that a previous effort to meet Canada’s implementation obligations, Bill C-262, died on the Order Paper after unnecessary delay and obstruction in the Parliamentary process. We do not want any further delays in meeting Canada’s obligations to implement the UN Declaration.
Some Indigenous peoples’ governments and organizations, including some represented in this letter, are proposing or supporting amendments to clarify and strengthen Bill C-15. We believe that the Parliamentary process can accommodate a fulsome consideration of such amendments, while still ensuring that Bill C-15 is adopted before the end of the current session of Parliament.
Concrete measures to implement the UN Declaration in Canadian law and policy are necessary and overdue. Passage of Bill C-15 should be a top priority for all Members of Parliament and Senators.
March 9, 2021
Ghost Dance Wounded Knee
Shawnee Sioux War Dance
(Lyrics) Andra Day - Rise Up
IN NONACQUIESCENCE YOU NEVER WALK ALONE !
Never, Ever Give Up! (Official Lyric Video NEVER GIVING UP) - I WILL NOT BOW!
Facebook shields Wounded Knee Massacre photos on anniversary, subverting history
29. December 2020
By Brenda Norrell -
WOUNDED KNEE. This photo on the Anniversary of the Massacre of Wounded Knee was shielded by Facebook today, in itself making a profound statement about the lack of truth in history in the U.S. and Facebook's role in subverting history and blocking the truth from view.
Facebook shields from view this image of the Massacre of Wounded Knee today. At the same time, Facebook glorifies the wealth and pomp of the so-called Royal Family of England -- whose riches were derived from the torture, murder, rape, and violent theft of land of Indigenous Peoples around the world. This history is shielded from view by history books and those who attempt to forget and erase history.
Facebook would have found a home in boarding schools and the reinventing of history, which concealed massacres and genocide and offered the white cup of capitalism.
This cover and warning by the Facebook censors appears over the image shown above of the Massacre of Wounded Knee today.
A second photo of the Massacre of Wounded Knee was also covered by Facebook censors. It was posted by the International Leonard Peltier Defense Committee.
.We remember those who were massacred by the U.S. 7th Cavalry at Wounded Knee in 1890, 130 years ago today
THE DEAD, THE WOUNDED, THE SURVIVORS
Afraid Of Bear
Afraid Of Nothing Bear (Bear Fool)
Afraid Of Tomahawk
Baby, Wet Feet (White Foot)
Bad (Bear) Woman’s son
Bad Owner Without Rope
Bad Owner Without Rope’ wife
Bad Spotted Eagle (Cree)
Bad Spotted Eagle’s wife
Bad Wound’s son
Bear Comes And Lies
Bear Don’t Run
Bear Lays Down
Bear Parts (Cuts) Body
Bear Parts (Cuts) Body’s son
Bear Sheds His Hair (Shedding Bear)
Bear Skin Vest
Bear Skin Vest’s wife
Bear Skin Vest’s daughter
Bear That Shoots
Bear That Shoots’ mother
Bear With Small Body
Bear With Small Body’s wife
Chief Big Foot (Spotted Elk)
Big Foot’s wife (Small Tail)
Big Foot’s daughter (White Horse Woman)
Big Skirt (Shirt)
Big (Loud) Voice Thunder
Big Voice Thunder’s wife
Big Voice Thunder’ child
Black Fox (Coyote)
Black Hair’s wife
Black Shield's little girl
Broken Arrow’s wife
Buckskin Breech Clout
Cast Away And Run
Charge At Them
Close To Home, Louis
Comes Out Rattling
Courage Bear’s wife
Courage Bear, George
Dewey Beard’s wife (Wears Eagle/White Face)
Dewey Beard’s son (Thomas Beard)
Drops Blood’s wife
Elk Creek’s wife
Fat Courage Bear
Good Bear’s wife
Grease Leg Bone
Grey In Eyes
Hard To Kill’s mother
Has A Dog
Has The Bell
He Eagle’s wife
He Eagle, Edward
Heart Of Timber
Her Eagle Body
Her Good Cloud
Her Scarlet Blanket
High Hawk’s wife
High Hawk’s son
High Hawk’s daughter
Horned Cloud, William
Horned Cloud, Sherman
Iron American’s wife
Iron Eyes (Big Foot's brother)
Iron Eyes’ wife
Iron Eyes, Albert
Kills Crow Indian
Kills In Bush
Kills Tin Cup
Kills Who Stand In Timber
Wife of Kills Who Stand In Timber
Little Body Bear
Little Body Bear’s wife
Little Body Bear’s son
Little Body Bear’s daughter
Little Boy’s son
Little Elk’s wife
Wife of Log
Mrs. Long Bull
Medicine Lake Girl
Medicine Woman’s son
Medicine Woman’s son (2)
Medicine Woman’s daughter
Mercy To Others
Not Afraid Of Lodge
Not Go In Among
Old Good Bear
Old Man Yellow Bull
Old Man Yellow Bull’
Pass Water In Horn
Pretty Bold Eagle
Pretty Hawk’s wife
Pretty Hawk’s baby
Pretty Voice Elk
Really Woman’s Son
Red Buffalo (Red White Cow)
Red Ears Horse
Red Ears Horse’s sister
Red Fish’s wife
Red (Scarlet) Horn
Red Other Woman
Red Shirt Girl
Red Water Woman
Roots Its Hole
Rousing Squirrel’s mother
Running In Lodge
Running Standing Hairs
Running Standing Hairs’ wife
Running Standing Hairs’ daughter
Runs Behind (Last Running)
Runs Off With Horses
Runs On’ sister
Sacred In Appearance
Scabbard Knife’s wife
Scares The Bear
Scares The Bear’s grandson
Scares The Bear’s grandson (2)
Scarlet Calf’s son
Scarlet Calf’s son (2)
Scarlet White Buffalo
Shakes The Bird
Shaving Bear’s child
Shaving Bear’s child (2)
Shaving Bear’s child (3)
Shaving Bear’s child (4)
Shedding Bear’s mother-in-law
Shoot At Accurately
Shoot At Accurately’s son
Shoots The Bear
Shoots The Bear’s wife
Shoots The Bear, George
Shoots (With) The Hawk Feather
Shoots (With) The Hawk Feather’s mother
Shoots The Right
Shoots The White
Short Hair (Close Haired) Bear
Short Hair Bear’s child
Short Hair Bear’s child (2)
Short Hair Bear’s child (3)
Shot In Hand
Singing Bull’s wife
Singing Bull’s son
Small Bodied Bear
Spotted (Speckled) Chief
Spotted Elk’s wife
Spotted Elk’s son
Spotted Elk’ son (2)
Spotted Elk’s son (3)
Starts The Horse
Stone Hammer’s wife
Strong Fox’s wife
Sun In The Pupil
Sun In The Pupil’s wife
Swift Bird’s wife
Takes Away Enemy
Takes Away The Bow
Thunder Hawk Woman
Trouble In Front
Trouble In Front’s mother-in-law
Trouble In Love’s wife
Up To His Waist
Up To His Waist’s wife
Used For Brother
Walking Bull’s wife
War In His
Wears Calfskin Robe
Weasel Bear, Louise
Whirlwind Hawk’s wife
Whirlwind Hawk’s daughter
Whirlwind Hawk’s daughter (2)
Whirlwind Hawk’s daughter (3)
Whirlwind Hawk’s son
Whirlwind Hawk’s son (2)
White Beaver Woman
White Face Sun
Wolf Ears, Edward
Wolf Skin Necklace
Wood Shade’s wife
Wounded In Winter
Yellow Bird Woman
Yellow Buffalo Calf’s wife
Young Afraid Of Bear
Young Good Bear
THE WOUNDED (partial list)
Afraid Of Enemy
Bad (Bear) Woman
Bear Lays Down’s wife
Dewey Beard (Iron Hail)
He Crow’s wife
Help Them (Helps Them Up)
Her Black Horses
Kills Close To Lodge, Bertha
Kills White Man’s wife
Little Finger, John
Looking Elk, Lydia
Put Away Moccasins
Run As Though His Hair Fussed
Runs Around Lodge
White Cowboy’s son
Afraid Of Hawk, Richard
Afraid Of Left Hand
Bear Cuts Body’s wife
Bear Don’t Run’s wife
Bear Runs In The Woods
Bear Sheds His Hair’s wife
Bear Woman’s daughter
Bear Woman, Edith
Big Boy’s son
Bird Shaker (Brown Bull)
Birds Afraid Of Him
Chases And Kills
Farms At The River
Good Horse’s wife
Good Scarlet Horn
Good (Pretty) Spotted Horse
Good White Cow
Grey Hand’s wife
Grey Hand’s son (George Randall)
Grey Owl Woman
Hard To Kill (Young Bear)
Hawk Bear (Eagle Hawk Bear)
Hawk Feather (Shoots The Hawk Feather)
He Crow, Jackson
Her Black Horses’s daughter
Her Brown Faced Dog
Her Elk Tooth
Her War Bonnet
Horn Cloud, Alice
Horn Cloud, William
Kill Her White Horse
Killed His Choice
Killed The Bear
Killed The Bear’s wife
Kills First, Leon
Kills First, Mary
Kills In The Middle
Kills One Hundred
Kills White Man
King Boy’s son
Knocked In The Head
Kyle, Charles’ wife
Kyle, Charles’ child
Light Hair Girl
Little Body Bear’s son
Little Cloud’s wife
Little Eyed Woman
Little Water’s wife
Lives In Iron
Living Bull’s son
Living Bull, Helena
Long Bull, Helen
Makes Him Mad
Picks And Kill
Pipe On Head, James
Pretty Shield’s wife
Quit On Him
Red Fingernail Woman
Red Fish, James
Red Horn Bear
Running Hawk, George
Runs After It
Scarlet Tipi Top
Sees The Bear
Sees The Elk
Shawl Over Head
She Wears Eagle
Shoot The Bear (I Shot The Bear)
Shoots Straight’s wife
Shoots Straight’s child
Shot Him Off
Short Hair Bear’s wife
Shows His Cloud
Sits Poor, Frank
Sits Straight (Good Thunder)
Snow Over Her
Sole Of Foot
Spotted Bear, John
Stands Looking’s wife
Stands Up For Him
Touches The Ground
Trouble In Front (Bear Sheds His Hair)
Two Arrows (Male Eagle)
Walks With Circle
Wears Calfskin Robe’s wife
Wears Fur Coat
Wears Yellow Robe
White Cow Comes Out
White Face Woman
White Hawk’s son
White Lance (Horn Cloud)
White Woman Hand
Wind In Guts
Young Big Foot
Sources: “The Wounded Knee Interviews of Eli S. Ricker” and “Big Foot’s Followers at Wounded Knee” in Nebraska History Quarterly
Native American tasered for hiking to sacred site.
Horrifying video of Navajo Oneida man being repeatedly tasered for praying at Petroglyphs National Monument
28. December 2020
The violent tasering by park rangers was quickly viewed 10,000 times and reported in Albuquerque media.
"A Native American Marine veteran walking his dog at Petroglyph National Monument Sunday was Tasered by a National Park Service ranger after he ventured off the marked hiking trail to find a quiet place to pray at the Native American sacred site. The incident was captured on video by a companion. That video was later shared to Instagram and with The Paper," Albuquerque's weekly The Paper reports.
Darrell House was given three citations by the federal park ranger for interfering with agency function, false information, and being off-trail, KRQE News reports.
Assailant: Federal Park Ranger Officer Graden and shame also on Officer Wineland.
The International Association of Chief of Police’s model policy on the use of Tasers says that officers should not use Tasers on persons engaged in “passive resistance” which it defines as a person “not reasonably perceived to be an immediate threat or flight risk to comply with an officer’s verbal commands or physical control techniques that does not involve the use of
physical force, control, or resistance of any kind.”
Reuters news service found that more than 1,000 persons have died following the use of Tasers by police.
“During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.” - George Orwell
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. – Edmund Burke
Derrick Broze breaks down what it means to be colonized and reminds the listener that everyone is indigenous to somewhere on the Earth. It’s up to us to connect to our ancestors and learn our roots.
BACKUP ON BITCHUTE
MNN Mohawk Nation News For, books, workshops, and sign up for MNN newsletters, go to MNN Archives. Address: Box 991, Kahnawake [Quebec, Canada] J0L 1B0
Originally published on Nov. 9, 2006.
Please post & distribute worldwide. Nov. 27, 2020.
1]GREAT ‘RESET’ OF MOHAWK LAND KNOWN AS “MONTREAL, AS PART OF NEW WORLD GOVERNANCE, BEING BUILT BY SNC LAVALIN, ALSTROM, PLACE DE DEPOT RETIREMENT FUND, QUEBEC GOVERNMENT, HYDRO QUEBEC, AND BANQUE DU INFRASTRUCTURE:
[Ed. Note:Most readers will not really be interested in what kind of infrastructure nonsense the settler government is involved in Montreal and the point that their political playing ground is on unceded lands might get lost here, because the desecration of unceded Mohawk lands is done since generations and cannot be reverted. However, no money from Trust Funds belonging to the Indigenous people must be abused to finance settler-projects and the remaining natural areas within and around Montreal could be re-occupied to safeguard that any further "development" doesn't touch them.]
2]MCGILL ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF ROTINOSHONNI LAND https://www.mcgill.ca/circ/land-acknowledgement
3]BIDEN PART OF ‘GREAT RESET’ https://www.thedailybeast.com/joe-bidens-presidency-already-has-its-first-conspiracy-theory-the-great-reset
Pete Seeger: This Land Your Land, This Land Is My Land
Unceded Land: The Case for Wet’suwet’en Sovereignty
By Augusta Davis - 28. February 2020
In 2008, Wet’suwet’en clans opted out of the British Columbia Treaty process and asserted their land rights to their unceded territory in Canada. On December 31, 2019, the British Columbia Supreme Court issued an injunction to allow construction of the Coastal GasLink pipeline, giving the company unlimited access to Wet’suwet’en lands. The Coastal GasLink pipeline is intended to be 416 miles long, stretching from northeast British Columbia to near Kitimat. Within this swath of land lies 22,000 square kilometers of unceded Wet’suwet’en land. The injunction was firmly rejected by the Wet’suwet’en. On January 7, 2020, the Wet’suwet’en Hereditary Chiefs issued an eviction notice to the pipeline company, effective immediately.
Encampments, intended to prevent pipeline construction and reclaim Wet’suwet’en land, play a crucial role in the reclamation of the Wet’suwet’en Peoples’ Indigenous land rights. Unist'ot'en Camp was founded in 2010 by Wet’suwet’en Hereditary Chiefs. Its mission is to protect Unist’ot’en territory by re-establishing traditional Indigenous governance systems and enacting a free, prior, and informed consent protocol for all activities on Unist’ot’en land. However, intimidation and violence have been ongoing for almost a year. In January 2019, the Unis’tot’en Camp faced intimidation and violence in a raid by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police who used chainsaws to break gates the Wet’suwet’en established on their traditional territories to block construction of the pipeline. The raid led to numerous arrests, and the threat of violence and force has not gone away since the raid.
While the Hereditary Chiefs oppose the pipeline, the Wet’suwet’en elected band council signed an agreement to allow the pipeline to go forward. Negotiations regarding the pipeline were only held with the council. The Hereditary Chiefs are the traditional form of government. This shows a lack of recognition from Canada of traditional government systems. Instead, the government is using a form of Indigneous government, the council, which they created and imposed historically to implement Canada’s policies and among them, approve economic development projects. The issue of the pipeline is also outside the council’s jurisdiction.
To many settler Canadians, however, the idea that these lands in British Columbia do not belong to Canada but rather the Wet’suwet’en Nation, is hard to conceptualize. To understand the situation from an Indigenous perspective, it is useful to take a look at the Wet’suwet’en claim to their unceded land, and the traditional hereditary government system.
In 1997, the Hereditary Chiefs brought their claim for their ancestral land to the Canadian Supreme Court. The court ruled that the Wet’suwet’en People had not relinquished their land rights and titles to 22,000 square kilometers of land in northern British Columbia. The ruling also recognized the validity of hereditary governance.
Most of the territory of British Columbia was never ceded by the Indigenous Peoples of the land. These Indigenous Peoples have been living on their land for at least 14,000 years, while British Columbia, first a colony now a province, has been around for about 160 years. The cultures, governments, and legal systems of many First Nation Peoples in the region were never extinguished.
At the time of colonization, international and British Law deemed Indigenous land interests were to be respected if the Indigenous People had not signed a treaty or been conquered. The Wet’suwet’en were never conquered nor did they sign a treaty. Nonetheless, without any legal backing, in the 1860s British Columbia started to pass land laws and hand out property interests of the Indigenous land.
Kate Gunn, a lawyer focusing on the rights of Indigenous Peoples writes “The source of the Province’s authority over Indigenous lands remains unresolved in Canadian law today.” Gunn also writes “The fact that the Province has acted since the 1860s as though it has full authority to decide how Indigenous Peoples’ lands are used does not make doing so legal or just.”
While the 1997 ruling highlighted that the government did not have the authority to end Aboriginal title of unceded land, it failed to recognize the boundaries of the territory the title applied to. The judges sent the case back to trial due to a defect and also suggested goodwill negotiations may be preferable for what the case was asking.
The Truth and Reconciliation Report: Reconciliation, the Final Report of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada 2015 pointed out a 1977 Report of the Mackenzie Valley Pipeline Inquiry. This 1977 report recommended that a proposed pipeline should not be built before Aboriginal land claims are resolved and environmental concerns are addressed. Canada should not rush development of projects until land claims are solved.
Hereditary Chiefs and Band Councils
The Hereditary Chiefs are a part of the pre-colonial, Indigenous governance system. There are 13 house chiefs. The Wet’suwet’en People never stopped using their hereditary government system just like they have never stopped occupying their land. The hereditary chiefs have authority over the unceded land and are the titleholders.
A hereditary chief is not necessarily born into the role but begins preparing for their role at a young age. The Wet’suwet’en Nation is made up of five clans, the clans are made up of 13 houses. Each house has a house chief and secondary leaders called wing chiefs. Chiefs are chosen based on their merit, differing from European or British hereditary systems. A chief is responsible for the land and resources of their territory. The Hereditary Chiefs have jurisdiction and authority over their unceded lands.
Karla Tait, a member of the Gilseyhu Clan of the Wet’suwet’en Nation, states “There’s a basic amount of respect that Indigenous Peoples need to be shown, [that] our governance system needs to be shown. We can’t continue to be considered inferior because we’re not assimilated. Because our life-ways and our beliefs and our governance structures are different than Canada’s.”
The band council was created as a result of the Indian Act of 1876. It was formed as a means to impose a government and leadership structure that is more similar to that of Canada’s government system.
Members of the band council are elected by members of the community. However, there are limitations on who is able to vote. Only those with ‘Indian status’ are able to elect council members. Indian status is determined by the Indian Act which has a long history of limiting who is able to obtain Indian status. This also means that the federal government has control over who can vote for the council.
Many council members felt agreeing to the pipeline was the best option for their people as it was an opportunity to help alleviate some of the poverty that many experience. The band council has concerns over employment on reserves, which is quite scarce, so the council would be more inclined to support Canada’s policies for more employment opportunities in the short term. Kim Staton, a lawyer practicing aboriginal law, commented “I think you can say that people are trying their best to do what they can for their people under very difficult circumstances. And when a resource extraction company comes along and says, 'Look, we have all of this money for you,' they are loath not to take it. They're in between a rock and a hard place. I don't think it's a measure of unqualified support."
However, the authority and jurisdiction of the council is limited by the Indian Act. The council does not have authority in the decision making regarding lands outside First Nation reserves. The land the pipeline will impact is not reserve land from the Indian Act. According to the Wet’suwet’en law, the land in question is under the jurisdiction of the Hereditary Chiefs. Many Indigenous Peoples in Canada hold land rightsoutside reserves, for example, Aboriginal title and rights to lands that have been occupied before colonization, which are protected under the Constitution Act, 1982.
United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples
The UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples was fully adopted by Canada in May 2016. The Declaration recognizes Indigenous Peoples’ right to free, prior, and informed consent in regard to any development on their land as well as self-determination. Article 5 of the Declaration states “Indigenous peoples have the right to maintain and strengthen their distinct political, legal, economic, social, and cultural institutions.” Article 10 of the Declaration states “Indigenous peoples shall not be forcibly removed from their lands or territories.” Article 18 states, “Indigenous Peoples have the right to participate in decision-making in matters which would affect their rights, through representatives chosen by themselves in accordance with their own procedures, as well as to maintain and develop their own Indigenous decision-making institutions.” Article 19 states, “States shall consult and cooperate in good faith with the Indigenous Peoples concerned through their own representative institutions in order to obtain their free, prior, and informed consent before adopting and implementing legislative or administrative measures that may affect them. Article 26 states “Indigenous Peoples have the right to the lands, territories, and resources which they have traditionally owned, occupied or otherwise used or acquired.” Good faith means exercising the historical crown fiduciary duty to guarantee the well being of Indigenous Peoples with special rights in exchange for all the lands taken to make Canada the country it is today.
On the topic of the Declaration, PM Justin Trudeau made a statement saying “[Canada recognizes] the injustices Indigenous Peoples have faced in Canada and continue to face around the world. While we cannot change history, we are working to right persisting historic wrongs.” However, in regard to the Wet'suwet'en land-defenders Trudeau said “The situation as it currently stands is unacceptable and untenable. Canadians have been patient. Our government has been patient. But it has been two weeks, and the barricades need to come down now.” In response, the Hereditary Chiefsstated “We heard Prime Minister Trudeau just a little while ago talking about the inconvenience Canada has suffered. However, there is a difference between inconvenience and injustice.”
Canada is seen around the world as a country that supports Indigenous rights and considers Indigenous issues to be a priority. While Canadian officials often use rhetoric that supports this sentiment, the actions of these officials do not, especially when dealing with development projects, economic reconciliation, and free, prior and informed consent. In addition, when a territory has still pending land claims, or the Indigenous community is divided, it is the time for the government to give the communities the time for them to reach consensus and unify rather than taking advantage of the division to push for a development project.
Research from the Yellowhead Institute at Ryerson University found that, in Canada, 76 percent of injunctions filed by corporations against Indigenous Peoples are granted, but more than 80 percent of the injunctions filed by Indigenous Peoples against corporations and the government are denied.
Cultural Survival supports the Wet’suwet’en People and joins the calls to Coastal GasLink and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police to stand down. Unis’tot’en Camp received a grant from Cultural Survival’s Keepers of the Earth Fund in 2017-2018.
Photo: Wet’suwet’en Hereditary Chiefs, December 2018, photo courtesy of https://unistoten.camp/
Ecuador’s Constitutional Court has issued an important decision upholding the fundamental right to an effective remedy for human rights violations amidst the country’s current state of emergency. The April 28 ruling comes after a series of inconsistent decisions by the Judiciary Council, charged with regulating the judiciary, made it harder to protect fundamental rights.
Declaring a state of emergency, which governments may proclaim to protect public health during a pandemic such as Covid-19, permits the suspension of certain rights under international human rights law. But even in a state of emergency, there are some rights that can never be suspended; these include the obligation to provide an effective remedy, including through the courts, for human rights violations.
Covid-19 is no exception. Even though governments may modify judicial procedures in response to the emergency, they must give everyone a way of seeking justice for rights violations.
Clarity on these fundamental principles had been missing in Ecuador until now.
On March 16, President Lenín Moreno issued an executive decree declaring a state of emergency to address Covid-19. The Judiciary Council later closed most of its offices, except those dealing with “flagrant” matters related to criminal justice, domestic violence, traffic, and juvenile offenders. The courts still working in these areas would also review habeas corpus requests on behalf of detained persons.
On April 15, the Pichincha provincial office of the Judiciary Council, which covers Ecuador’s capital, Quito, issued a memorandum providing that the only challenges to violations of rights that people could file were habeas corpus petitions. Human rights organizations filed two complaints challenging the constitutionality of the resolution; they remain pending.
Two days later, the director of the Pichincha office revoked the original memorandum and the council issued another resolution creating procedures to hear claims in six provinces, but it didn’t refer to the memorandum nor did it mention Ecuador’s other 18 provinces.
Lawyers have reported that judges have been inconsistent when receiving and processing court challenges to rights violations provided for in Ecuadorean law, including habeas corpus.
In its April 28 decision, the Constitutional Court ordered the Judiciary Council to adopt clear and timely measures to guarantee Ecuadoreans’ access to justice. The Judiciary Council should urgently clarify that even during the current state of emergency, Ecuadorians will not be restricted in their fundamental right to access justice in cases of human rights violations.
This is not just rhetoric; it’s necessary to ensure Ecuador complies with its international human rights obligations and effectively protects its people in times of emergency.
The leaders of two controversial pandemic simulations that took place just months before the Coronavirus crisis – Event 201 and Crimson Contagion – share a common history, the 2001 biowarfare simulation Dark Winter. Dark Winter not only predicted the 2001 anthrax attacks, but some of its participants had clear foreknowledge of those attacks.
During the presidency of George H.W. Bush in the early 1990s, something disturbing unfolded at the U.S.’ top biological warfare research facility at Fort Detrick, Maryland. Specimens of highly contagious and deadly pathogens – anthrax and ebola among them – had disappeared from the lab, at a time when lab workers and rival scientists had been accused of targeted sexual and ethnic harassment and several disgruntled researchers had left as a result.
In addition to missing samples of anthrax, ebola, hanta virus and a variant of AIDS, two of the missing specimens had been labeled “unknown” – “an Army euphemism for classified research whose subject was secret,” according to reports. The vast majority of the specimens lost were never found and an Army spokesperson would later claim that it was “likely some were simply thrown out with the trash.”
An internal Army inquiry in 1992 would reveal that one employee, Lt. Col. Philip Zack, had been caught on camera secretly entering the lab to conduct “unauthorized research, apparently involving anthrax,” the Hartford Courant would later report. Despite this, Zack would continue to do infectious disease research for pharmaceutical giant Eli Lilly and would collaborate with the U.S. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease (NIAID) throughout the 1990s.
The Courant had also noted that: “A numerical counter on a piece of lab equipment had been rolled back to hide work done by the mystery researcher [later revealed to be Zack], who left the misspelled label ‘antrax’ in the machine’s electronic memory.” The Courant’s report further detailed the extremely lax security controls and chaotic disorganization that then characterized the U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases (USAMRIID) lab in Fort Detrick.
This same lab would, a decade later, be officially labeled as the source of the anthrax spores responsible for the 2001 anthrax attacks, attacks which are also officially said to have been the work of a “deranged” USAMRIID researcher, despite initially having been blamed on Saddam Hussein and Iraq by top government officials and mainstream media. Those attacks killed 5 Americans and sickened 17.
Yet, as the investigation into the 2001 anthrax attacks unfolded, accusations from major U.S. newspapers soon emerged that the FBI was deliberately sabotaging the probe to protect the Anthrax attacker and that the CIA and U.S. military intelligence had refused to cooperate with the investigation. The FBI did not officially close their investigation into the 2001 anthrax attacks, nicknamed “Amerithrax,” until 2010 and aspects of that investigation still remain classified.
More recently, this past July, the same Fort Detrick lab would be shut down by the CDC, after it was found that researchers “did not maintain an accurate or current inventory” for toxins and “failed to safeguard against unauthorized access to select agents.” The closure of the lab for its numerous breaches of biosafety protocols would be hidden from Congress and the facility would controversially be partially reopened last November before all of the identified biosafety issues were resolved.
The same day that the lab was controversially allowed to partially reopen, which was the result of heavy lobbying from the Pentagon, local news outlets reported that the lab had suffered “two breaches of containment” last year, though the nature of those breaches and the pathogens involved were redacted in the inspection findings report obtained by the Frederick News Post. Notably, USAMRIID has, since the 1980s, worked closely with virologists and virology labs in Wuhan, China, where the first epicenter of the current novel Coronavirus (Covid-19) cases emerged. The Chinese government has since alleged that the virus had been brought to China by members of the U.S. military, members of which attended the World Military Games in the country last October.
Such similarities among these Fort Detrick lab breaches, from the early 1990s to 2001 to the present, may be nothing more than unfortunate coincidences that are the result of a stubborn federal government and military that have repeatedly refused to enforce the necessary stringent safety precautions on the nation’s top biological warfare laboratory.
Yet, upon examining not only these biosafety incidents at Fort Detrick, but the 2001 Anthrax attacks and the current Covid-19 outbreak, another odd commonality stands out — high-level war games exercise took place in June 2001 that eerily predicted not only the Anthrax attacks, but also the initial government narrative of those attacks and much, much more.
That June 2001 exercise, known as “Dark Winter,” also predicted many aspects of government pandemic response that would later re-emerge in last October’s simulation “Event 201,” which predicted a global pandemic caused by a novel Coronavirus just months before the Covid-19 outbreak. In addition, the U.S. government would lead its own multi-part series of pandemic simulations, called “Crimson Contagion,” that would also predict aspects of the Covid-19 outbreak and government response.
Upon further investigation, key leaders of both Event 201 and Crimson Contagion, not only have deep and longstanding ties to U.S. Intelligence and the U.S. Department of Defense, they were all previously involved in that same June 2001 exercise, Dark Winter. Some of these same individuals would also play a role in the FBI’s “sabotaged” investigation into the subsequent Anthrax attacks and are now handling major aspects of the U.S. government’s response to the Covid-19 crisis. One of those individuals, Robert Kadlec, was recently put in charge of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) entire Covid-19 response efforts, despite the fact that he was recently and directly responsible for actions that needlessly infected Americans with Covid-19.
Other major players in Dark Winter are now key drivers behind the “biodefense” mass surveillance programs currently being promoted as a technological solution to Covid-19’s spread, despite evidence that such programs actually worsen pandemic outbreaks. Others still have close connections to the insider trading that recently occurred among a select group of U.S. Senators regarding the economic impact of Covid-19 and are set to personally profit from lucrative contracts to develop not just one, but the majority, of experimental Covid-19 treatments and vaccines currently under development by U.S. companies.
This investigative series, entitled “Engineering Contagion: Amerithrax, Coronavirus and the Rise of the Biotech-Industrial Complex,” will examine these disturbing parallels between the 2001 anthrax attacks and the current scandals and “solutions” of the Covid-19 crisis as well as the simulations that eerily preceded both events. By tracing key actors in Dark Winter from 2001 to the present, it is also possible to trace the corruption that has lurked behind U.S. “biodefense” and pandemic preparedness efforts for decades and which now is rearing its ugly head as pandemic panic distracts the American and global public from the fundamentally untrustworthy, and frankly dangerous, individuals who are in control of the U.S. government’s and corporate America’s response.
Given their involvement in Dark Winter and, more recently, Event 201 and Crimson Contagion, this series seeks to explore the possibility that, just like the 2001 anthrax attacks, government insiders had foreknowledge of the Covid-19 crisis on a scale that, thus far, has gone unreported and that those same insiders are now manipulating the government’s response and public panic in order to reap record profits and gain unprecedented power for themselves and control over people’s lives.
A Dark Winter Descends
In late June 2001, the U.S. military was preparing for a “Dark Winter.” At Andrews Air Force Base in Camp Springs, Maryland, several Congressmen, a former CIA director, a former FBI director, government insiders and privileged members of the press met to conduct a biowarfare simulation that would precede both the September 11 attacks and the 2001 Anthrax attacks by a matter of months. It specifically simulated the deliberate introduction of smallpox to the American public by a hostile actor.
The simulation was a collaborative effort led by the Johns Hopkins Center for Civilian Biodefense Strategies (part of the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security) in collaboration with the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), the Analytic Services (ANSER) Institute for Homeland Security and the Oklahoma National Memorial Institute for the Prevention of Terrorism. The concept, design and script of the simulation were created by Tara O’Toole and Thomas Inglesby of the Johns Hopkins Center along with Randy Larsen and Mark DeMier of ANSER. The full script of the exercise can be read here.
The name for the exercise derives from a statement made by Robert Kadlec, who participated in the script created for the exercise, when he states that the lack of smallpox vaccines for the U.S. populace means that “it could be a very dark winter for America.” Kadlec, a veteran of the George W. Bush administration and a former lobbyist for military intelligence/intelligence contractors, is now leading HHS’ Covid-19 response and led the Trump administration’s 2019 “Crimson Contagion” exercises, which simulated a crippling pandemic influenza outbreak in the U.S. that had first originated in China. Kadlec’s professional history, his decades-old obsession with apocalyptic bioweapon attack scenarios and the Crimson Contagion exercises themselves are the subject of Part III of this series.
The Dark Winter exercise began with a briefing on the geopolitical context of the exercise, which included intelligence suggesting that China had intentionally introduced Foot and Mouth disease in Taiwan for economic and political advantage; that Al-Qaeda was seeking to purchase biological pathogens once weaponized by the Soviet Union; and that Saddam Hussein of Iraq had recruited former biowarfare specialists from the Soviet Union and was importing materials to create biological weapons. It further notes that a majority of Americans had opposed a planned deployment of U.S. soldiers to the Middle East, which was also opposed by Iraq, China and Russia. The script also asserts that the soldiers were being deployed to counter and potentially engage the Iraqi military. Later, as the exercise unfolds, many of those Americans once skeptical about this troop deployment soon begin calling for “revenge.”
Amid this backdrop, news suddenly breaks that smallpox, a disease long eradicated in the U.S. and globally, appears to have broken out in the state of Oklahoma. The participants in Dark Winter, representing the National Security Council, quickly deduce that smallpox has been deliberately introduced and that this is the result of a “bioterrorist attack on the United States.” The assumption is made that the attack is “related to decisions we may make to deploy troops to the Mid-East.”
Not unlike what is unfolding currently with the Covid-19 crisis, in Dark Winter, there is no means of rapid diagnosis for smallpox, no treatments available and no surge capacity in the healthcare system. The outbreak quickly spreads to numerous other U.S. states and throughout the world. Hospitals in the U.S. soon face “desperate situations” as “tens of thousands of ill or anxious persons seek care.” This is compounded by “grossly inadequate supplies” and “insufficient isolation rooms,” among other complications.
Since this exercise occurred in June 2001, the heavy hinting that Saddam Hussein-led Iraq and Al Qaeda are the main suspects is notable. Indeed, at one point in one of the fictional news reports used in the exercise, the reporter states that “Iraq might have provided the technology behind the attacks to terrorist groups based in Afghanistan.” Such claims that Iraq’s government was linked to Al Qaeda in Afghanistan would re-emerge months later in the aftermath of the September 11 attacks, and would be heavily promoted by several Dark Winter participants such as former CIA Director James Woolsey, who would later swear under oath that Saddam Hussein was involved in 9/11. It would, of course, later emerge that Iraq’s connections to Al Qaeda and the 9/11 attacks were nonexistent as well as the fact that Iraq did not possess biological weapons or other “weapons of mass destruction.”
Notably, this insertion into one of the Dark Winter news clips was not the only part of the exercise that sought to link Saddam Hussein and Iraq to biological weapons. For instance, during the exercise, satellite imaging showed that a “suspected bioresearch facility” in Iraq appeared to be expanding an “exclusionary zone” in order to limit civilian activity near the facility as well as a “possible quarantine” area in the same area as this facility. Previously in the exercise, Iraq was one of three countries, along with Iran and North Korea, who were “repeatedly rumored” to have illicitly obtained Soviet smallpox cultures from defecting scientists and Iraq was alleged to have offered employment to a leading smallpox scientist who had worked on the Soviet bioweapons program.
Then, at the end of the exercise, a “prominent Iraqi defector” emerges who claims Iraq had arranged the bioweapons attack “through intermediaries,” which is deemed “highly credible” even though “there is no forensic evidence to support this claim.” Iraq officially denies the accusation, but vows to target the U.S. in “highly damaging ways” if the U.S. “takes action against Iraq.” It is thus unsurprising that, as will be shown later in this report, key participants in Dark Winter would heavily promote the narrative that Iraq was to blame for the 2001 Anthrax attacks. Other participants, including Robert Kadlec, would then become involved in the FBI’s “sabotaged” investigation once the Bureau began to focus on a domestic, as opposed to an international source.
In addition, as part of Dark Winter, mainstream media outlets, including the New York Times and others, were sent anonymous letters that threatened renewed attacks on the U.S., including anthrax attacks, if the U.S. did not withdraw its troops from the Middle East. In this simulation, those letters contained “a genetic fingerprint of the smallpox strain matching the fingerprint of the strain causing the current epidemic.” During the Anthrax attacks that would occur just a few months after Dark Winter, Judith Miller – who participated in Dark Winter – and other U.S. reporters would receive threatening letters with a white powder presumed to be Anthrax. In Miller’s case, the powder turned out to be harmless.
Other aspects of Dark Winter appear more notable now than ever, particularly in light of recent pandemic simulations that were conducted by the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security (Event 201) and the Trump administration (Crimson Contagion) in 2019, as well as the federal government’s current options for responding to Covid-19.
For instance, Dark Winter warns of “dangerous misinformation” spreading online selling “unverified” cures and making similarly “unverified” claims, all of which are deemed as posing a threat to public safety. Such concerns over online misinformation/disinformation and narrative control have recently surfaced in connection with the current Covid-19 crisis. Notable, however, is the fact that the “Event 201” simulation held last October, which simulated a global pandemic caused by a novel coronavirus, also greatly emphasized concerns about such misinformation/disinformation and suggested increased social media censorship and “limited internet shutdowns” to combat the issue. That simulation was co-hosted by the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security, which is currently led by Dark Winter co-author Thomas Inglesby.
Dark Winter further discusses the suppression and removal of civil liberties, such as the possibility of the President to invoke “The Insurrection Act”, which would allow the military to act as law enforcement upon request by a State governor, as well as the possibility of “martial rule.” The Dark Winter script also discusses how options for martial rule “include, but are not limited to, prohibition of free assembly, national travel ban, quarantine of certain areas, suspension of the writ of habeas corpus [i.e. arrest without due process], and/or military trials in the event that the court system becomes dysfunctional.”
The exercise later includes “credible allegations” that those deemed “suspicious for smallpox” by authorities were illegally arrested or detained and that these arrests largely targeted low income individuals or ethnic minorities. In terms of current events, it is worth pointing out that U.S. Attorney General William Barr and the Department of Justice he leads have recently requested new “emergency powers” that are allegedly related to the current Covid-19 outbreak. That request specifically references the ability to indefinitely detain Americans without right to a free trial.
Weaving a narrative
After examining Dark Winter, it then becomes important to examine the events the exercise seemingly predicted, namely the 2001 anthrax attacks. This is particularly crucial for two reasons: first, that the source of the anthrax was later traced to a domestic source, allegedly the USAMRIID lab in Fort Detrick; and second, the mode of attack and the initial narrative of those attacks were straight out of the Dark Winter playbook. Furthermore, key players in the government response to the anthrax attacks, including those with apparent foreknowledge of the attacks, as well as those who sought (falsely) to link those attacks to Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda were also participants in Dark Winter.
Weeks before the first Anthrax case would be discovered, on the evening of September 11, 2001, then-Vice President Dick Cheney’s staff was told to start taking injections of the antibiotic Cipro in order to prevent Anthrax infection. In addition, at least one member of the press, journalist Richard Cohen – then at the Washington Post – had also been told to take Cipro soon after September 11 after receiving a tip “in a roundabout way from a high government official.” Who exactly in the Bush administration and in the Beltway began taking Cipro weeks prior to the anthrax attacks and for how long? Unfortunately, the answer to that question remains unanswered. Yet, it has since been revealed that the person who had told these officials to take Cipro was none other than Dark Winter participant Jerome Hauer, who had previously served for nearly 8 years at the U.S. Army Medical Research and Development Command (USAMRDC), which oversees the USAMRIID lab at Fort Detrick.
Hauer, on September 11, 2001, was the managing director of Kroll Inc., a private intelligence and security company informally known as the “CIA of Wall Street,” a company that French intelligence had accused of acting as a front for the actual CIA. Kroll Inc., at the time of the attacks was responsible for security at the World Trade Center complex, yet Hauer was conveniently not present at his World Trade Center office on the day of the attacks, instead appearing on cable news. More on the series of “conveniences” that have followed Hauer throughout his career, especially over the course of 2001, and the massive amounts of money he stands to make off of the current Covid-19 epidemic will be discussed in detail in Part II of this series.
Then, on September 12, Donald Kagan of the neoconservative think tank the Project for a New American Century (PNAC), whose members populated key posts in the Bush administration, made an odd comment (for the time, anyway) about the September 11 attacks and anthrax. Speaking on Washington DC radio, Kagan – after suggesting that the U.S. should invade Afghanistan, Iraq and Palestine in retaliation for September 11 – asks “What would have happened if they had anthrax on that plane?” That same day, James Woolsey, himself a PNAC member and also a Dark Winter participant, claimed that Iraq was to blame for September 11 during a cable news interview.
A week later, another PNAC member and advisor to the Bush White House– Richard Perle – told CNN that the next terror attack is likely to involve “chemical or biological weapons.” Soon after, Jerome Hauer re-emerges, claiming that the government now has a “new sense of urgency” regarding bioterrorist threats and asserts that “Osama Bin Laden wants to acquire these [biological] agents and we know he has links to Saddam and Saddam Hussein has them.” Of course, Saddam Hussein did not actually possess these biological weapons, although he did during the fictional Dark Winter exercise in which Hauer had actively participated. Just days after Hauer made these bold claims, ABC News reported that the alleged 9/11 hijackers may have intended to modify crop dusters to disperse Anthrax.
All of this took place several days before the first anthrax victim, photojournalist Bob Stevens, would even begin to show symptoms and over a week before doctors would even begin to suspect that his condition had been caused by anthrax poisoning.
On October 2, as Stevens’ health began to rapidly deteriorate, a new book co-written by journalist Judith Miller of the New York Times was released. Entitled “Germs: Biological Weapons and America’s Secret War,” the book asserted that the U.S. faced an unprecedented bioterrorism threat from terrorist groups like Al Qaeda. It further alleged that such groups may have teamed up with countries such as Iraq and Russia. Miller, who had participated in Dark Winter months prior, had conducted numerous interviews with senior White House officials for the book, particularly Dick Cheney’s chief of staff I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby.
Libby, although he had not personally attended Dark Winter, was greatly impacted by the exercise when he learned of it, so much so that he had personally arranged for Cheney to watch the video of the entire Dark Winter exercise on September 20, 2001. Cheney took the contents of Dark Winter to the National Security Council the very next day. It would later be reported in New York magazine that, “a few days after 9/11,” the principal authors of Dark Winter – Randall Larsen, Tara O’Toole and Thomas Inglesby – would personally meet with Cheney and members of the administration’s national security staff about the exercise.
Larsen, who worked closely with Robert Kadlec throughout the 1990s, allegedly smuggled a test tube of weaponized Bacillus globigii, “almost genetically identical to anthrax,” into the meeting, according to that report. It is unclear when this meeting took place in relation to when Cheney had watched the video of the Dark Winter exercise.
The same day that Miller’s “Germs” was released, October 2, another odd occurrence took place. A former scientist at the USAMRIID lab at Fort Detrick, Dr. Ayaad Assaad, received a call from the FBI after someone who intimately knew Assaad’s work history and career in great detail (and who also claimed to have previously worked with Assaad) had anonymously accused him of being a “potential biological terrorist” with a deep-seated hatred of the U.S. government. At the time the letter was received by the FBI, neither the public nor the FBI were aware of any anthrax cases. Assaad, who was then working for the Environmental Protection Agency, told the FBI that he believed he was being framed by former co-workers. The FBI deemed this to be credible and never contacted Assaad in connection with the case again.
It later emerged in the Hartford Courant that Assaad had been the target of extensive harassment by a clique of co-workers at the USAMRIID lab in the early 1990s. One of those co-workers who had harassed Assaad would leave the lab disgruntled as a result of the controversy over Assaad’s harassment allegations. He would later return to the lab to conduct unauthorized, late night research on anthrax and be tied to several missing specimens of anthrax and other pathogens – Lt. Col. Philip Zack.
Zack, in 2001, was working for the U.S. biotechnology company Gilead Sciences. Though he first began working for Gilead in 1999, he was “handpicked” in 2001 to lead the establishment of “a new Project Management Department in conjunction with a complete restructure of R&D [Research and Development].” Donald Rumsfeld, another member of PNAC, became the chairman of Gilead Sciences in 1997 and he served as chairman of that company up until he became George W. Bush’s Secretary of Defense in early 2001.
Rumsfeld would later announce on September 10, 2001 that $2.3 trillion had gone “missing” from the Pentagon’s budget. The Pentagon’s accounting office, whose staff was attempting to locate these missing trillions, would be destroyed on September 11, 2001. Though planes being flown into the Pentagon would later be described by government officials as “unimaginable” and “unthinkable” after the attacks, a simulation of planes being flown into the Pentagon had been conducted less than a year prior to September 11.
On October 4, 2001, Bob Stevens’ anthrax poisoning diagnosis was made known to the FBI and CDC and the public was then informed via a press conference. The second anthrax case was declared soon after and was a co-worker of Stevens’, who had worked for the Florida-based newspaper, the Sun.
A day later, White House officials began to immediately pressure then-FBI Director Robert Mueller to prove that the anthrax attacks were linked to Al Qaeda, despite there being no evidence to make such a link. “They really wanted to blame somebody in the Middle East,” a then-senior FBI official would later tell the New York Daily News of the meetings.
Over the next few weeks, suspicious letters containing fine, white powder were sent to well-known American journalists, including NBC’s Tom Brokaw and The New York Times’ Judith Miller, though the powder in the letter addressed to Miller was found to be harmless. Notably, Miller and other New York Times journalists wrote a total of 27 articles specifically about anthrax and its potential use as a bioweapon between September 12, 2001 and the day before Stevens was diagnosed with anthrax poisoning.
Letters containing anthrax were also received by Senators Tom Daschle, Russ Feingold and Patrick Leahy, all of whom were – at the time – preventing the US Patriot Act from quickly passing through the Senate and who were resisting administration attempts to ram the legislation through with little to no debate. Several of the letters included the date “9-11-01” and the phrases “Death to America, Death to Israel, Allah is great” in neatly-printed block letters.
Soon after, a suspicious letter was found in the office of then-Congressman and current Vice President Mike Pence. Media Roots noted the following about Pence’s subsequent press conference in a 2018 podcast that examined the timeline of the 2001 anthrax attacks:
“…Mike Pence, who once hosted an AM talk show describing himself as ‘Rush Limbaugh on decaf,’ conducts a press conference outside the Capitol proclaiming revenge and biblical style justice to whoever conducted the anthrax attacks. His family–with news cameras in tow–gets tested for anthrax at the hospital after it is allegedly found in his office.
No news outlets questioned his grandstanding or odd performance of going to the hospital with his family, and unlike Senators Daschle and Leahy in their press appearances, Mike Pence alluded to the anthrax letters being connected to the larger ‘war on terror.’”
As public panic swelled, more letters continued to be found, not just in the United States but around the world, with anthrax and/or hoax letters being found in Japan, Kenya, Israel, China and Australia, among others. Simultaneously, efforts to link the anthrax attacks to Saddam Hussein and Iraq began to emerge and quickly grew in intensity and number.
The media push to link the attacks to Iraq began first with The Guardian and then was followed by U.S. media outlets like The Wall Street Journal. Those early reports cited unnamed “American investigators” and defense officials and largely centered on the false claim that alleged 9/11 mastermind Mohammad Atta had met with an Iraqi diplomat in Prague in late 2000 as well as similarly false allegations that members of Al Qaeda had recently obtained vials of anthrax in the Czech Republic.
A key person in disseminating that false Prague story was Dark Winter participant and PNAC member James Woolsey. It was also revealed in late October 2001 that Woolsey was serving as the personal emissary of Paul Wolfowitz, Iraq War “architect” and then-Deputy Secretary of Defense, in “investigating Iraqi involvement in the September 11 attacks and anthrax outbreaks.”
Beyond the Pentagon, foreign “experts” soon began to assert that there was a link between the anthrax attacks and Iraq, including former Israeli military intelligence officer Dany Shoham. Shoham recently resurfaced this past January after claiming that Covid-19 was developed by the Chinese government as a bioweapon.
These assertions were soon followed by a report from ABC News’ Brian Ross, who (again falsely) claimed that some of the anthrax used in the attacks had contained bentonite. Ross claimed that bentonite “is a trademark of Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein’s biological weapons program” and that “only one country, Iraq, has used bentonite to produce biological weapons.” Ross asserted this information had come from three “well-placed but separate sources,” which later grew to four. Yet, no tests conducted during the Anthrax investigation ever found any bentonite at all, meaning the story was an invention from the very start. ABC and Brian Ross never retracted the story.
Glenn Greenwald, then writing at Salon, would state the following about Ross’ sources in 2008:
“Ross’ allegedly four separate sources had to have some specific knowledge of the tests conducted and, if they were really “well-placed,” one would presume that meant they had some connection to the laboratory where the tests were conducted — Ft. Detrick. That means that the same Government lab where the anthrax attacks themselves came from was the same place where the false reports originated that blamed those attacks on Iraq.
It’s extremely possible — one could say highly likely — that the same people responsible for perpetrating the attacks were the ones who fed the false reports to the public, through ABC News, that Saddam was behind them. What we know for certain — as a result of the letters accompanying the anthrax — is that whoever perpetrated the attacks wanted the public to believe they were sent by foreign Muslims. Feeding claims to ABC News designed to link Saddam to those attacks would, for obvious reasons, promote the goal of the anthrax attacker(s).”
Soon, media reports began noting the contradictory messaging of the U.S. government with regards to the anthrax attacks, messaging which has striking parallels to the Trump administration’s messaging on Covid-19. In one such report, written by Matthew Engel for The Guardian, states:
“Those in charge have compounded the problems by sending out confused messages. Was the anthrax weapons-grade or not? Should Americans be alarmed or relaxed? Has President Bush himself been tested? The signals keep changing. Mr. Thompson suggested early on that Bob Stevens, the first anthrax victim, might have drunk from an infected stream.”
During the 2001 anthrax attacks, there was no shortage of contradictory actions either, such as the government’s failure to mandate that postal workers take Cipro or even take the simplest precautions even though members of the Bush administration had been taking Cipro weeks before the anthrax attacks were known to the FBI and the public. Even worse, the Bush administration waited an extremely long time to close post offices for anthrax testing, waiting until numerous postal workers had already become infected and some had already died. In addition, Ernesto Blanco – a Florida mail room worker who later recovered from Anthrax poisoning – and his family were left confused about the refusal of the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to diagnose him with anthrax poisoning while he was in dire condition. Blanco’s family later claimed that his diagnosis had been kept a secret for political reasons.
BASIS for surveillance and control
The contradictory response of the Bush administration to the anthrax attacks and the panic that ensued was also paralleled by an equally contradictory sensor system, one which had been installed just a few months before the anthrax attacks in thirty cities throughout the U.S. despite a dubious record of accuracy.
Just as the fictional scenarios proposed in Dark Winter were being written, American scientists were developing a sensor system for the detection of anthrax and botulinum toxin called BASIS (Biological Aerosol Sentry and Information Systems). Months before anthrax would cause extreme panic and target American Senators, scientists from Los Alamos and the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory were testing the biological sensing device at the Dugway Proving Ground in Utah, inside the Special Programs Division of what was once the site of the U.S. biological weapons program and where anthrax samples used at Fort Detrick are often produced.
It is worth noting that Dugway, not unlike Fort Detrick, has a longstanding issues with biosafety lapses that have resulted in numerous mishaps, such as their accidental shipment of live anthrax over 70 times to 86 different labs throughout the world from 2005-2015. Independent analyses conducted after the FBI closed its investigation into the attacks have suggested that Dugway may have been the source of the anthrax used in the attacks, as opposed to Fort Detrick.
Returning to BASIS, the results of the tests conducted on this new sensor system in 2001 showed that it was highly prone to generating false positives and was, therefore, worthless beyond the ability to “induce the very panic and social disruption it is intended to thwart“, according to the Livermore Laboratory, which nevertheless marketed BASIS as a tool to “guard the air we breathe.” Vice President Cheney, following his September 2001 briefing on Dark Winter, decided to install the system in the White House.
Days after Senator Tom Daschle’s press conference that revealed he had been targeted by the anthrax attacker, President Bush was in Shanghai attending the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit when he received a call from Dick Cheney on Airforce Two. Cheney delivered a chilling message — the President and Secretaries Condoleezza Rice and Colin Powell, who were with Bush in China, might have been exposed to the ultra-lethal botulinum toxin at the White House.
BASIS had returned two positive results for the deadly neurotoxin and – if the tests held true – three of the U.S.’ highest ranking officials were “toast.” Yet, once again, BASIS had lived up to its reputation as a great panic-inducing mechanism when the supposed botulinum toxin hits were determined to have been false positives. Apparently, this “unintended” feature was a real selling point, as proven by George W. Bush’s subsequent deployment of the system in thirty citiesthroughout the country under the auspices of the newly-minted Department of Homeland Security as part of a program called Bio-Watch.
Given the events described, it is noteworthy that BASIS relies on the CDC’s Laboratory Response Network (LRN) to identify the biological agents trapped by its sensors. The 150 state and local laboratories that make up the LRN use a polymerase chain reaction (PCR-based) analysis, which is ill-equipped to detect the aforementioned botulinum toxin. In addition, the Bio-Watch program is plagued by bureaucratic and logistical problems, which further undermine any potential public health benefits.
DHS was fully aware of the program’s limitations from the start and issued requests for proposals (RFPs) for the development of autonomous sensor technology that would eliminate the need for manual sample collection. The Bioagent Autonomous Networked Detector (BAND) program was then initiated by HSARPA (Homeland Security Advanced Research Projects Agency) in September of 2003 and, in 2008, awarded a multi-year contract for its development to MicroFluidic Systems, Inc., a company founded by Allen Northrup. Northup is also co-founder of Cepheid, a diagnostic testing company that received FDA approval for a 45-minute Covid-19 test less than two weeks ago.
In tandem with the development of BASIS shortly before 9/11 and the 2001 anthrax attacks, DARPA was sponsoring a surveillance program to collect data on U.S. citizens without their knowledge or consent by using their medical records. The ostensible purpose of that program was to develop algorithms that could detect a bioweapons attack based on real-time data input. The Bio-Event Advanced Leading Indicator Recognition Technology, or Bio-ALIRT, is at the heart of what Dark Winter co-author, Dr. Tara O’Toole, calls the “information supply chain.”
“We need to have a disciplined flow of information during epidemics that goes to the people who need to know what they need to know,” O’Toole recently told Ira Pastor in an interview. “That’s different from this cosmic surveillance system, that captures all the possible information all the time and tells us, in advance when an epidemic is coming. We need a supply chain of information to manage the epidemic.” O’Toole, who now works for the CIA’s venture capital arm In-Q-Tel, and her longstanding promotion of mass surveillance in the name of “public health” will be discussed in a subsequent installment of this series.
DARPA’s partners in this Orwellian endeavor were, perhaps unsurprisingly, recurring actors in the arena of biological attack simulations, from Johns Hopkins to the University of Pittsburgh – the Biosecurity centers of which were both previously run by O’Toole – and defense industry giants, General Dynamics and IBM.
Hovering over these draconian innovations floats the overarching narrative, which the 2001 anthrax attacks were supposed to activate in popular consciousness. Though the attacks would be pinned on USAMRIID scientist Bruce Ivins, the highly questionable investigative and prosecutorial methods employed in Ivins’ case, not to mention his timely pre-trial suicide, may instead offer clues regarding a botched false flag operation that had originally been designed to bolster the creation of a new geopolitical chessboard pitting the U.S. against its same perpetual enemies.
Covering up the real conspiracy
From its earliest moments, the FBI’s “Amerithrax” investigation into the 2001 anthrax attacks was clearly botched, sabotaged and even farcical. For instance, the letter sent to Dr. Ayaad Assaad would obviously have been a clear starting point for any honest investigation, as whoever wrote it had obvious foreknowledge of the attacks, connections to USAMRIID and was attempting to frame someone else for a crime that – at the time it was sent – had yet to be committed. Yet, The Hartford Courant noted in late 2001 that “the FBI is not tracking the source of the anonymous letter, despite its curious timing, coming a matter of days before the existence of anthrax-laced mail became known.” Why would the FBI not be interested in who wrote that letter, when it presents a clear lead on someone who, at the very least, knew a bioterrorism attack would soon take place and that the attacker’s profile would fit that of Assaad (i.e. Muslim and a former USAMRIID scientist).
In addition, in the early days of the investigation on October 12, 2001 – just one week after the attacks had claimed their first victim, the FBI called the University of Iowa and demanded that they destroy their entire database on the Ames strain of anthrax, the strain that would later be revealed to have been the very strain used in the attacks.
Both the FBI and the university officially claimed that the database’s destruction was ordered in order to prevent its potential use by terrorists in the future and was thus a “precaution,” despite greatly hampering the capacity of the investigation to determine the origins of the anthrax used in the attacks. Dr. Francis Boyle, an American law professor who drafted the Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act of 1989, later asserted that the FBI’s decision to order the destruction of the Ames strain database was an “obstruction of justice, a federal crime,” adding that “…That collection should have been preserved and protected as evidence. That’s the DNA, the fingerprints right there.”
Can the destruction of the Ames strain database and the decision to not pursue any leads related to the anonymous letter framing Dr. Assaad be written off as merely “missteps” made in the earliest and arguably most crucial days of the investigation? The fact that the Bush administration, as previously mentioned, was strongly pressuring then-FBI Director Robert Mueller to find a connection to “someone in the Middle East” at the same time these decision were made instead suggests that the investigation was highly politicized and manipulated by top government officials from the very beginning.
The FBI investigation continued to be marred by similarly obstructive actions. For instance, the anthrax sample that was in the envelope addressed to Senator Patrick Leahy had been found to contain traces of human DNA, a crucial finding that the FBI laboratory deliberately concealedfrom the agency’s own investigators. The FBI lab then declined to search for a match to this human DNA sample, despite the fact that doing so would – in all probability – lead to the actual attacker.
Due to all the obstruction and deliberate sabotage that took place, the investigation progressed slowly as crucial clues were ignored or outright discarded, apparently in order to keep FBI investigators off of the real trail. After coming under political and media pressure at least name a suspect, the FBI began to focus on former USAMRIID researcher Stephen Hatfill.
Despite lacking any good reason to pursue Hatfill, the FBI – accompanied by TV crews – raided Hatfill’s apartment in biohazard suits and then-Attorney General John Ashcroft later publicly named him a “person of interest” in the case. The FBI pressured Hatfill’s then-employer to fire him and refused to clear his name years after the Bureau knew full well that he had no connection to the crime. Hatfill first sued the government in 2003 and the Department of Justice settled with Hatfill five years later, paying him $4.6 million in damages.
Though it was eventually settled, Hatfill’s lawsuit initially resulted in some odd claims from FBI investigators, with Richard Lambert – the FBI official in charge of the Amerithrax investigation, claiming that the lawsuit “could jeopardize the probe and expose national secrets related to U.S. bioweapons defense measures.” He also claimed it would “make public the vulnerabilities and capabilities of U.S. government installations to bioweapons attacks and expose sensitive intelligence collection sources and methods.” Lambert would later file a federal whistleblower lawsuit where he accused the Bureau’s Washington field office and FBI headquarters of having “greatly obstructed and impeded the investigation.”
The Department of Justice, which oversees the FBI, would make a similar argument when Maureen Stevens, the wife of the first anthrax victim Bob Stevens, sued the federal government over the lax security measures in place at the USAMRIID lab where the anthrax used in the attacks was alleged to have originated. Stevens’ lawyer said the lawsuit was also filed due to “the government’s stonewalling tactics,” which included “taking months to turn over an autopsy report, denying them access to DNA tests and even denying them money from the Sept. 11 Victims Compensation Fund.” Citing “national security concerns,” federal attorneys sought to delay Stevens’ lawsuit, arguing that the litigation “would pose a significant risk of disclosing classified or sensitive information relating to the acquisition, development and use of weapons of mass destruction such as anthrax.”
In 2008, soon after Hatfill was cleared and the lawsuit with him settled, the FBI began to focus on another USAMRIID researcher, Dr. Bruce E. Ivins. Ivins, who had previously helped the FBI analyze the anthrax used in the letters sent to politicians, journalists and others, was aggressively targeted by the FBI through aggressive surveillance and what can only be described as extreme harassment.
As Glenn Greenwald noted in Salon in 2008, “the FBI investigation was so heavy-handed that it actually entailed showing gruesome photographs of the anthrax victims to Ivins’ adult children, telling them that their father is the one who did that, while trying to entice them to turn on him with promises of a reward.” It was also revealed that addiction counselor Jean Duley, whose restraining order against Ivins was used by the media as “proof” that he was deranged and a likely “lone wolf” terrorist, had actually been egged on by none other than the FBI to seek that very restraining order.
The FBI, as it ramped up its targeting of Ivins, leaked much of its evidence to media outlets, which – for the most part – uncritically reported it. However, it eventually became clear that the case was shoddy and would never hold up in court as it was built on circumstantial evidence and questionable scientific analyses.
It was then announced on July 29, 2008 that Ivins, whose life and career had been left in ruins by the FBI’s aggressive tactics, had committed suicide just as the federal government was set to charge him as the sole culprit behind the Anthrax attacks. Few chose to question the suicide narrative despite there being legitimate reasons to do so, such as the lack of a suicide note at the scene and the fact that no autopsy was ever performed on Ivins’ corpse.
Former FBI agent Richard Lambert’s whistleblower lawsuit would later reveal that the FBI had intentionally withheld a “wealth” of evidence that proved Ivins’ innocence and further charged that the DOJ and FBI had “crafted an elaborate perception management campaign to bolster their assertion of Ivins’ guilt” that included “press conferences and highly selective evidentiary presentations which were replete with material omissions.”
After Ivins’ suicide, questions continued to arise regarding the FBI’s case against the deceased scientist, with several journalists and even Senator Patrick Leahy – who had been sent an Anthrax letter – insisting that the FBI’s case against Ivins, particularly the charge that he had acted alone, was implausible. A former co-worker of Ivins and one of the country’s top biowarfare experts, Richard Spertzel, asserted in The Wall Street Journal that Ivins couldn’t have been the culprit because Ivins did not know how to make anthrax of the quality used in the attacks as only 4-5 people in the entire country, Spertzel being one of them, knew how to do so. Spertzel asserted that one of those 4-5 people would have needed at least a year as well as a full lab and a staff dedicate to the task in order to produce the Anthrax used.
In an attempt to mollify mounting criticism, Mueller announced in September 2008 that a panel from the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) would independently review the FBI’s “smoking gun” scientific analyses that had led them to accuse Ivins. However, the FBI abruptly closed the case in 2010, well before the panel could conclude its review, and stood by its controversial assertion that Ivins had acted as a “lone wolf” and that anthrax from a flask in Ivins’ lab was “conclusively identified as the parent material to the anthrax powder used in the mailings.”
When the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) did release its review of the FBI’s scientific findings a year later in 2011, it found that the Bureau’s “smoking gun” scientific evidence against Ivins was actually very inconclusive and they also identified several still, unresolved issues with the FBI’s analyses for which the Bureau could not provide an explanation.
However, because Ivins had died before the FBI’s scientific case could go to trial, the FBI’s claims would never be challenged in court. David Relman, vice chairman of the National Academy study committee, later told ProPublica that Ivins’ trial would have been the only way the FBI’s claims “could have been weighed and challenged by experts.”
The NAS study was not the only independent report that challenged the FBI’s case against Ivins after his apparent suicide. In 2014, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) released its own analysis of the FBI investigation and concluded that the FBI’s approach lacked consistency, adequate standards and precision. The GAO report ultimately supported the NAS’ conclusion that the scientific evidence did not definitely prove Ivins to be the culprit.
The conclusions of both the NAS and GAO reports show that the FBI’s “smoking gun” against Ivins – its scientific analyses – were hardly a smoking gun as they were just as circumstantial as the rest of the Bureau’s evidence against the scientist. This, of course, makes the timing of the FBI’s decision to close the case, a year before any independent analysis of its evidence against Ivins could be completed, significant.
A familiar cast of characters
Key players in Dark Winter would also end up playing a role in the FBI Amerithrax investigation and Bush administration efforts to link them to a foreign, rather than a domestic, source. For instance, as increasingly desperate efforts were made to link the anthrax attacks to Al Qaeda in early 2002, an “independent” team from the Johns Hopkins Center for Civilian Biodefense Strategies argued that the anthrax attackers were linked to Al Qaeda, citing a diagnosis made by a Florida doctor in June 2001 that alleged 9/11 hijacker Ahmed al-Haznawi had a skin lesion that was “consistent with cutaneous anthrax.”
Yet, this team from Johns Hopkins was – in reality — far from independent, as it was led by Dark Winter co-authors Tara O’Toole and Thomas Inglesby. However, their association with Dark Winter and their September 2001 meeting with Dick Cheney went unmentioned as media outlets ran with O’Toole and Inglesby’s assertion that al-Haznawi’s allegedly anthrax-related lesion “raises the possibility that the hijackers were handling anthrax and were the perpetrators of the anthrax letter attacks.” Other scientists and analysts as well as the FBI challenged and rejected their claims.
Another Dark Winter figure involved in the Amerithrax case was current Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response (ASPR) at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), Robert Kadlec, who became an adviser on biological warfare to the Rumsfeld-led Pentagon in the days after 9/11. Kadlec’s official biography states that he “contributed to the FBI investigation of the anthrax letter attacks,” though it’s unclear exactly what those contributions were, beyond having met at least once with scientists at Fort Detrick in November 2001. Whatever his contributions were, Kadlec has long been an emphatic supporter of the official narrative regarding Bruce Ivins, who he has referred to as a “deranged scientist” and the sole culprit behind the attacks. Kadlec has also used the official narrative about Ivins to assert that bioweapons have been “democratized,” which he argues means that weaponized pathogens can be wielded by essentially anyone with “a few thousand dollars” and enough time on their hands.
Notably, Kadlec isn’t the only key figure in the current U.S. government response to Covid-19 to have ties to the botched FBI investigation as current HHS Secretary Alex Azar was also involved in the FBI investigation. In addition, Azar stated at a White House press briefing in 2018 that he had been “personally involved in much of managing the response [to the anthrax attacks]” as then-General counsel to HHS.
Yet, given that the FBI investigation into the anthrax attacks and the government response to them were so disastrous and heavily criticized by independent and mainstream media alike, it is surprising that Azar and Kadlec would so proudly tout their involvement in that fiasco, especially considering that the scientific analyses used in that investigation were fatally flawed and, by all indications, led to the death of an innocent man.
While such credentials in a “normal” world would be grounds for exclusion from public service, they apparently have the opposite effect when it comes to post-2001 HHS policy and U.S. biodefense policy, which – especially following 2001 – has championed the interests and profits of corporate pharmaceutical companies and the apocalyptic vision of bioweapons held by war hawks and perpetual Cold Warriors. This latter category, of course, includes members of the now-defunct PNAC, who infamously referred to racially-targeted bioweapons as a “politically useful tool” in a now infamous 2000 document, and their ideological descendants.
As the next installment of this series will show, Dark Winter participant and 2001 anthrax attack insider Jerome Hauer epitomizes this merging of perpetual hawkishness and corporate pharmaceutical interests, as he has long held (and continues to occupy) key board positions of the very pharmaceutical company that not only sold tens of millions of anthrax vaccine doses to HHS following the 2001 anthrax attacks, but is now a partner in the development of the majority of vaccines, drugs and experimental treatments currently under development in the United States for the treatment of Covid-19.
PETE SEEGER'S RAINBOW QUEST W BUFFY ST. MARIE - SHOW # 13N SEPTEMBER 1966
•Mar 18, 2020
PETE SEEGER WITH HIS GUEST BUFFY ST. MARIE - NATIVE AMERICAN FOLK SINGER 1966 program . Buffy sings " Welcome Immigrants" , "My Country Tis Of Thee People Who Die", discusses the plight of "new Immigrants and how immigrants not much newer are prejudice towards them , Pete sings " As Long As I Am Singing" , BUFFY SINGS "MEN OF THE FIELDS" "LITTLE WHEELS SPIN AND SPIN BIG WHEEL TURNS AROUND AND AROUND" GET ALONG HOME LITTLE CINDY ( SEEGER & BUFFY DUET)