Diffusing knowledge

Part II concluded by showing that the entire US military apparatus had been completely corporatized. Whether it be weapons development or surveillance, the safety and security of the nation was now in the hands of large corporations whose methods and intellectual property is completely hidden from the people. The outsourcing of scientific research and bio-weapons development had truly provided the stepping-stones for the creation of a massive Military Industrial Complex.

To understand the origins of “trusted science”, this article will reveal an infiltration that occurred in the US over a century before the Nazi Paperclip scientists arrived.

To set the stage, we will provide a brief high-level summary of the patterns of Prussian infiltration.

A Brief History of Prussian Inflitration

In Evolution of Slavery - Part I, we showed how the Hanseatic League merchants infiltrated England in the mid-1600s, and how their merchant traders were perfectly positioned in London by the time William III of Orange took the throne in 1688. Soon after, the Bank of England arrived in 1694.

In 1871 – Part I we provided intricate detail around the period leading up to the creation of the Bank of England. To summarize, the English Crown was drowning in debt, and had been terribly mismanaged by the House of Stuart. London’s Goldsmiths came to the aid of Charles II, after his father had been executed for treason. In 1676, Charles II defaulted again, and the powers-that-be were done. The goldsmiths were furious, and were determined to be paid back, However, it was evident they’d need a new king. Across the English Channel, the merchant traders found their Protestant prince, and in 1688, William III of Orange marched onto English soil and carried out a bloodless coup. The formation of the ‘The Governor and the Company of the Bank of England’ was complex because the Goldsmiths were not interested in supporting further loans. To get around this problem, wealthy members of the public loaned money to the new bank, essentially becoming share-holders in a new joint-stock company.

Almost exactly one century later, this Bank of England model would find its way into the United States, with the private investors also retaining the controlling interest:

The culture of this private banking cartel has long-since permeated into every facet of society; education, religion, technology, governments and corporate media.

Is it possible that the spirit of the Hanseatic merchants lives on, inside this new global empire?

Our 1871 series outlines exactly how this London-based banking cabal became consolidated in the US following the 1871 Treaty of Washington. A few years later, the Statue of Liberty was dedicated in 1886. The statue commemorated the abolition of slavery, but it also was seen as a welcoming symbol to immigrants arriving on the sea. Was this statue a symbol of the new regime that had recently arrived into the US, from “over the sea”?

Is there a possibility that the English bankers covertly exercised their own liberty in the US, while subjecting the people to fees and taxes? Is it just a coincidence that the Statue of Liberty is standing on the water?

Whatever their motive at this time in history, shiny new money would play a significant part in kicking off this phase of the deception. Much like the Age of Enlightenment a century earlier, this was period a freedom, hope and prosperity. However, this invisible enemy had a problem. That pesky US Constitution means that the infiltration of the United States is never complete. Any embedded enemy must exert its control, while ensuring that the people never realize it is happening. This is an exhausting task to contemplate, and they’ve been at it for a long time!

The 1871 Treaty of Washington sabotaged America’s ability to declare their debt obligations to the British null and void. It was perhaps one of the most significant events in American history, because those debt obligations were converted into capital that took the lion’s share of prosperity during the American Industrial Revolution. A huge portion of America’s industrial capital during this period was in the hands of globalist psychopaths, bent on ruling over humanity forever. In 1913, when the Prussian Central banking model was imposed over America, the globalist goal was almost complete. However, to continue to have the people agree to being ruled, there must be a high degree of trickery. This is often done with clever words and deceptive names, as we will show throughout the remainder of this series.

Since the 1871 Treaty was so successful, and became one of the founding precedents to international law and the United Nations, are there other treaties established around the globe that aim to deceive the people and achieve the globalists’ desired end-state of planetary rule?

A Centralized Bioweapon Treaty:

We have previously postulated that a Peace Treaty is a Trade Agreement in disguise. With all we are leaning about the deceptive tactics of this invisible enemy, could a Bioweapon Prevention Treaty also be facilitating some kind of Trade Agreement?

With the presence of bioweapons labs recently exposed in Ukraine, this 2005 Treaty is worth exploring as a case study:

When the title talks about the “prevention” of bioweapons, questions naturally emerge within any enquiring mind. The detail within this particular Agreement reveals its true intentions:

So, let’s summarize what is taking place in Ukraine under the protection of this so-called “Prevention” agreement:

• Firstly, there are dangerous pathogens in Ukraine, and all parties knew about this;

• These dangerous pathogens are to be stored in a centralized lab by the Ukraine government, OR a “designated agent”;

• The US Department of Defense is providing Ukraine funding, which “may include, but is not limited to, cooperative biological research”;

• Any dangerous pathogen strains which are discovered in Ukraine must also be sent to “designated laboratories in the United States”.

This agreement is pure insanity! What bio-activity, if any, is being prevented by this Treaty?

We acknowledge that the overarching aim of this Agreement says that it is for peace and protection, but is it possible that the title of this Treaty represents the opposite of what is taking place?

We closed Part I with Anthony Fauci saying, in 2002, how much he was learning from “bio-weaponers”. This was well after the 1977 Senate Committee were assured that CIA bioweapons research had ceased; a claim which Fauci has essentially debunked.

We are now compelled to ask: Did any of this scientific research stop at all? In fact, with the evidence emerging, you’d be forgiven for thinking it has probably expanded.

Whatever the case, Vladimir Putin seemed to believe that the bioweapons and pathogens in Ukraine presented a serious threat to his people. To be fair, none of the wording in this 2005 “Prevention” Treaty would have given Putin any comfort whatsoever. In fact, the agreement we’re featuring outlines protocols for the expansion of bio-weapons, and that they will be funded by the US government!

Putin believed there was a threat to Russia, and in October of 2022, he famously called out the Ukraine and US governments for developing biological weapons:

The media fact-checkers were working overtime, saying that Putin was lying. However, people began to notice that the media refused to examine the evidence that he submitted to the UN Security Council; evidence that there were operations taking place in laboratories in Kharkiv and Poltava:

This pesky “truth” that was emerging was aggressively opposed by the main stream media. The trusted ‘talking heads’ in the media asked the people to “trust ze science” while they aggressively pushed on with their “Putin is evil and must be destroyed” narrative.

No enquiry as to whether Putin might be telling the truth would be tolerated. The ‘public square’ of free speech had to be seized, and all “misinformation” had to be quietened. The Enlightened Despots were having none of this new enquiry by the free-thinking people.

Eventually, the United States Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs, Victoria Nuland, was forced to acknowledge the awkward truth about Putin’s claims, but this mistress of chicanery framed her response carefully, suggesting that these newly discovered bioweapons labs in Ukraine were just “biological research facilities”, and were really only dangerous because they could now fall into Russian hands (1:29 mins):

Does Victoria Nuland think we are all stupid? Well, the truth is that these Enlightened Despots truly do believe we are sub-human unless we are enlightened, as they claim to be.

Is “dark to light” a phrase that speaks of our transition away from the darkness that the Enlightened Despots suggest we live within?

Trust ze news:

In our Ode to the Prussian Pickle series, we demonstrated how scientific despots had introduced a depopulation agenda cleverly embedded within the climate change narrative. This was publicly launched at the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro. For details about the lead-up to the Earth Summit you can read our article, An Ode to the Prussian Pickle – Part V. Following the 1992 Rio Summit, an enormous media narrative coalesced around this newly-created environmental context.

The information provided in our previously-referenced articles is foundational to the direction of this current series. The global public narrative back in 1992 was that science can be trusted. Over the last decade or so, we’ve seen this climate-change narrative gradually increase in ferocity:

However, during the Covid pandemic in 2020-2022, we witnessed this global narrative change gear again; almost to the point of violence (1:08):

We were no longer being told the science can be trusted. The world was being told that the science must be trusted, or else!

Many were starting to see familiar patterns emerging around the propaganda we were being subjected to:

We all watched on as “agreed science” became intertwined with the global propaganda machine which seemed intent on stripping away two of the most-basic of human rights: The right to free thought; and the right to decide what goes into our own body.

Most of us were left asking ourselves – how on earth did we get here? How did science become so institutionalized; so powerful?

The Enlightened Despots, or globalists, knew that their messaging wasn’t working as it had previously, and they unleashed a world-wide re-education campaign:

During the Covid-19 pandemic, another far more serious question arose: How did this “trusted science” narrative arrive at a point where it was able to successfully divide families?

Was the global media narrative around Covid-19 actually a carefully designed propaganda program to create family disputes, cause untold division and shame people into compliance?

Were the Scientific Industrial Complex and the Media Industrial Complex working together to enforce their globalist agenda?

Institutionalized Truth:

To explore these questions properly, we must go back into history. As we foreshadowed earlier, we will come back to “trusted science”, but before that we wish to identify one of the most significant infiltrations of the US that took place a century before Operation Paperclip.

One of the earliest scientific institutions arriving onto US shores was the Smithsonian Institute. Having been around since 1846, it was the epitome of trust and solidarity. So, when the US government decided to decouple from the gold standard in 1971, a significant international agreement was negotiated. In December 1971, ten nations agreed to peg their currencies to the US dollar. This agreement was known as the Smithsonian Agreement, as the agreement was signed at the Smithsonian Institute building in Washington DC.

The Smithsonian Institution had long been offered to the public as a trusted custodian of historical information. Maybe this was why the name of this landmark-agreement was chosen; to inspire public confidence.

Given the name of this historic event, the history of the Smithsonian Institute is worth looking at, given what we are revealing in terms of Enlightened Despotism.

Let us now bring a British chemist and geologist into the spotlight, whose final will and testament left a significant impact on the United States, and the entire western world.

James Smithson, the son of Hugh Smithson, the Duke of Northumberland, was born in 1764 and willed his vast estate to Washington DC, founding a Washington NGO named the Smithsonian Institution:

A few questions immediately spring to mind:

• Why did a foreign scientist leave a vast estate to Washington for the purpose of increasing and controlling the diffusion of knowledge?
• How did a British-led scientific institute come to define an “American National Identity”?

On July 1, 1836, Congress accepted the legacy bequeathed to the nation and pledged the faith of the United States to the charitable trust. In September 1838, Smithson’s legacy, which amounted to more than 100,000 gold sovereigns, was delivered to the mint at Philadelphia. Recoined in US currency, the gift amounted to more than $500,000, representing about 1.5% of the entire US budget at the time, meaning it was a serious chunk of change.

Smithson’s Will provided that the final transfer of his estate would take place via his nephew:

At the time, there were serious questions being asked about this new institution, and it took another ten years of debate before the US Senate formally founded the Smithsonian Institution on August 10, 1846.

Was this vast estate just a chance donation from a foreigner who had no children, or was it something more sinister? Congress and others in the US at the time, were asking the same question:

Some Congress Members went as far as voicing concerns about a man who had never set foot on US soil, as well as the potential impacts on the future “rights” of the people; potentially opening the door to a ‘pay for play’ culture:

Whatever the intent behind the estate, the gift was accepted. The timing of Smithson’s estate coincided with an economic boom in Washington DC, resulting in the construction of new Federal buildings:

The Old Patent Office building – Circa 1900.¹⁸

In some ways, the origin of the Smithsonian Institution can be traced to a group of Washington citizens who met on June 28, 1816, to establish the Columbian Institute for the Promotion of Arts and Sciences. Members included John Quincy Adams, Andrew Jackson, Henry Clay, Judge William Cranch, and James Hoban. Honorary members included James Madison, James Monroe, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, and the Marquis de Lafayette. Given that the Age of Enlightenment was sweeping the earth, new networks were emerging everywhere.

This existing local base of influence provided an avenue which would allow for significant expansion over time. Just as Frederick the Great covertly took control of the vast expression of human talent and endeavor taking place in Prussia, was the Smithsonian arrival opening the doorway for the same thing to occur in the US?

Adding weight to the above assertion, the 1846 Act of Congress to create the Smithsonian was just two years before the Forty-eighters arrived in the US. For those interested, the Forty-eighters was the name given to the migration of Prussian scientists, business leaders and bankers into the US during 1848, which we detailed in The Prussian Origins of the U.S. Federal Reichsbank. Famous names included Kuhn & Loeb, and Charles Pfizer. Again, was the timing of all this just a coincidence, or was a far bigger infiltration taking place?

We often focus on the influence that bankers, energy companies and manufacturers have on government, and for good reason. However, the arrival of the Smithsonian Institution powerfully illustrates how scientific communities and academia can also influence governments, even at the highest level. Did the Smithsonian arrival pave the way for the Enlightened Despots to infiltrate the United States? Was this the point in history that birthed the Scientific Industrial Complex?

Once large institutions become trusted, they can attract significant government funding. Today, we notice that international grants are commonplace for large NGOs and educational institutions. The influence that large scientific research organizations and universities have on society has become quite incredible.

What weighting do governments afford these global think-tanks in terms of defining what is “trusted science”? Does the size of the organization correlate with trustworthiness? Alternatively, who gets to define what ideas can be publicly discussed, and who is a “science-denier”?

In recent years, the main stream media has aggressively pushed the narrative of “trusted scientists” who are promoting their “agreed science”. Any other narrative is deemed to be a threat to the very survival of humanity. Notwithstanding that there were numerous health professionals screaming out to be careful of the Covid-vaccine push, they were obviously not a part of the trusted group of scientists. They received zero media airtime, unless they were being vilified.

Many doctors were deleted from social media platforms for publishing what is now being shown to be true. Despite being trained medical professionals and scientists, they were labelled as “science deniers”, and savagely demonized in the public square.

This censorship went even further than just holding a dangerous opinion; doctors in most western countries who did not whole-heartedly embrace the “agreed science” narrative, or who questioned the safety and efficacy of the Covid vaccines, could lose their medical license.¹⁹

Who on earth was writing this insane script? While this is a good question, some are beginning to view this question as more like a statement, and are nodding in agreement: “Yes, the W.H.O. is writing this insane script!”

The ability of this scientific community to control public opinion and public policy is quite chilling. Its rise in influence over recent decades, begs the question: Are the enormous grants to these NGOs by corporations and governments truly advancing the diffusion of knowledge, or do they come with strings attached?

Suppressing truth:

Truth is a force of nature; it never halts its quest to rise to the surface. Whenever truth does threaten to become public, the invisible enemy uses the media to shield the public from it. This could be via media distractions, or via distorted reports, all aimed to deceive people about what the emerging information means.

Similarly, whenever a public enquiry is warranted, the Deep State tend to run their own parallel enquiry to clog the news cycle with their own highly-contextualized narrative. We saw an example of this in the shambolic January 6 Investigation in the United States in 2021.

Unsurprisingly, this playbook was being used sixty years ago. As the Church Commission was looking into the MKULTRA experiments we noted in Part II, then Vice President, Nelson Rockefeller, and the embedded enemy created an alternate Commission to run along-side the Church Commission:

Whatever the intention behind the creation of the Rockefeller Commission, a broader audience had gained access to the emerging information. Was the Rockefeller Commission a clever plan to gather the intel, and leak it to the media, in order to then control the public narrative? The patterns are eerily similar to the January 6 Committee.²²

Hopefully, our research helps you understand the methods and mannerisms of this invisible enemy, so we can observe them today. We have adopted this approach so that we can get to know this invisible enemy, recognize how we’ve engaged with it, understand how it controls our mind, see how it influences social policy, and then finally, stand against its tyrannical rule.

Essentially, we are suggesting that we must stare down these Enlightened Despots and politely say “no” to their contract offerings. Once we withdraw our agreement to their mandates, there is no contract; meaning they have no legal jurisdiction over our choices. This is true freedom, and we can walk in it now.

This is how we overcome; this is how we win.

You cannot leave a captivity that you cannot see.

To be continued…