Just following US DoD orders?
Operation COVID-19, 'CBRN Response' and the ‘Biodefense’ Coup
For this post, don’t miss details of the DoD’s Joint Publication on CBRN Response.
Was this the template for the lockstep COVID Coup seen in the US and allied nations?
A military operation from start to finish
The previous post covered revelations by a Dutch parliamentarian that are consistent with claims made by Australia’s Senator Malcolm Roberts since mid-2023, about COVID-19…
Holland’s Deputy PM, Fleur Agema, said the country’s national security agency (NCTV) and “NATO obligations” were central to the policy response during COVID. Online media reports described this as “a coup d'état by the NCTV” in the Netherlands.
(A video monologue by UK commentator, Neil Oliver, is approaching 1 million views - link here.)
In his August 2023 speech, Senator Roberts referred to Australia’s membership in a four-nation consortium for emergency Medical Countermeasures (or MCMs - namely ‘vaccines’) under the American-led CBR Defense Cooperative Program.
The most important question (for Australians) remains…
The CBRN ‘Biodefense’ Coup: ‘Crisis’ > ‘Response’ > ‘Solution’
This post introduces readers to an important “new” document (published in September 2016) from the United States Department of Defense, titled:
Joint Publication 3-41: Chemical Biological Radiological and Nuclear Response
This publication provides joint doctrine for military domestic or international response to minimize the effects of a CBRN incident.
The document relates to the “consequence management” of CBRN incidents — in the case of ‘biothreats’, that’s the manufactured ‘crisis-response’ that’s used to justify the ‘vaccine solution’ which is already in the pipeline!
The topic of DoD-led ‘medical countermeasures’ has been covered at length for over two years by
who shared this insight in the comments section in mid-2024:WHO treaty is irrelevant, largely for show, IMO. The international laws are not enforceable, and everything that WHO wants to do is already firmly enshrined in the US federal and most state laws (which are enforceable).
I personally believe it's US DOD was in charge of all of the global covid scam […]
There is a group of owners (private global mafia) that use US Gov and DOD as their imperial enforcer because of the power of the dollar and the power of the US military. But the owners are all global, i.e. they do not care which country they reside in, and it doesn't matter that much, because they are not state actors. They are just very powerful criminal oligarchs.
In terms of the biodefense-pharma complex, here’s a clip of Dr Jason Roos on 24 January 2020 (after taking to the stage wearing a military-grade gas mask for laughs) delivering the key note address at a joint DoD-DHS-CWMD industry day for CBRN-Defense “rapid response” medical countermeasures. (30 sec)
This post will provide an overview of some key aspects of the September 2016 version of the DoD CBRN Response document, updated from the 2012 publication...which is available on Amazon!
The 2016 version was in effect in the lead up to the declaration of the COVID ‘pandemic’ on 11 March 2020.
The central elements of DoD doctrine for CBRN Response are consistent with the ratcheting-up and rollout of the COVID event, whereby a preset security-state response in the US and allied countries pulled the trigger on a militarized ‘biodefense’ operation transnationally.
From the perspective of COVID-19, by inference and in hindsight, the 2016 version of this publication sheds light on elements of:
the official early 2020 timeline - and the initial US federal response - as the ‘Wuhan outbreak’ was evolving into a ‘pandemic’.
the series of ‘emergency’ policy decisions in early March 2020 in response to the so-called ‘crisis’ - culminating in lockdowns - within the US domestically
the lockstep militarization of domestic ‘emergency response’ seen in American-allied nations (NATO and Five Eyes) from mid-March 2020, and the ongoing defense operations during the COVID event (eg. the military enforcement of lockdowns and the military-led mass vaccination campaign in Australia in mid-2021).
DoD Joint Publication 3-41: CBRN Response - document
This section of the post reproduces a few key parts of the document highlighting:
the overview of the three distinct (and dynamic) constructs for US DoD CBRN Response: Domestic, DoD-led, and International (revised in 2016).
information relevant to “multinational operations” for CBRN Response
Overview: DOD Perspectives of CBRN Response
Domestic, International, and Department of Defense-Led Situations
USG Approach in Responding to a CBRN Incident:
[… ] CBRN response can be described generally as the overarching USG’s capability to prepare for, respond to, and recover from the effects of a man-made or natural CBRN incident. When required, the USG will coordinate its response to a CBRN incident in one of three ways, based on geopolitical situations…
Essentially, from the perspective of the ‘US Homeland’ (depending on one of three CBRN Response environments) the designated Lead Federal Agency (LFA) for CBRN Response is:
Domestic Response: LFA = DHS or DOD
International Response: LFA = DOS or DOD
Department of Defense Response: LFA = DOD
In the majority of cases, DOD CBRN response capabilities are applied in support of DOS in the conduct of ICBRN-R and DHS for domestic CBRN response. However, during combat operations or in specific instances where DOS or DHS is unable or incapable of leading the USG effort, DOD could be given primary mission responsibility. DOD-led CBRN response can occur in either domestic CBRN response or ICBRN-R. DOD may be delegated or tasked with leading a USG CBRN response effort. (p83)
Figure I.1 - CBRN Responses (p27)
**Note: for the September 2016 document - which uses the term “response” in place of “consequence management”- the listed changes (to the 2012 version) on page 5 include this point :
Clarifies DOD’s supporting roles during an international chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear response (previously foreign consequence management) on foreign territory, regardless of who is designated the United States Government lead.
A comparison of the 2012 and 2016 versions of the document reveals the change.
Putting the 2012 and 2016 versions of Figure I.1 side by side - with red boxes to indicate change - the addition of the Department of Defense (ie. in addition to the Department of State) as LFA for an International CBRN Response is noteworthy:
Department of Defense-led CBRN Response
(p 103)
**Note: Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Instruction 3214.01 (link)
[See: 3. Applicability/ a. (3): DoD-led (POTUS-directed)]
Multinational CBRN Response operations
Note - from Figure I.1:
[Ends »] Means: Fully integrated US and partner nation capabilities linked across components and echelons of command
From the Appendix (p121):
Key International Legal Documents: Military Agreements
CANUS Civil Assistance Plan
Quadripartite Standardization Agreements (QSTAGs) - between the military forces of the Five Eyes countries
NATO Standardization Agreements (STANAGs)
Note - the term “unified action” as applied to multinational and interagency coordination of CBRN Response (p61)
Note - Multinational operations: foreign governments/ sharing of high-level intelligence/ Non Disclosure Policy (NDP). (p 99)
Additional diagrams outlining US Domestic and International CBRN Response:
Figure II-2: Domestic CBRN Response Command Relationships (p61)
Figure III-2: International CBRN Affected State Coordination Process (p86)
‘CBRN Response’ - relevance to COVID-19
This document raises questions (and resolves others) about the COVID response including…
(1) The official timeline of the US federal response in early 2020 in the context of CBRN Response. DoS versus DoD-led international response. At what stage was the President informed/ involved in decisions.
See also - Figure III-2: International CBRN Affected State Coordination Process (p86)
Note the official timeline from the majority report by the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs (December 2022): “Examination of Federal Government’s Pandemic Preparedness and Initial COVID-19 Response”
(2) In the context of Domestic CBRN Response, this document explains the decision by the President to put FEMA (Department of Homeland Security) in charge as the Lead Federal Agency for the federal response on 19 March 2020.
See also - Figure II-2: Domestic CBRN Response Command Relationships (p61)
(In Australia, a template similar to the ‘emergency’ Homeland Security/ FEMA takeover was used, as outlined in previous posts.)
(3) In the context of an International CBRN Response and multinational operations, the Five Eyes military treaty alliances includes the ABCANZ Armies program:
Originally, the role of ABCANZ was limited to issues of standardization for soldier equipment, training, and tactics. Following the September 11 attacks, a review by the Program's Heads of Delegations saw the Program modified to address the changing security environment and improve responsiveness, relevance, and focus on interoperability.
The DoD’s Joint Publication 3-41 highlights the importance of US-led multinational military alliances as they explicitly relate to international standardization agreements - known as QSTAGs and STANAGs - in the context of CBRN Response for the Five Eyes and NATO countries, respectively.
Note: NATO has a CBRN Defence Centre of Excellence!
“Essentially a conspiracy within the government…”
The JP 3-41 document for CBRN Response appears to be a significant piece of the puzzle in terms of the origins of the ‘COVID response’.
The real PsyOp was the non-disclosure to the public of this back-door ‘pandemic policy’ trap. Only top-level “stakeholders” are in the know!
Applied to the COVID Coup, the DoD publication sheds light on how an ‘outbreak’ - maybe even a military ‘biolab leak’ or worse (for effect) - led to the rollout of a deliberately manufactured ‘crisis’ in early 2020. This was the pretext for the coordinated, US-centric ‘biodefense’ response of mass quarantines, tests, masks… and the ‘vaccine solution’.
And the media was fully on board with the ‘national security’ theatre …
The ‘bioterror alarmism’ pushed by those with vested public-private-partnership interests was clearly identified at the start of COVID by American journalists Whitney Webb and Robbie Martin (cited in previous posts)…
Whitney Webb [in May 2020] outlined the various “prescient simulations” - among them Dark Winter, hosted by the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security in June 2001. She used this as the starting point for identifying a cast of characters and various powerful entities that “profit off of pandemic situations and the fear of bioterror” in the private sector by leveraging their influence on government via “…guiding the [U.S.] legislation and policy related to biodefense and pandemic preparedness".
In a podcast interview in May 2020, Webb agreed with fellow journalist and host, Robbie Martin, about the decades-long U.S. bipartisan “pandemic response racket”, which the latter summarized as:
…essentially a conspiracy within the government to fearmonger not only the public but also policy makers into creating these unnecessary positions that ultimately didn't amount to stopping or helping anything with this Covid-19 “pandemic”.
How to pull of a ‘pandemic’…
For nearly two decades after Dark Winter in the lead-up to the COVID Coup, similar high-level ‘health security’ simulations were used to rehearse responses and influence policy for ‘pandemic preparedness’ at a “whole-of-society” level.
The last of these tabletop exercises - and the most prescient and timely according to the organizers! - was in December 2019. Pacific Eclipse was conducted jointly by the US DoD and PLuS Alliance universities, with 200 invited attendees from the Five Eyes countries and Europe representing government and the private sector, including participants from “the WHO, US CDC, US military, FBI, London Metropolitan Police, Defence Science Technology Laboratories UK, and several state and international agencies.”
The pandemic scenario was set in the year 2020, and adapted for the US context including the presidential election (and Brexit)!
Did the DoD’s CBRN Response document feature in this warm-up exercise?
And was President Trump - or any leader of a US-allied nation - made aware of the DoD-led final rehearsal that took place on the eve of Operation COVID-19?
Many thanks to
at !