China’s Military Declares Biotechnology Warfare as its Fundamental Guiding Principle

By Jim Hoft October 22, 2021

Guest post by Lawrence Sellin and Anna Chen

China’s People’s Liberation Army believes that biological weapons, not nuclear weapons, are the key to global military dominance.

In our recent Gateway Pundit article, we described the 2005 and 2006 Chinese military publications by Colonel Ji-wei Guo, who advocated the use of biotechnology in developing new methods of waging war and recommended that military medical doctors be involved in creating bioweapons.

In his 2008 book, “Biological Outlook on War and Foresight of Biotechnology Supremacy,” Colonel Guo elaborated on the application of biotechnology in bio-based war, representing the “Third Leap” in military strategy:

“The third leap includes biotechnology and related sciences that develop and grow on the basis of information technology (including advanced computer and communication), nano-science and other convergence technologies, where biotechnology and biomedical science (including genetic engineering), cognitive science (including cognitive neuroscience) are comprehensively applied. It will cause huge quantitative changes in the combat environment, combat methods, space-time relationship, military structure and function, and will eventually cause new qualitative changes, which will bring about profound changes in modern military history. The operational level change brought by this military transformation is the further extension of the theory of power control with modern biotechnology as the main feature.”

Colonel Guo’s comments did not just represent the random musings of one particular Chinese military officer, but were concepts embraced by China’s People’s Liberation Army and became embedded in its military doctrine.

In his 2012 article “Development of military biotechnology and the future of bio-based war,” Major General Fu-Chu He wrote:

“As an emerging technology, military biotechnology expands the concept of weaponry and equipment, and becomes an important driving force behind the weaponry and equipment development. In recent years, great breakthroughs have been made in many fields of military biotechnology, such as synthetic biology, brain-computer interface and brain control, biological materials, bio-inspired machinery, bio-fuels, bio-electronics, bio-computing and non-lethal weapons, leading to the birth of new operational concepts. In future wars, military biotechnology will promote the bio-based weaponry and equipment, bio-based forces and bio-based combat style.”

Major General Fu-Chu He was President of the Academy of Military Medical Sciences, Vice President of China’s Academy of Medical Sciences, an Alternate Member of the 18th Central Committee of the Chinese Communist Party and Vice Director of Scientific and Technical Committee affiliated to Central Military Commission, which is China’s equivalent of the U.S. Department of Defense’s DARPA, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency.

Major General Chen Wei is presently the Director of the Institute of Biotechnology, Academy of Military Medical Sciences and presumed head of China’s biological warfare program.

She was placed in command of the “clean up” operation in Wuhan after local authorities lost control of the COVID-19 outbreak. She also led China’s effort to create a COVID-19 vaccine.

Published in 2014, Major General Chen Wei co-authored the book “Biotechnology Development Yearbook, 2013,” which described the major biotechnological advances and their impact on military medical science.

The book contained 10 sections with 25 specific biotechnological topics including gene manipulation, synthetic biology, gene sequencing, biotherapeutics, biomaterials, bioinformatics, bio-imaging, cloning, and neurobiology.

In 2016, the Thirteenth Five-Year Plan’s Science and Technology Military-Civilian Fusion Program was launched by the Scientific and Technical Committee affiliated with the Central Military Commission.

That program incorporated all Chinese universities, pharmaceutical companies and “civilian” research centers, like the Wuhan Institute of Virology, into the People’s Liberation Army’s biotechnology warfare effort.

It is not then surprising that Major General Chen Wei’s predecessor as Director of the Institute of Biotechnology and retired Vice President of the Academy of Military Medical Sciences, Major General Pei-Tang Huang became an independent director of Hualan Biological Bacterin Inc. on April 26, 2019.

Given the intensity of the military-civilian research fusion program, perhaps it is no coincidence that in the two to three months after Pei-Tang Huang’s appointment, the chief executive officers of twenty-three multinational and domestic pharmaceutical companies across China resigned or retired, including Sanofi, Roche, Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb and General Electric Healthcare.

In April 2021, Hualan Biological Bacterin Inc. announced an exclusive agreement with the Russian government to produce 100 million doses of the Sputnik V COVID-19 vaccine developed by the Gamaleya Research Institute of Epidemiology and Microbiology of Russia’s Ministry of Health.

None of the above seems to have drawn the attention of those responsible for U.S. national security.

Clearly, the U.S. Department of Defense and U.S. intelligence agencies lack a basic understanding of the direction and extent of China’s biotechnology warfare program.

U.S. government officials seem unaware that COVID-19 was certainly an element of that program, perhaps even a test of it.

Lawrence Sellin, Ph.D. is retired U.S. Army Reserve colonel and a veteran of Afghanistan and Iraq. He had a civilian career in international business and medical research. His email address is lawrence.sellin@gmail.com. Anna Chen can be followed on Twitter @2020Gladiator

China’s Military Declares Biotechnology Warfare as its Fundamental Guiding Principle

China’s Military Declares Biotechnology Warfare as its Fundamental Guiding Principle

Guest post by Lawrence Sellin and Anna Chen China’s People’s Liberation Army believes that biological weapons, not nuclear weapons, are the key to global military dominance. In our recent Gateway Pundit article, we described the 2005 and 2006 Chinese military publications by Colonel Ji-wei Guo, who advocated the use of biotechnology in developing new methods.

The Gateway Pundit

New Lawsuit: Biden Task Force Schemes to Deny Religious Exemptions, Falsifies Medical Records

A lawsuit filed Oct. 24, 2021, in DC District Court by attorney Michael Yoder details the illegal steps taken by the Biden Administration to unconstitutionally deny religious exemptions to federal employees by using a Task Force and fake deadlines to circumvent the first amendment and deprive Plaintiffs of their free exercise of religion. [See below: the Court granted a temporary restraining order on Thursday in favor of Plaintiffs]

Shocking video footage from an Oct. 8, 2021 ‘Safer Federal Workforce Task Force’ Zoom call reveals Sam Berger—former Senior Advisor to Obama and the former VP of Democracy for John Podesta’s Center for American Progress (CAP)—outlined to nearly 200 high-level officials from various government agencies the “methodical approach” for each agency to adopt when dealing with religious exemptions.

The Unbelievable Task Force Scheme to Deny Religious Exemptions

In order to find out how many federal employees might seek an exemption, the Task Force advised the agencies to establish a deadline, with no intention of enforcing it, to induce all or nearly all federal employees seeking religious exemptions to submit them. Armed with that information, the Task Force then instructed the agencies not to issue any decisions. As explained in the lawsuit, the Task Force reasoned:

“once you grant an exemption to an individual in a job category, it is very hard to say that you’re not going to grant [an exemption] to a similarly situated person.”

The Task Force stressed out loud that, because it is important to “collect information” on federal employees who might hold sincerely held religious beliefs prohibiting them from complying with the vaccine mandate, the agencies should “take their time,” and “should not feel rushed that they have to take steps immediately.”

The Zoom call further revealed that the Task Force provided the agencies with a religious exemption questionnaire designed to collect specific information from employees seeking religious exemptions. Granting the agencies the full authority to refuse to provide religious accommodations under “whatever circumstances each agency so chooses,” the Task Force further directed the agencies to:

“work bearing in mind that a fair bit of thought went into the range of questions and the kind of information that [the questions] would provide.”

The lawsuit points out that instead of advising the agencies against taking any actions that would constitute a violation of federal law, the Task Force instead further identified its scheme to NOT provide any exemptions, emphasizing how important it is for the agencies to “figure[e] it out as quickly as possible . . . because [the agencies are] not going to run an accommodation in those places–and that’s totally fine.”

By following the directives of the Task Force, the lawsuit maintains the Defendants have either failed to implement a process for Plaintiff and federal employees to submit religious exemptions or intentionally implemented a strategy to collect information from Plaintiff’s and federal employees to which they are not entitled. Both are in violation of current EEOC Guidance, federal statutory law, and the fundamental First Amendment right to engage in the free exercise of religion.

Reinforcing the nefarious agenda of the Task Force, the lawsuit explains that EO 14043—signed on Sept. 9, 2021, to establish the “Vaccine Mandate“—insists all federal agencies implement a program “requiring COVID-19 vaccination for all of its federal employees, with exceptions only as required by law.” EO 14043 also declares that within 7 days of the EO, the Task Force must issue guidance on agency implementation of the vaccine mandate for all agencies covered by the order.

Still, on Sept. 13, 2021, when the Task Force published its Guidance titled “COVID-19 Workplace Safety: Agency Model Safety Principles,” the Guidance was entirely devoid of any information about religious exemptions. Instead, it established the Nov. 22 deadline for compliance and delegated decision-making authority to the heads of respective government agencies. By not including guidance on exemptions as clearly provided by law, the lawsuit states the Task Force violated EO 14043 “on its face” adding:

“… the egregiousness as the why the Task Force refused to give the agencies guidance is conscious shocking.”
The Executive Order Driving the Task Force

As the Nov. 22, 2021 deadline approaches for the Federal Vaccine Mandate, hundreds of thousands of federal employees and active-duty service members face unlawful termination. Many service members have been denied religious exemptions despite having sincerely held religious beliefs that prohibit them from complying with Executive Order 14043 (EO 14043), signed by the president on Sept. 9, 2021. The 99-page lawsuit, filed on Oct. 24, 2021, reminds the First Amendment’s Free Exercise Clause provides that:

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”

According to the lawsuit, by exploiting EO 13991, which established the Safer Federal Workforce Task Force, Biden has wrongly “revered CDC guidelines as the holy grail of not only medical authority—but legal authority too.” In what logic dictates is not a coincidence, one short day after the FDA’s “approval” of the Pfizer COMIRNATY COVID-19 “vaccine,” Sec. of Defense Lloyd Austin issued a DoD Order on Aug. 24 demanding all active-duty servicemembers be vaccinated against COVID-19.

The Legal Distinctions between Pfizer-BioNTech & Comirnaty “Vaccines”

The lawsuit emphasizes that Pfizer’s COMIRNATY® COVID-19 mRNA vaccine (“COMIRNATY”), approved by the FDA on Aug. 23, 2021, is legally distinguishable from the Pfizer-BioNTech “vaccine” (BioNTech) as spelled out in the FDA’s COMIRNATY vaccine approval announcement. Explaining the significant distinction, including the fact COMIRNATY has a stated eleven ingredients and Pfizer-BioNTech has just ten, the lawsuit says:

The FDA approval letter only states that COMIRNATY is FDA-approved; Pfizer-BioNTech, is not, nor has it ever been approved by the FDA.

It could not be clearer that BioNTech is not FDA-approved and therefore, the vaccine remains subject to the EUA provisions of the federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (“FDCA”).

As a result, a mass misinformation campaign has construed the two legally distinct vaccines to be considered by the public at-large as a single “Pfizer vaccine”—this is not correct.

While Pfizer’s COMIRNATY approval letter states that its two vaccines share the same formulation, the FDA concedes that “the products are legally distinct with certain differences. . .”

In tremendous detail, the lawsuit explains the lack of evidence proving what the “certain differences” are between the two “vaccines,” and questions the FDA’s assertion that the two distinct formulations can legally be used interchangeably.

Outlining the visible labeling differences between the two “vaccines,” the FDA asserted in a letter to Pfizer, “The Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine vial label and carton labels are clearly marked for ‘Emergency Use Only.’” In what the lawsuit contends is “not true,” the FDA also included specific language in the letter declaring “the licensed vaccine (COMIRNATY) has the same formulation as the EUA-authorized vaccine (Pfizer-BioNTech) and the products can be used interchangeably to provide vaccination series without presenting any safety or effectiveness concerns.”

According to the CDC, “the FDA approved the licensure of COMIRNATY (COVID-19 Vaccine, mRNA), made by Pfizer for BioNTech.” The lawsuit points out that the FDA did not approve the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine. Noticeably, with the full awareness that the BioNTech vaccine is not FDA-approved, the CDC nevertheless stated that:

“… because “[t]he FDA-approved Pfizer-BioNTech product COMIRNATY and the FDA-authorized Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine have the same formulation[,] [the two vaccines] can be used interchangeably to provide the COVID-19 vaccination series . . .”. As a result, the CDC has advised:

[V]accination providers can use doses distributed under EUA [(e.g., the non-FDA approved Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine)] to administer the vaccination series as if the doses were the licensed vaccine.

The lawsuit affirms without question that the CDC is wrong. The EUA statute explicitly states that anyone administered an EUA product must be informed of the option to accept or refuse it, as well as alternatives to the product and the risks and benefits of receiving it. Equally as erroneous is the CDC’s assertion that “vaccine providers can use doses distributed under EUA to administer the vaccination series as if the doses were the licensed vaccine.” Without question, possibly the most crucial difference between COMIRNATY and Pfizer-BioNTech is their current availability. 

On the surface, the lawsuit notes that the FDA’s approval letter for COMIRNATY states that the CDC: explicitly distinguishes between the COMIRNATY and BioNTech vaccines; expressly determines that COMIRNATY is FDA approved and BioNTech is under EUA; asserts that COMIRNATY and BioNTech have the same “formulation”; and alleges that, “despite certain differences” between the two, BioNTech can be used interchangeably with COMRINATY. And then, the lawsuit aptly illustrates the Biden Administration’s significant untruth, explaining:

“… and then with abject audacity, [the FDA] advises that “[a]lthough COMIRNATY is approved. . . there is not sufficient approved vaccine available for distribution to this population in its entirety at the time of reissuance of [the BioNTech] EUA.

In unequivocal terms, the FDA has made it expressly clear: “There is no adequate, approved, and available alternative to the emergency use of [the BioNTech] COVID‑19 Vaccine to prevent COVID-19.

The only vaccine that has received FDA approval is COMIRNATY, yet COMIRNATY is unavailable. [Therefore] no FDA-approved COVID-19 vaccine is available.”

All Current COVID-19 Vaccines Use Aborted Fetal Cell Tissue

As discussed extensively in the lawsuit, fetal tissue has a long history of being procured and sold in the development of vaccines. It is not disputed that two fetal cell lines were used in the development and testing of the three available COVID-19 “vaccines.” The use of fetal cells in vaccines goes against the Plaintiffs’ sincerely held religious beliefs that compel them to refuse these products in their body, regardless of any perceived benefit or rationale.

In an apparent attempt to conceal the presence of fetal cells, Pfizer Senior Director of Worldwide Research Vanessa Gelman is quoted as saying, “From the perspective of corporate affairs, we want to avoid having the information on fetal cells floating out there…The risk of communicating this right now outweighs any potential benefit we could see…” And Philip Dormitzer, Pfizer’s Chief Scientific Officer, has echoed that he wants to keep the information a secret because of the objections of pro-life individuals, like the Plaintiffs in the lawsuit.

DoD Misrepresentations, Falsification of Records & Denials of Exemptions

Significantly, on Oct. 15, 2021, Major Edwin Paz requested information from the DiLorenzo Clinic about whether the clinic had any of the FDA-approved COMIRNATY available. Clinic Director Dr. Seto responded, stating, “Pfizer has not made any Comirnaty. There is no expected date when we will receive Comirnaty.” DoD OIG COVID-19 Coordinator corroborated this statement after being informed by DoD officials that the Pentagon does not have any COMIRNATY and does not know when the product will be available.

With the DoD recognition that Pfizer has not made any COMIRNATY, the lawsuit points to indisputable evidence that the DoD does not now, nor has it ever had, one or more FDA-approved doses of COMIRNATY. In undoubtedly one of the more damaging revelations, the DoD has falsified the medical records of active-duty personnel to reflect the injection of the FDA-approved COMIRNATY vaccine. Chief Warrant Officer One Jacob Workman has testified that his immunization records with the TRICARE medical portal reflect that he received the COMIRNATY jab on Oct. 8, 2021.

Finally, under the jurisdiction of Secretary of Defense Austin and President Biden, using identical language, the U.S. Marine Corps has denied the religious accommodation requests of servicemembers. Pursuant to the Marine Administration Message (MARDAMIN) on Oct. 23, 2021, the Marine Corps has begun processing 1st Lt. Soto and Cpl. Hall. for administrative separation and subjected them to adverse administrative disciplinary action. In addition to the “copy/paste” generic responses received, both men cite errors in the data referenced in their respective letters, leaving each to assume their requests for religious exemption were not “carefully considered.”

Claims for Relief

By limiting the vaccination mandate to only Executive Branch employees of the “agencies,” such as the Plaintiffs, while not requiring the same from other Executive Branches (like the White House, EOP, CDC, NIH, NIAID), the Plaintiffs allege the Vaccine Mandate instituted by Defendants, which is neither neutral nor generally applicable, plainly and unconstitutionally targets religious practice.

With the goal of a Court rendered declaratory judgment that the Vaccine Mandate is illegal and unlawful, the lawsuit asks, among other things, that the court issue a temporary restraining order (TRO) to halt the draconian vaccine commands. Without sufficient provisions for exemption or accommodation for sincerely held religious beliefs, the Vaccine Mandate violates the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act and the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. For that reason, the Defendants should immediately grant Plaintiff’s requests for religious exemptions from the Vaccine Mandate to accommodate their sincerely held religious beliefs.

Yoder points out that “while reasonable minds can disagree to the magnitude of the COVID-19 pandemic,” the United States Supreme Court reminds us:

“even in a pandemic, the Constitution cannot be put away and forgotten.”

https://uncoverdc.com/2021/10/27/new-lawsuit-biden-task-force-schemes-to-deny-religious-exemptions-falsifies-medical-records/

---

D.C. Judge Blocks Military Members And Employees From Being Fired Over Vaccine Mandate After Lawsuit

By The Scoop October 29, 2021

Several unvaccinated government employees, including active-duty military members, who were named in the lawsuit challenging the president’s vaccination mandate as illegal were granted a temporary restraining order on Thursday by a federal judge in Washington.

The plaintiffs are requesting a religious exemption from the Biden vaccination requirement for federal employees, which was originally disclosed officially on September 9.

As reported by Fox News, District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly ruled that none of the civilian employee plaintiffs would be subject to discipline while their request for a religious exemption was ongoing.

Additionally, according to Judge Kollar-Kotelly’s judgment, Kotelly’s active-duty military plaintiffs whose religious exemption petitions have been refused will not be penalized or separated while their appeals are pending.

TRENDING: Rutgers Professor: “White People Are Committed to Being Villains – We Gotta Take These Motherf**kers Out” (VIDEO)

Jenna Ellis, a political journalist, and lawyer shared the decision on Twitter on Thursday: “This is an amazing development from the DC District Court in the stand for OUR RIGHTS against the unconstitutional vaccine mandates,” she said.

As reported by Fox News, “the court additionally ordered that the defendants in the Biden administration file a supplemental notice by noon on Friday, indicating whether they will agree that no plaintiff will be penalized or dismissed until the court’s judgment.”

Plaintiffs’ attorney Mike Yoder followed suit with a similar statement to Biden’s. According to his tweet, “I will be immediately filing suit against [Joe Biden] regarding his [overboard] & unconstitutional vaccine mandate.”

In addition, Yoder stated that “Your executive order may not be about freedom, but this lawsuit sure as hell is.”

Mike Yoder

@Yoder_Esq

I will be immediately filing suit against

@JoeBiden

regarding his overbroad & unconstitutional vaccine mandate. Your executive order may not be about freedom, but this lawsuit sure as hell is

4:16 PM · Sep 9, 2021·Twitter for iPhone

Yoder went on a rant about the mandate on the internet the day before he was granted a temporary restraining order in his favor.

According to him: “Under Biden, exercising your religious freedoms will get your fired, for cause and you lose your benefits,” he wrote. “But if you perjure yourself like FBI’s Andy McCabe, you’ll get a pension, $200,000 in backpay, & $500,000 worth of attorneys fees.”

“The agreement does not change the findings of DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz that McCabe lied under oath to investigators on three occasions; it simply eliminates all consequences for doing so.” wrote The Hill in an op-ed last month.

As President Joe Biden stated in September, mandated immunization and testing, as well as mask restrictions, affect not just government employees, but also numerous private enterprises.

As The Daily Wire noted at the time, “Companies with at least 100 employees must require their employees get vaccinated or submit to weekly COVID-19 tests under a new Biden administration plan to combat the coronavirus and encourage vaccination.” “President Joe Biden is scheduled to outline a revamped federal strategy to address COVID-19 that includes far more invasive regulations and restrictions than the federal government has put in place to date. Part of Biden’s six-point plan involves cracking down on 100+ employee companies to push their employees to get vaccinated against COVID-19.”

As reported by The Wall Street Journal, the United States Labor Department aims to release an emergency interim standard in a couple of weeks  “implementing the new requirement, which will cover 80 million private-sector workers. … Businesses that don’t comply can face fines of up to $14,000 per violation, [officials] said.”

Particularly noteworthy is that Daily Wire co-founder and co-CEO Jeremy Boreing reacted to the announcement immediately through Twitter, stating that he would not comply with Biden’s demands.

D.C. Judge Blocks Military Members And Employees From Being Fired Over Vaccine Mandate After Lawsuit

Several unvaccinated government employees, including active-duty military members, who were named in the lawsuit challenging the president’s vaccination mandate as illegal were granted a temporary restraining order on Thursday by a federal judge in Washington. The plaintiffs are requesting a religious exemption from the Biden vaccination requirement for federal employees, which was originally disclosed officially … Continue reading D.C. Judge Blocks Military Members And Employees From Being Fired Over Vaccine Mandate After Lawsuit

The Gateway Pundit

LEAKED VIDEO: NYPD Commissioner Warns Cops In Leaked Memo: “Vaccinate Or No Pay”

LEAKED VIDEO: NYPD Commissioner Warns Cops In Leaked Memo: ‘Vaccinate Or No Pay’

In a video leaked by a whistleblower within the New York City Police Department, NYPD Commissioner Dermont Shea urges police officers to take the $500 bonus and comply with the mayor’s vaccine mandate by Friday’s deadline or else be placed on unpaid leave on Monday when the city’s verification of vaccine status ramps up. “We’re … Continue reading LEAKED VIDEO: NYPD Commissioner Warns Cops In Leaked Memo: ‘Vaccinate Or No Pay’

The Gateway Pundit

---

Related

HERE WE GO: New Jersey Hospital Mandates Covid Booster Shots For Certain Employees

University Hospital in Newark, New Jersey is mandating Covid booster shots for employees who got the Johnson & Johnson vaccine. “Data and analysis indicate that a single dose of the Johnson & Johnson vaccine may no longer confer a level of effectiveness that prevents COVID-19 infection in enough of our employees if they are exposed, … Continue reading HERE WE GO: New Jersey Hospital Mandates Covid Booster Shots For Certain Employees

The Gateway Pundit

DeBlasio’s New York City: Vaccine Mandates Take Effect Monday — 22% of Cops, 35% of Firefighters Remain Unvaxxed as City Crime Soars

Thousands marched in New York City on Monday against DeBlasio’s vaccine mandates. On Monday Mayor Bill DeBlasio’s vaccine mandate will take effect on the streets of New York City. Over one-third of police officers remain unvaccinated and will not be allowed to work starting Monday. 22% of firefighters remain unvaccinated and will not be able … Continue reading DeBlasio’s New York City: Vaccine Mandates Take Effect Monday — 22% of Cops, 35% of Firefighters Remain Unvaxxed as City Crime Soars

The Gateway Pundit

BREAKING: US Supreme Court Rejects Maine Health Care Workers’ Challenge to Vaccine Mandate in 6-3 Vote – Amy Coney Barrett, Kavanaugh Join Liberal Justices

The US Supreme Court on Friday rejected a challenge from a group of Maine health care workers seeking to block a vaccine mandate based on religious grounds. Recall, Democrat Governor Janet Mills in August announced that healthcare workers in Maine must be fully vaccinated by October 29. The Liberty Counsel filed a lawsuit on behalf … Continue reading BREAKING: US Supreme Court Rejects Maine Health Care Workers’ Challenge to Vaccine Mandate in 6-3 Vote – Amy Coney Barrett, Kavanaugh Join Liberal Justices

The Gateway Pundit