Was the US pandemic response hobbled by a foreign intelligence agency?

I have healthy skepticism that a foreign nation engaged in an effort to sabotage our pandemic response. It’s also not an area of my expertise, but I find the possibility intriguing and keep coming across information that never seems to get proper attention or analysis. I think there is strong evidence that incompetence and corruption of taxpayer-funded heads of public health agencies compromised at best or sabotaged at worst our pandemic response. Can any of what looks like incompetence or corruption of the Nation’s experts, be attributed to a foreign intelligence operation?

Most Americans recall a certain tweet as being the first time they had heard the word “hydroxychloroquine.”

It is hard to imagine how the public record could be completely devoid of “hydroxychloroquine” references in the months leading up to the President’s tweet. But researching the response to the pandemic, that’s exactly what we found when we stumbled on strange data anomalies regarding Google searches around the word “hydroxychloroquine.” One of the findings is that between January 1, 2020 and March 20, 2020 in the United States, there were fewer than 70 Google searches for the term: “hydroxychloroquine.” Separately, a researcher‘s informal study concluded that there were no references to hydroxychloroquine in conventional search engines from February 1, through March 20, 2020. This seems implausible given the interest in discovering potential cures at that time, but there were also newsworthy events about hydroxychloroquine leading up to the President’s tweet that makes it even less likely the drug could have escaped notice.

On January 13, 2020, France designated HCQ “poison” and removed it from all pharmacies (Liberty Complaint p. 59) Quite a turnabout of events for the “indispensable WHO medication” that was the most readily available and among the safest drugs then available that could be immediately deployed to blunt or eliminate the pandemic.

Even today, references to France designating HCQ as a poison–which would seem newsworthy–is an event that is hard to find in the record. How and why? Wouldn’t word of this massive change–changing a drug’s “over the counter” status to designating it as poison–have been considered newsworthy or worthy of comment? Today there are few references to this event and I am not sure how this can be explained.

For the next 30 days after France’s action, although every media organization in the world was searching for treatments and cures, and HCQ was being used and tested in multiple regions of the world as a cure for Covid19, almost nothing leaked out about hydroxychloroquine.

From a March 13, 2020 WHO treatment protocol (below), we know that the WHO viewed HCQ as the first defense against COVID19. It seems like any reporter that would have ferreted out this treatment protocol would have had keen readership interest in the United States. Perhaps we could expect to find just one story about how the safest drug in the world, now officially a French poison for a month, was being used as the WHO’s first line defense against COVID19? Yet there seems to be nothing in the record about this. How is this possible, how did it happened and at whose behest?

If our research is accurate, it shows an astounding lack of curiosity in all levels of the body politic(this assumes there were no internet searches or comments actually made. Another possibility is that the record was just erased or, perhaps these inquiries were made, but they were just diverted or suppressed [causing it to not be recorded] or perhaps the record was just expunged?).

Also on March 13, 2020, James M. Todaro, MD, and Gregory J. Rigano,
penned An Effective Treatment for Coronavirus (COVID-19). This paper was widely credited (or blamed) for proposing chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine as an effective treatment against COVID-19. Based on information and belief, someone, perhaps Google, “memory holed” this
document and it was eventually blocked by Google on March 20, 2020. Google seems to have Removed Key Papers and Videos on HCQ, Science Defies Politics July 2, 2020.

Maybe we are missing some part of the record, but we seem to find very little commentary or discussion about these newsworthy issues. Is the existence of this seemingly clean record organic? As a Nation, to protect the #scientificmethod, #academicfreedom, #freeexpression, #objectivereality including the present and past, and #freewill, we must understand if factors behind this are naturally occurring or artificially created? If artificially created, why and by whom? Is reality being distorted by social media platforms and search engines? Is this being performed by or under the influence of a foreign or domestic intelligence agency? If so, with whose approval and knowledge? If something like this effort exists, is anyone at the social media platforms like Google and Facebook aware of it? What is the scope if their knowledge? What, if anything, are they doing about it? Are they facilitating it? Are they receiving compensation to facilitate it?

Now the New York Post Reports (12/25/2020):

“Fresh evidence published jointly by The New York Times and ProPublica confirms that Beijing has been trying to keep COVID-19 information from the rest of the world since the very start of the pandemic.

On Feb. 7, Li Wenliang, the doctor who blew the whistle on COVID-19, died of the disease he’d warned the world about. While working at Wuhan Central Hospital in China’s Hubei Province, he saw a new version of the severe acute respiratory syndrome known as SARS, which also originated in China in 2002.

As news of the 34-year-old doctor’s untimely death spread and grief went viral on social media such as Weibo and WeChat — Beijing set out to bury the truth.

“They ordered news websites not to issue push notifications alerting readers to [Li’s] death. They told social platforms to gradually remove his name from trending topics pages. And they activated legions of fake online commenters to flood social sites with distracting chatter,” the Times-ProPublica team reports. In all, the Hangzhou offices of Beijing’s Internet regulator, the Cyberspace Administration of China, issued more than 3,200 directives and 1,800 memos in its COVID-censorship drive — all leaked by the hacker group C.C.P. [Chinese Communist Party] Unmasked.

“At a time when digital media is deepening social divides in Western democracies,” the investigative team warns, “China is manipulating online discourse to enforce the Communist Party’s consensus.”

This New Post Article followed an article about a troll army that China deployed to distract from a top COVID-19 doctor’s death. The article referenced:

“China has a politically weaponized system of censorship; it is refined, organized, coordinated and supported by the state’s resources. It’s not just for deleting something. They also have a powerful apparatus to construct a narrative and aim it at any target with huge scale,” Xiao Qiang, China Digital Times founder, told the outlets.

“This is a huge thing,” he added. “No other country has that.”

Was a troll army aimed at the United States’ pandemic response to exacerbate the situation by removing context, politicizing apolitical drugs, confusing communications and expert analysis and responses? Was hydroxychloroquine sabotaged by a foreign intelligence agency because it was a safe and available drug that could have blunted or eliminated the pandemic? We know the pandemic response was compromised or even sabotaged by domestic public health experts, but perhaps these experts were blinded by confusion and disinformation? Was our government compromised?!

Could a strategy of an enemy of the United States have been to deny all context from a nation through manipulation of media, social media and other undiscovered compliance mechanisms, so that when a polarizing US political figure mentioned it on March 20, 2020, it would sound “out of left field” to perhaps half that country who would be more likely to see it unhinged and without basis and should be distrusted or resisted? Would these compromise efforts extend to flip flopping on mask use, inordinate focus on the wrong disease state and the importance of ventilators, exaggerations on projected death rates, overdosing of patients with hydroxychloroquine in more than one location and study, fast tracking and clear pathing remdesivir, approving an FDA protocol that does not provide for early treatment, and increased intensity of the conviction that only a vaccine could be a viable solution when off patent, safe and efficacious solutions were available immediately?