A 2019 law ordered an assessment of a possible ‘transnational pandemic’ weeks before COVID-19 was first reported.

Source:

ANALYSIS

(LifeSiteNews) – A law approved by Congress just weeks before the emergence of COVID-19 ordered an assessment of a possible “transnational pandemic,” raising more questions about COVID and the government’s role in the pandemic, including in light of other federal laws that may authorize covert, pandemic-related “exercises.”

Several previous articles provided information which suggests that the COVID-19 pandemic may be a hoax, ruse, ploy, operational exercise, or other type of falsified activity or event. One method used to arrive at this potential conclusion is to observe U.S. federal government laws, amendments, and other documents which were enacted or published leading up to what is reported as the COVID-19 pandemic. This article provides more significant information which suggests that the COVID-19 pandemic may be, or is very likely to be, a falsified pandemic.

TRENDING: Put on The Whole Armor Of GOD

The National Defense Authorization Act and ‘implied authority’

Prior to the reported beginning of COVID-19, the federal government enacted the “National Defense Authorization Act of 2020”; it was enacted on December 20, 2019, only a few weeks before the outbreak of what was reported to be a transnational pandemic, otherwise known as the COVID-19 pandemic. Typically, the National Defense Authorization Act is used every year by Congress to fund the U.S. Department of Defense. Occasionally, though, there are laws and amendments included in the Act. A summary of such an act from the U.S. federal government is helpful:

The congressional budget process distinguishes between “authorizations,” which establish or define the activities of the federal government, and “appropriations,” which finance those activities. In itself an authorization does not provide funding for government activities. An authorization generally provides legal authority for the government to act, usually by establishing, continuing, or restricting a federal agency, program, policy, project, or activity. It may also, explicitly or implicitly, authorize subsequent congressional action to provide appropriations for those purposes. An appropriation generally provides both the legal authority to obligate future payments from the Treasury, and the ability to make subsequent payments to satisfy those obligations. (Page 1, emphasis added)

It is important to note that “an authorization generally provides legal authority for the government to act, usually by establishing, continuing, or restricting a federal agency, program, policy, project, or activity.” It is also important to note that such laws may apparently imply authorized subsequent U.S. government action rather than specifically saying what government actions are being authorized. This appears to be described as “implied authority” or potentially “apparent authority” by legal scholars. Several federal laws, and specifically national security, “public health,” intelligence community, and law enforcement laws appear to contain “implied” or “apparent” authorities.

While they cannot be completely discussed here, some especially relevant U.S. government laws or orders with “implied authority” are those that ordered the FBI and Department of Justice to link “public health with law enforcement,” the linking of “mental health disorder” with enhanced law enforcement authority, the evaluation of useful “new and emerging technologies that, in the determination of the Secretary [of Health and Human Services], are designed to improve or enhance the ability of public health or safety officials to conduct public health surveillance activities relating to a bioterrorist attack or other public health emergency,” and laws on “biosurveillance,” defined as “the process of gathering near real-time biological data that relates to human…disease activity and threats to human…health, in order to achieve early warning and identification of such health threats, early detection and prompt ongoing tracking of health events, and overall situational awareness of disease activity.” (emphasis added and distractions omitted)

And one legal definition of U.S. government computers in federal law may or may not include significant implications: “the term ‘computer’ means an electronic, magnetic, optical, electrochemical, or other high speed data processing device performing logical, arithmetic, or storage functions, and includes any data storage facility or communications facility directly related to or operating in conjunction with such device.” There are several more federal laws with implied authority or apparent authority which would be more likely to be found in Middle East and Far East countries that torture their citizens rather than in the United States of America.

For this article, though, “implied authority” in laws is mentioned in part due to U.S. federal laws apparently implying that “false information and hoaxes” may be “lawfully authorized” to be carried out by federal government law enforcement or intelligence agencies. Other articles described this point more in depth, but it should be mentioned here.

A federal law apparently prohibits the provision of “false information and hoaxes” but the section then provides an apparent exemption for U.S. government law enforcement and intelligence agencies. The exemption reads:

Activities of Law Enforcement.—

This section does not prohibit any lawfully authorized investigative, protective, or intelligence activity of a law enforcement agency of the United States, a State, or political subdivision of a State, or of an intelligence agency of the United States. (18 U.S. Code § 1038(d), emphasis added)

A ‘transnational pandemic’ test?

Now, this article discusses the U.S. government authorization of an activity of the Director of National Intelligence, which may imply an activity of the whole intelligence community (which includes the FBI). Of course, if the federal government attempts to “lawfully authorize” a hoax by law enforcement and/or the intelligence community and others, the wording of the laws are likely to imply an attempt to “lawfully authorize” such a hoax rather than clearly saying “we hereby and henceforth authorize a hoax pandemic to terrorize the world to be known as the COVID-19 pandemic.”

Again, the potentially very significant provision of “legal authority for the government to act” within the “National Defense Authorization Act of 2020” establishes an activity of the U.S. federal intelligence community. The National Defense Authorization Act of 2020 itself is more than one thousand pages long. And, of course, the significant authorization on pandemics is not until page one thousand thirty-seven (133 STAT. 2233). This is how it is presented in the law:

It should go without saying that the timing of a law regarding the U.S. intelligence community that requires an assessment or “examination” of the effects of a transnational pandemic within 120 days followed by the reported COVID-19 “transnational pandemic” – within 120 days – might not be a coincidence.

Now, does the wording of the law appear to contain any “implied” or “apparent” authorities? As mentioned previously, federal law apparently attempts to give authority to “intelligence agencies of the United States” to carry out “hoaxes” or convey other false information. The December 2019 law “authorizes” an “assessment” of “risks, costs, and impacts” of a transnational pandemic. And it “authorizes” an “examination” – or, potentially a “test” – of “the effectiveness of current international frameworks, agreements, and health systems to respond to emerging infectious diseases and a possible transnational pandemic.”

It may be helpful to know that assessments, examinations (“tests”), or evaluations may be performed by the U.S. federal National Exercise Program. Some of those exercises may be classified information and kept secret from Americans. (Page 11) Some of those exercises may be international. (Page 1) And it should also be mentioned that “response capacities” to emerging infectious disease – specifically response capabilities to “medical surge capacities” – may also be assessed, evaluated, or examined through “drills and exercises” which may potentially be “without notice.” (42 U.S. Code § 300hh–10(b)(4)(G))

In other words, the December 2019 law requiring an assessment or “examination” or “test” “of response capacity” of the “risks, costs, and impacts” of a transnational pandemic, when combined with other U.S. federal laws, may be an attempt of U.S. government officials to imply authority for a hoax pandemic to potentially be carried out “within 120 days of the enactment” of the December 2019 Act.

And, within 120 days of the enactment, it just so happened that the COVID-19 pandemic reportedly began. Some may reasonably suggest that this may not be a coincidence.

The December 2019 law which requires the examination of the response to a transnational pandemic by the Director of National Intelligence (and the other intelligence agencies which the Director of National Intelligence oversees, including the FBI’s intelligence activities) may be some of the most specific information which suggests that the COVID-19 pandemic may be a falsified or hoax pandemic.