-: Good afternoon.
My name is Abigail Yi.
I'm a senior from Cincinnati, Ohio,
and I'm studying financial management,
and I have the honor of introducing our speaker for today.
Brian T. Kennedy is president
of the American Strategy Group,
a think tank dedicated
to understanding the strategic threats to the United States.
A graduate of Claremont McKenna College and a member
of the Independent Working Group on Missile Defense,
Mr. Kennedy is chairman
of the Committee for the Present Danger: China.
He is a board member
and senior fellow of the Claremont Institute,
where he served as president from 2002 to 2015,
and directed its Golden State Center in Sacramento,
its National Security Project,
and served as publisher of the Claremont Review of Books.
He has written widely on national security affairs
and public policy, including in the Wall Street Journal,
The Federalist, The American Mind, Imprimis,
Investor's Business Daily, and RealClearPolitics.
He is the author of "Communist China's War Inside America,"
and co-author of "The CCP is at War with America,"
a Team B report on the COVID-19 biological warfare attack.
Please join me in welcoming Mr. Brian T. Kennedy.
(audience applauds)
-: Thank you very much. Thank you.
Thank you very much for that kind introduction.
Good afternoon, everyone.
-: Good afternoon.
-: It's a pleasure to be here at Hillsdale College.
I'm sure this is going to be a very friendly audience.
-: We'll see.
-: We'll see. No, thank you.
Yeah. No, I appreciate that.
Yes.
Well, I gave a talk yesterday to some of the grad students
in RJ Pestritto's class, but before that,
two weeks ago, the last audience I was
in front of was a grand jury in Washington, DC.
(audience laughs)
I was one of the 30 people
that was subpoenaed from Trump World
regarding the January 6th
and the relationship of my investigation
and other people's investigation
of the election in November of 2020.
So I spent 6.5 hours in front of a grand jury,
talking to them about
how I thought China had helped steal the election in 2020.
(audience applauds)
Thank you. That's sort of gratuitous, of course.
But there were a lot of nodding heads
in that grand jury in Washington, DC.
Even in Washington, DC I think people believed
that there was something wrong.
So after the first 3.5 hours, I thought,
"I can do this all day."
'Cause all I was doing was talking about Communist China
and what I thought was a problem.
Well, it is a great pleasure
to be back at Hillsdale College.
Someone asked me earlier in the week where I was going,
and I said I was going to the finest university
in America to give a talk.
(audience applauds)
I'm very proud of what my old colleagues,
Larry Arnn and Doug Jeffrey
and Tim Casper and Tom West,
Mickey Craig, and RJ Pestritto
and so many others have built here.
It's a really great honor and privilege. Thank you.
Before I begin my talk,
I would like to make a point that I think needs to be made.
I think you know this,
but we're living in very strange times.
It's often very difficult to understand such times.
The human eye may look for anomalies,
but the human brain looks
for that which is regular and predictable.
It wants to reject anomalies and prefer instead normalcy.
This is one reason
that the term "conspiracy theory" can gain such traction.
In the early days of the COVID pandemic,
it was said that it might have come
from the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
No, no, no. That was just a conspiracy theory, it was said.
That can't be true.
This is heard a lot these days
to the point where it really is the go-to meme on MSNBC
or CNN or any of the mainstream media.
When they don't like what is being said,
it's a conspiracy theory, whether it's COVID,
the vaccine, election fraud,
or anything that deviates from the accepted narrative.
When you examine everything that's going on today,
you can't quite make sense of what is going on.
You need to ask yourself the simple question,
why is this happening?
What's going on here?
Is this all a series of random events,
or is there ordered planning
and high government policy at work?
Robert Kennedy mentioned the other night
the Event 201 project,
the so-called tabletop experiment
on how to deal with the Coronavirus pandemic
that included very important people
from within the government and outside the government.
Avril Haines was there.
She's today the director of national intelligence
in the Biden administration.
She just happened to be there.
Christopher Elias from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation
just happened to be there.
George Gao from the Chinese CDC,
representatives from the World Economic Forum and the like.
People who'd be influential in the media.
Now, this isn't random.
This is policy at work, strategy at work.
People mean to do these things for a reason.
There's something going on.
And as much as I enjoyed the lectures
by Robert Kennedy and Naomi Wolf,
and I agree with everything that was said by them,
I just wanna remind us once again,
these are not mainstream views.
Nowhere close to it.
It's not going to be accepted very far
outside this room, unfortunately.
Nor will anything I have to say be very mainstream,
no matter how much people are waking up to the threat
from Communist China.
Much work needs to be done,
and I am most grateful that Hillsdale College
is at the forefront of presenting these ideas
to a candid world.
As chairman of the Committee on the Present Danger: China,
which I founded with Steve Bannon
and Frank Gaffney in 2 19,
I have the pleasure of working with a group of scholars,
writers, intellectuals, former military
and intelligence officials, academic policy analysts,
and the like to understand what Communist China
is trying to do to destroy the United States.
Much of what I have to say today will be the product
of four years of work by the committee
to try to understand the machinations of Communist China
and our own government,
which has seemingly become very malleable
and subject to manipulation by the CCP.
I would humbly argue that for the last three years,
the United States,
with everything the United States has experienced,
has been an exercise in information, political,
and psychological warfare,
aimed at the American people,
both from abroad and from forces here at home.
This includes a bio warfare attack
against the United States,
although it was treated even today as something else.
And that really is the purpose of my talk,
to see if we can understand that.
Specifically, I'd like
to discuss the Chinese Communist Party
and its interplay with big pharma.
Now, I'd like to do three things this afternoon.
First, I'd like to describe the strategic objectives
of the Chinese Communist Party.
Second, I'd like to discuss big pharma
and how it has failed the American people.
And finally, I'd like to discuss
how I think both of these entities are working
to destroy the United States and the free world.
First, the CCP.
It has a single goal:
The control of the earth and all the peoples of it.
Three things should inform how we deal with
and think about the Chinese Communist Party.
And here we are trying
to understand the Chinese Communist Party
as they understand themselves.
The first is that they have declared a people's war
against the United States.
A people's war.
They declared this in May of 2019 against the United States.
This was published in the People's Daily,
which is a media arm of the CCP.
It was a signal to the people of China
that an unconventional war would be waged
against the United States,
and that they should prepare themselves for war.
So it was first a message to the Chinese people themselves.
The reason for this people's war was
that the United States had the temerity
to try to enforce some kind of ban,
some kind of mechanism to stop Communist China,
the People's Liberation Army,
the industrial espionage units within it,
and private cyber thieves within Communist China
from stealing about $500 billion a year
in intellectual property from the United States.
That's $5 trillion over a decade,
the Trump administration had said.
So because we had the temerity to ask them
to quit stealing $5 trillion of our intellectual property,
they declared a people's war on us.
That's how they think of us.
That whatever we have belongs to them.
And I'd also say that people's war was not just about money,
it was also about political control.
They believed they had control of the United States
before Donald Trump and the MAGA movement.
They had captured the elites in the West.
They thought they had bought them off.
Major media figures like Rupert Murdoch
were sympathetic to them.
The masters of the universe on Wall Street,
like Larry Fink at BlackRock
or Steven Schwartzman at Blackstone,
were all making billions of dollars doing business
in Communist China.
They, the CCP, believed they had complete control
of the oligarchs in the United States.
That much was clear.
The MAGA movement and Donald Trump,
however, represented something different.
It represented a genuine resurgence of American nationalism.
It represented an awakening for the American people.
The communist movement that has operated in this country
for the better part of a century was having a lot of success
prior to Donald Trump.
If the primary goal of communism or a communist revolution
is to first demoralize the American people,
which is an absolute requirement for a communist revolution,
demoralization, Donald Trump represented a remoralization
of the American people that
from the Chinese communist point
of view could not be tolerated.
The United States is the most powerful nation
of the Judeo-Christian West.
With Donald Trump as president,
the principles of human freedom and the great traditions
of the Christian West were being reborn.
For that reason,
the Chinese Communist Party must have believed
that it must be destroyed, or at minimum,
Donald Trump needed to be destroyed politically.
Within six months of their declaration of a people's war,
the COVID-19 virus was spreading throughout the world.
And it matters little
whether it was intentionally leaked from a lab or not.
What is clear is that they allowed it to spread
throughout the world, knowing the harm it would cause.
And just as a practical matter,
even if it were an intentional attack,
in war, deception matters.
And even an intentional attack would require
that it looked like an accident,
as I'll discuss a little later.
But it was always going to be presented
as the possibility of a lab leak.
Now, again, regardless,
COVID-19 was used as a bio-weapon against the United States,
which leads me to the second point in this section.
When you're trying to understand Communist China,
you really need to understand their belief
in unrestricted warfare.
There was a famous book by two colonels in 1999.
There were colonels, of course,
of the People's Liberation Army,
and they wrote a book called "Unrestricted Warfare."
And it's been a popular document that I and my colleagues
on the Committee on the Danger point to,
'cause it's one of the ways to understand China
and how they think about policy and statecraft.
In the book, the two colonels believe that war
between China and the United States is inevitable.
And the PRC, they believe, must be prepared,
if they are to win,
to engage in whatever means are necessary to achieve this.
And they say the variable means
to achieve this victory include the use of economic warfare,
cyber warfare, information warfare, political warfare.
They use this phrase "terrorism, bio warfare, and the like."
They write that. They tell the world this in 1999.
Wars, as we know, are fought on battlefields, on the seas,
but yes, today they're also fought online,
in the media, in boardrooms,
in classrooms, and in laboratories.
Their purpose in writing this document,
which was very well known in China and outside of China,
was to lay down a marker with US policy makers
that nothing was going to be out of bounds
when it comes to how the PRC viewed the United States.
They wanted to make sure the PRC was capable of waging war,
and that they committed doing so whenever
and wherever it took.
So for all the commerce we
in the United States may engage in with the PRC,
we ought to have no illusions
that they see themselves as our enemy.
And an enemy that they are allowed
to do anything they want to
because after all, from their point of view,
they're in a war with us.
This leads me to the third part of my section
on the Chinese Communist Party.
And that's work that's been extensively done by my colleague
on the Committee on the Present Danger, JR Nyquist.
And he's really done extensive work
in promoting a secret speech that was given in 2003,
and it deals with what the Chinese communists think of
as the problem of America.
And it was articulated in this speech
by the Chinese defense minister, General Chi Haotian.
He gave it to members of the politburo.
And I'm gonna focus a bit on it today
because I think it is one
of the most underappreciated documents
that our intelligence community has and does not highlight.
And I think you'll see where I'm going with this
as I lay this out.
He's talking to the people within the politburo
who are going to be planning out the future
of Chinese strategy.
And he's taking a long-term view,
the way the Chinese typically do.
As he's laying out the problems for them to deal with,
he is referencing Nazi Germany first.
In World War II, of course.
He says about Nazi Germany,
"The following are the fundamental causes
of their defeat, the Nazis:
First, they had too many enemies all at once,
as they did not adhere to the principles
of eliminating enemies one at a time.
Second, they were two impetuous,
lacking the patience and perseverance required
for great accomplishments.
Third, when the time came for them to be ruthless,
they turned out to be too soft,
therefore leaving troubles that resurfaced later on."
So just for perspective,
Chi Haotian believes the Nazis were inherently, as he says,
too soft to win the Second World War.
So he lays out what ought to have been their strategy.
He says, "Let's presume that back
when Germany and Japan had been able
to keep the United States neutral
and had fought a protracted war step by step
on the Soviet front,
if they'd adopted this approach,
gained some time to advance their research,
eventually succeeded in obtaining the technology
of nuclear weapons and missiles,
and launched surprise attacks against the United States
and the Soviet Union using them,
then the United States
and the Soviet Union would not have been able
to defend themselves and would've had to surrender."
"Little Japan," he says, "in particular,
made an egregious mistake in launching the sneak attack
on Pearl Harbor.
This attack did not hit the vital parts
of the United States.
Instead, it dragged the United States into the war,
into the ranks of the grave diggers
that eventually buried the German and Japanese fascists."
Pretty interesting the way he thinks of that.
He goes on to say, "Ostensibly, in comparison,
today's China is alarmingly similar to Germany back then.
Both of them regard themselves as the most superior races.
Both of them have a history of being exploited
by foreign powers and are therefore vindictive.
Both of them have the tradition
of worshiping their own authorities.
Both of them feel that they have insufficient living space.
Both of them raise high the two banners of nationalism
and socialism and label themselves as national socialism.
Both of them worship one state, one party,
one leader, and one doctrine."
He's comparing himself in this to the Nazis.
So bear with me here
because he really is trying to make an argument
to the politburo about how they need to think
about their strategic future.
He goes, "First is the issue of living space.
This is the biggest focus
on the revitalization of the Chinese race."
He basically then starts complaining
that they don't have enough land in which to live.
China, big country, but with a big population.
He starts complaining
about how they polluted Communist China.
This is 2003.
They polluted Communist China
to the point where it's unlivable.
He says, "Anybody who has been to Western countries know
that their living space is much better than ours.
They have forests along the highways,
while we hardly have any trees by our streets.
Their sky is often blue with white clouds,
while our sky is covered by a layer of dark haze.
Their tap water is clean enough for drinking,
while even our groundwater is so polluted
that it can't be drunk without filtering.
They have few people in the streets,
and two or three people can occupy
a small residential building.
In contrast, our streets are always crawling with people,
and several people have to share one room."
So he is establishing in this story their resentment
of the West.
That they should have these resentments against the West.
He goes on:
"From the perspective of history,
the reason that China is faced
with the issue of living space is
because Western countries established colonies ahead
of Eastern countries.
Western countries established colonies all around the world,
therefore giving themselves an advantage
on the issue of living space.
To solve this problem,
we must lead the Chinese people outside of China
so that they could develop outside of China."
Now, this is a really important point,
for it does be the beginning
of a change in Chinese strategy,
at least when it comes to their public presentation.
Now, it's often said
the Chinese are not an expansionary people,
that they're an inward-looking people.
They've been around for 5,000 years,
and they've not expanded beyond where they currently are.
That's the narrative we're told of Communist China.
But General Chi makes this point.
He says, "There's no need to worry about this issue.
Comrade Mao Zedong said
that if we could lead the Chinese people outside of China,
resolving the lack of living space in China,
the Chinese people will support us.
At that time, we don't have to worry about the labels
of totalitarianism or dictatorship."
So already in China they were feeling criticisms
of totalitarianism and dictatorship within China.
And so he says, "As a practical matter,
whether we can forever represent the Chinese people
depends on whether we can succeed
in leading the Chinese people out of China.
After some deep pondering,
we've finally come to this conclusion:
Only by turning our developed national strength
into the force of first striking outward,
only by leading people to go out can we win forever
the Chinese people's support
and love for the Communist Party.
Our party will then stand on invincible ground,
and the Chinese people will have to depend
on the Chinese Communist Party.
They will forever follow the Communist Party
with their hearts and minds,
as was written in a couplet frequently seen
in the countryside some years ago:
Listen to Chairman Mao, follow the Communist Party."
So for him, expansion outside of China is critical.
That is the thing that matters.
He says, "What is the third issue we should clinch firmly
in order to accomplish our historical mission
of national renaissance?
It is to hold firmly onto the big issue of America.
The renaissance of China is in fundamental conflict
with Western strategic interests,
and therefore will inevitably be obstructed
by the Western countries doing everything they can.
So only by breaking the blockade formed
by the Western countries, headed by the United States,
can China grow and move forward."
And so it is clear that he says,
"Our future strategy is against the United States.
We need living space. They have it."
So he says, "Therefore, solving the issue of America
is key to solving all other issues.
First, this makes it possible
for us to have many people migrate there
and even establish another China,"
another China, he says,
"Under the same leadership of the CCP."
He says, "America was originally discovered
by the ancestors of the yellow race."
He says, "We, the descendants of the Chinese nation,
are entitled to the possession of this land.
It is said that the residents
of the yellow race have a very low social status
in the United States.
We need to liberate them.
Second, after solving the issue of America,
the Western countries of Europe would bow to us,
not to mention Taiwan, Japan, and other small countries."
"Therefore," he says,
"Solving the issue of America is the mission assigned
to the CCP members by history."
Now, there is something very powerful in that formulation.
The idea that he thinks that America is theirs
and that there are people here, Chinese people here,
that need to be liberated should be
of great concern to all of us.
Now, he says, this is almost the end,
"Only by using special means
to clean up America will we be able
to lead the Chinese people there.
This is the only choice left for us.
This is not a matter of whether we are willing
to do it or not.
What kind of special means is there available
for us to clean up America?"
He says, "Conventional weapons such as fighters,
cannons, missiles, and battleships won't do.
Neither will highly destructive weapons
such as nuclear weapons.
We are not as foolish as to want to perish together
with America by using nuclear weapons,
despite the fact that we have been exclaiming
that we will have the Taiwan issue resolved
at whatever cost.
Only by using non-destructive weapons
that kill many people will we be able
to reserve America for ourselves.
There has been rapid development
of modern biological technology,
and new bio-weapons have been invented one after another.
Of course, we have not been idle.
In the past years, we have seized the opportunity
to master weapons of this kind.
We are capable of achieving our purpose
of cleaning up America all of a sudden.
When Comrade Xiaoping was still with us,
the Party Central Committee had the perspicacity
to make the right decision not
to develop aircraft carrier groups
and focus instead on developing lethal weapons
that can eliminate mass population of the enemy country."
So the point is,
he's gonna use biological weapons against us.
He says, "Biological weapons are unprecedented
in their ruthlessness, but if the Americans do not die,
then the Chinese have to die.
If the Chinese people are strapped to the present land,"
meaning if they're stuck in China,
"A total societal collapse is bound to take place.
According to the computation of the author of Yellow Peril,
more than half of the Chinese will die."
He lays out how many of them are gonna die.
He thinks, you know, 800 million are going to die.
So he says, "We must prepare ourselves for two scenarios:
If our biological weapons succeed in the surprise attack,
the Chinese people will be able to keep their losses
at minimum in the fight against the United States.
If, however, the attack fails
and triggers a nuclear reaction from the United States,
China would perhaps suffer a catastrophe
in which more than half of its population would perish.
This is why we need to be ready with air defense systems
for our big and medium-sized cities.
Whatever the case may be,
we can only move forward fearlessly
for the sake of our party and state and our nation's future,
regardless of the hardships we have to face
and the sacrifices we have to make.
"It is indeed brutal to kill 1 or 200 million Americans,"
he says, "But that is the only path
that will secure a Chinese century
in which the CCP leads the world.
We as revolutionary humanitarians do not want death.
But if history confronts us with a choice
between the deaths of Chinese and those of Americans,
we have to pick the latter.
As for us, it is more important
to safeguard the lives of the Chinese people
and the life of our party.
That is because, after all,
we are Chinese and members of the CCP.
Since the day we joined the CCP,
the party life has always been above all else.
History will prove that we made the right choice."
Now, that is a powerful, powerful formulation
of how they think of themselves.
And the idea that they describe using biological weapons
against us has a way of, in my mind,
it gives some logic to everything we've been living under
for the past three years.
That whereas we, the United States and Robert Kennedy,
did a great job of laying all the concerns we had
about biological weapons,
whereas he laid out why we wouldn't want to use them,
even if the CIA had them, the Chinese,
they have no illusions about any of this.
They think, "If we really want that place, America,
with its, you know, the fertile lands that we have,
the beauty of it, but just the economic capacity of it,
why would we want to destroy it with nuclear weapons?
Why not just kill the people?"
And the way you kill the people is with biological weapons.
But here's something that he says,
you know, as he concludes his speech
that I found the most interesting, if you can believe it.
He talks about in 1995 a meeting
of The Gorbachev Foundation in San Francisco.
1995. And he says, "This is a shocking US conspiracy."
So this is a meeting of like the World Economic Forum types,
but back in '95, it's Gorbachev's Foundation.
He says, "There are 500 business leaders there:
important statesmen, economic leaders, scientists,
George W. Bush," he said, "Who is not the president.
Baroness Thatcher was there. Tony Blair was there.
Zbigniew Brzezinski, George Soros, Bill Gates."
"They were all there," he says,
and this is true, I did investigate this,
"From September 27th to October 1st in 1995."
And they're talking about the world's population,
among other things.
It's a very sort of future-looking meeting
of all these world leaders,
not unlike what the World Economic Forum
and George Soros and Klaus Schwab do today.
But back then, in 1995, they basically come to a conclusion
at this conference that the planet,
the economic productivity of the planet could be done
by about 20% of the population.
So that 4/5 of the planet, the 80%, would,
and these are General Chi's words now,
he says, "The people in attendance thought
that this excess 80% population would be a trash population,
and a, quote, 'high-tech means' should be used
to eliminate them gradually."
Now, this kind of a conversation was actually had
in 1995 in San Francisco by these types.
Now, I'm not saying George Bush believed any of this
or, you know, Baroness Thatcher or anybody else,
but when you get these globalists together,
I'm not saying those are globalists,
but when you get people who are looking
in this global way together,
there are always gonna be some
who believe that the world's overpopulated
and that we have to do something about it.
So from the point of General Chi,
he's saying, "We polluted China
to the point where it's unlivable."
They need living room,
not unlike the Germans' Lebensraum,
that is going to take pressure off them politically
with the Chinese people,
if the Chinese people can go outside their borders.
That there are eventually going to have
to fight the Americans anyway.
That America's essentially the only country standing
in their way.
And so they're going to use biological weapons
to take America down.
And he's saying these globalist powers
in that meeting in San Francisco, eight years previous,
were conspiring back then
to eradicate the world's population, anyway.
And so the CCP ought to act first.
Now, this is not an unknown speech
among the American intelligence community.
It's not subscribed to because if you subscribe to this,
what I just said,
you have to do something about Communist China.
You have to take that seriously.
And so much easier not to take it seriously.
Just as a closing note on General Chi.
This guy was not a marginal character.
He was responsible for organizing
how to deal with Tiananmen Square in 1989.
He organized that,
which was one of the most sophisticated exercises
in political suppression in the history of mankind.
He would be sent to Washington after that.
He was promoted after Tiananmen Square.
He would go to Washington all the time
and give military talks, military-to-military talks.
So our military knows him well.
They know he's a serious guy.
And I spent time on this, a lot of time on this,
because if we're gonna win the war we're in with them,
we need to understand that this is
how they're thinking about us.
They're thinking about not merely hurting us,
but potentially killing all of us and taking North America.
And they think about it,
not in terms of sort of some like,
native hatred of the United States,
but they're saying, essentially,
"We've destroyed China. We need to go somewhere else.
If we're gonna have to fight a war
with the Americans anyway,
because they're the only thing standing
between us and global domination,
we might as well start now."
And one could argue
they've spent 20 years preparing for that.
Within that context, in my time remaining,
I'd like to focus on big pharma and its relation to that.
Because if you are China,
would you have an interest
if you're about to engage in biological warfare,
would you want to co-opt big pharma?
One would have to think.
That wouldn't be a crazy idea.
In this country, we've promoted big pharma
in a variety of ways because any nation,
like ours, should have an advanced industry
where we can investigate the best medicines.
We today, as has been discussed during this conference,
we in America have invested billions of dollars
in universities, laboratories.
We put money into all sorts of research
to develop new pharmaceuticals
to deal with all sorts of diseases.
And we should have been focusing as well
on the supply chain.
Now, the government agencies,
it appears, were co-opted by big pharma.
In a properly functioning republic,
it wouldn't be crazy to put public monies
to encourage big pharma to invest in certain things.
But as to be expected, you know,
we screwed that up as a nation.
When we put money into big pharma,
big pharma did what it wanted to do,
not what was good necessarily for the American people.
For the last half century, we have substituted,
in my judgment, common sense for pills.
Now, without the communists raising a finger,
we're becoming ever obese as a society.
Instead of encouraging people
to lose weight and exercise,
we give them pills to lower their cholesterol
and blood pressure.
Not crazy if they have high cholesterol
and high blood pressure, it is thought.
But because the body doesn't react well
to that pharmacology,
an array of other problems occur within human beings.
And so big pharma has been in the business
to make money by dealing with all the problems
that either one set of drugs cause or that a vaccine causes.
And I think Bobby Kennedy, Robert Kennedy Jr.,
had an excellent treatment of all that.
And you can see big pharma has gotten so rich that,
you know, you watch any sports or TV show,
and, you know, it's sponsored by commercials or by,
you know, Pfizer, Moderna, Novartis.
You know, I especially like the ones where, you know,
they're talking about, you know, fixing,
you have a pain in your lower back,
and they can give you something.
And they start listing off all the side effects
that include, you know, a variety of things,
including, and my favorite always is,
suicidal tendencies, right?
You know, your lower back's gonna feel great,
but you may have these suicidal tendencies.
But you almost think, "These are such obscure drugs.
What is the point of advertising for them?"
And then you realize maybe they're not really advertising
to fix the problem, but to control the networks.
'Cause they're advertising things
that they can't be making that much money on.
But if they control the networks
by subsidizing all these TV shows,
I mean, everything is, you know, brought to you by Pfizer,
then that has a corrupting influence.
So big pharma, using our tax dollars,
have created drugs that have made them a lot of money
that have not made us healthier.
I think one of the speakers earlier
in the week highlighted some of this.
And it's a national tragedy
that we haven't woken up to this before now.
Now, if that wasn't bad enough, though,
one of the members of
our Committee on the Present Danger: China
is Rosemary Gibson.
She's one of the founding members.
And she wrote a book called "China Rx."
So not only have we done all this with big pharma,
we've exported much of the production of this now
to Communist China so that they can make all the money.
The upshot of her scholarship was that
in ever greater pursuit of profits,
America's pharmaceutical industry has exported both
the manufacturer of pharmaceuticals
and the active pharmaceutical ingredients
from which the drugs are made.
And a substantial amount of the research now,
Pfizer makes deals with, you know,
not merely folks in pharma,
but other laboratories in Communist China
to do all the research on this.
So it was not just that we would find a place
to make the drugs at a lower cost,
but we would take a thriving industry,
a real industry in America,
to try to research, you know,
chronic illness and disease
and things that are really bothering us
and things that we might be able to deal with,
and we take those billions of dollars worth of jobs
in America and we export that to Communist China.
We offshore that as well.
So I'm not even saying we should be taking these drugs,
but if we are gonna make these drugs,
we should at least make them in the United States.
And the crazier part to all this,
I don't wanna run out of time here.
The crazier part of all this is that
the Chinese want to be the world's pharmacy, they say.
Their strategy is to be openly the world's pharmacy.
So they not only want to produce the drugs,
they want to produce the active pharmaceutical ingredients,
they want the money for the research
to investigate all these things.
So when Tony Fauci, Anthony Fauci,
goes and has the Wuhan Institute of Virology
through EcoHealth Alliance, you know,
do what appears to be gain-of-function research,
this is just how the world works here.
Just how the world works.
We're just gonna let China do all this for us.
Apparently, these are jobs Americans just won't do,
which is research and manufacturing,
all of which is crazy.
If there's a piece of good news of highlighting all this,
the Trump administration did take this seriously.
Before 2018, there was literally no one
in the US government responsible for knowing
where our pharmaceuticals were being manufactured.
They knew they were being manufactured all
throughout the world.
It was no one's job to really track that,
as if they were kind of indifferent
to the fact that now 80%
of the active pharmaceutical ingredients are made
in Communist China.
And in 2019, the Trump administration took
these facts very seriously
to where now both the DoD and the FDA have to report
to Congress on the status of certain medicines here.
We still have not brought back onshore
to the United States the production
of these active pharmaceutical ingredients.
It turns out once you close down these factories,
it's very hard to open them back up.
But it is my sincere hope,
should be all of our sincere hope,
that we do that quickly,
because as one Chinese official said
after in 2020,
there was a lot of criticism
of the Wuhan Institute of Virology
and the idea that it was an intentional attack.
One of the Chinese members
of the politburo said that they were gonna start denying us.
Made a threat. He was gonna start denying us.
They were gonna start denying us
in the active pharmaceutical ingredients.
And he said, quote,
"We would be drowned in a sea of Coronavirus."
So let me just say, you know, wrapping up here,
the issue of the vaccines is something we really need
to get to the bottom of in this new Congress.
I think what President Trump was promised from Pfizer
and Moderna was not what we actually got.
(audience applauds)
I don't think there was any time when someone said
to President Trump, and I think Peter Navarro affirms this
in some of the things he's written,
"We're gonna give you an mRNA, you know, gene therapy."
He was promised an honest-to-god vaccine of the kind
that we took when we were kids for a variety of things.
And so this was a new thing.
He was promised something that was a traditional vaccine
that was going to save America's lives.
Now, I do think he had a faith in modern science
that we now know is unwarranted.
That I'm not sure he fully appreciated just
how corrupt our government agencies,
led by Tony Fauci in part,
were in dealing with all this.
And that seems to me a great political tragedy
that we need to consider.
And I think before Congress,
Albert Bourla from, the CEO of Pfizer,
who I should note is a veterinarian.
Nothing against veterinarians,
but he's a veterinarian.
And Stephane Bancel at Moderna.
They should be asked how these mRNA gene therapies got
to be our vaccines.
Because as a practical matter,
that simply didn't make any sense.
So let me conclude.
I think what we're seeing here
is a matter of high government policy by Communist China
in what I would term the demonic forces
of globalism that are
within the organizations like the World Economic Forum.
I think we're seeing with all of these an effort
to depopulate the planet.
The World Economic Forum
and writers like Paul Ehrlich have raised a specter
that we're overpopulated,
that there's some 8 billion people,
and that we should really only have 500 million
or a billion.
If you look at that number from that 1995 conference,
that number's roughly a billion, right?
There's a group of people on this planet,
whether they're Communist China,
who would like America or the World Economic Forum
or radical environmentalists,
who think we're overpopulated,
and now they're going to take it upon themselves
to remake this world.
And so from a big pharma point of view,
if you want drugs that'll lower your cholesterol,
we can produce those.
If you want drugs that will lower the population,
we can do that too, right?
We'll put this or that into this vaccine.
We'll put this or that into this drug.
It's not about money, it's about power.
Big pharma is gonna follow whatever government
on this earth is willing to give them the power
to do what they do.
And perhaps I'm a little over the top
by calling this demonic,
but I think there's a demonic force here,
because there's no other way to explain.
(audience applauds)
There's no other way to explain.
You know, either big pharma is grossly incompetent,
or they're malicious and evil.
And it certainly is that.
And let me say, Xi Jinping said the virus is a demon,
and we cannot let this demon hide.
Indeed, he wanted it to go all over the world.
Now, whether he is carrying out the strategic design
of Chi Haotian or not is another matter,
but suffice it to say
that the Chinese Communist Party has carried out
a bio-weapon attack against the United States
with near impunity.
The Communist Chinese point of view I understand.
They're a great nation with strategic interests.
They care about the wellbeing first
and foremost of the Chinese Communist Party.
They have 90 million members.
They don't care about the Chinese people.
They care about those 90 million.
There's only one nation
that stands between us and global domination.
We in this room who care about human freedom must rally
our countrymen to understand the threats before us.
We must remoralize our people
and be children of light in the darkness that surrounds us.
The cause of freedom has never been more in danger.
Let us commit ourselves like never before to its defense.
Thank you.
(audience applauds)
Thank you, thank you.
-: Thank you, Mr. Kennedy.
We now have time for some Q&A.
-: Thank you. -: If you have a question,
please make your way to the microphone.
And student questions will be given preference.
-: As I am aware, China's modern geopolitical moves
on a global stage include opening ports
and trading posts in areas of Southeast Asia,
akin to European trade companies' ports
that they had owned during the century of humiliation
for the Chinese.
So with this happening
with China taking trade ports in Southeast Asia
and many major trading areas,
what should the US' geopolitical maneuvering be
in regards to trade and tariff policy
with countries such as Singapore or Indonesia?
-: It's a good question.
I mean, the thing is China, we're a commercial republic.
We want to trade with the world.
Free trade has done a lot of good for us.
It did more good for us
when we were also manufacturing things
and selling things around the world.
When you combine free trade with restrictive manufacturing
and environmental regulatory policy in this country,
it's very hard for us to engage in the kind of free trade
that made us so prosperous,
even though we are a very prosperous country.
The Chinese have seen
that we're taking a step back in the world.
So through their Belt and Road Initiative,
they've been expanding everywhere,
making all sorts of trade deals,
buying up all sorts of raw materials in all the countries.
Any country that will make a deal with them,
they'll do business with.
And that Belt and Road Initiative has a real way
of co-opting all these small countries.
Because the Chinese have perfected corruption.
They know how to pay off the elites in any given country.
They get a trade deal,
they get a deal to buy a port,
railway to build these kind of things.
The leader of the country,
the handful of people who run the country,
get paid a boatload of money.
The Chinese get the contract, the Chinese become rich,
the leaders of the country become rich,
and the people within those countries become exploited
and their raw materials taken from them.
And the Chinese have perfected that,
and they're very effective.
And we, the United States, who are concerned
about being a commercial republic,
need to take that seriously
and challenge the Chinese wherever we can,
because most of the time they're using methods
that are illegal from our own standards
to achieve these deals.
Yes.
-: So Mr. Kennedy,
of our multi-trillion dollar national debt,
I know a good portion of that is owed to China.
Is China exploiting this?
Like, don't they care that we owe a lot of money to them?
Just what are they doing about that?
-: Yeah, that's a great question.
The answer is no.
I mean, right now we have
a $31 trillion national debt going up every minute.
And the Chinese today have 800 billion of that.
So, you know, if it were 8 billion,
8 trillion, and they owned a trillion,
that'd be one thing.
They own 800 billion of 31 trillion.
The bigger crisis in America
is the fact that Americans today invest 4 to 7 trillion,
this is a crazy number,
4 to 7 trillion in Chinese equities.
So people in this room,
you've heard this from my colleague Roger Robinson
as part of the work on the Committee on the Present Danger.
In your investment portfolios,
most of the time, unbeknownst to you,
you'll invest your own hard-earned dollars
in index funds that are invested in Communist China
to the tune today of 4 to 7 trillion dollars,
which should be just a crime.
So the idea that they own us because they own 800 billion
of our treasury debt was something
that they have promoted pretty effectively.
And I will say, just as a practical note,
on a practical note, we the United States have owned,
citizens of the United States own
the defaulted sovereign debt of the PRC
that they've never paid on
that is in excess of a trillion dollars.
So most of this is really a real head scratcher.
We're not doing anything to hold China
to account on anything.
They steal our intellectual property.
They, you know, exploit our markets
in a variety of ways.
They get our Wall Street titans to invest in them,
and, you know, no one's watching what they're doing.
That's how, unfortunately, corrupt a country we are.
Yes.
-: Hi, thank you very much.
I don't know if this is fake news,
but I have read in many places
that the number of members of the Communist Party
in China is dropping significantly.
And also, in the 1990s,
David Aikman wrote a book called "Jesus in Beijing,"
where I learned in that book
that there are actually more Christians in China
than the rest of the world combined.
So I'm wondering what,
I don't know what my question is,
but maybe comment on that. -: No, no, no, no.
-: Like, what is the role of faith and in the conversion
of the Chinese people given this scenario?
-: Yeah, I would love for it
to be true that that were so.
I don't see any evidence
that the Chinese Communist Party is declining in numbers.
And it seems to be getting ever more powerful.
It has 90 million members.
The Chinese students that you see in the United States,
you know, from Mainland China, there's about 300,000.
It used to be more before COVID.
These are the children of the Chinese elite.
They're the future masters.
They're part of the effort to steal
that $500 billion a year.
They're making plenty of money.
They're growing in number.
Does China have a population problem?
Yes, they do, but not among that wealthy elite.
Christianity in China is still being suppressed.
The Chinese Communist Party,
they actually believe in communism.
They believe that atheism is their strength.
Their strength.
Atheism and unity are the two phrases that they often use.
And so they've managed to suppress Christianity's,
you know, there,
and they've also managed to corrupt the Catholic Church,
which has, you know, all sorts of outlets there.
And the Catholic Church even has not been able
to navigate their way around that.
Yes, sir.
-: All I can say is wow.
I'm trying to find a bit of optimism here.
I have personally no hope that our federal
or national government is capable of dealing with China
under its current construct, in my opinion.
However, your colleague, Steve Bannon,
often talks about, I'm from Brooklyn,
so my Asian accent probably isn't very good,
(speaking in Chinese).
He claims that in 1984
or whatever it was with Tiananmen Square,
if the United States had supported
the (speaking in Chinese),
that China would be done back then.
Is there a chance
that the Chinese people have not voted yet
and there's a chance that they could be a strategic benefit
to the world?
-: I think that's a fabulous question.
Steve's an optimist, I will say.
The dark lord is an optimist.
I'd like to think the Chinese people would rise up.
There's plenty of reason for them to.
You saw a lot of evidence of the potential
for them to rise up in some of these lockdowns.
I think they followed this zero-COVID policy,
I thought that was mostly theater.
I thought that it was mostly designed
to see how the Chinese people would respond to lockdowns,
because they might actually have to engage in lockdowns
in China in the event that they invaded Taiwan.
There was another recording
of a private meeting in China last year
among a Communist Party cell
in the southern part of China.
And they were talking about the potential,
if they did invade Taiwan,
of major riots in the major cities,
and the need to engage in what sounded like,
you know, 18 months,
24 months of preparation internally to deal with the,
have their own police deal with the internal population
in the event of an invasion of Taiwan.
Which would suggest that Steve may be onto something there,
that the Chinese people will not sit idly by
under every circumstance.
But we also know that the communist government there
is not afraid to kill their own people.
And they make a big point often.
You know, in the last 100 years,
they've killed over 100 million people.
So they're not afraid to kill their own people.
The General Chi speech was long enough as it was,
but he says at one point that what about all the people,
all the Chinese within the United States
that we're gonna have to kill as well?
And he basically says,
"And we've done it before, we'll do it,
essentially, we've done it before, we'll do it again."
You know, if we want to save all these other people
in Communist China, we're gonna have to kill the Chinese
that are in America too.
So they don't really seem to care about that.
It's those 90 million members
of the Chinese Communist Party.
Now, this is true of everything that we're dealing with.
It's a fraction of 1% of this global elite
that are trying to tyrannize us.
There's more of us than there are of them.
We sit idly by, they win.
We can't let that be the case,
whether it's here or in Communist China.
I'm not sure what we can do
to help liberate the communist Chinese,
or the Chinese people from the party.
And we pray that they do it themselves
for the sake of the whole world.
But my main message is that we in America have to wake up.
We have to liberate this country.
We're an occupied country right now.
We're not living in a republic.
(audience applauds)
-: We now have time for one more question.
-: In 1989, I found myself in Beijing, China opening
the first chiropractic clinic there.
And I was there during the Tiananmen Square incident.
-: I love chiropractors.
-: (laughs) And we would go down to the square
before the whole lockdown happened
to hang out with the students.
And I would walk around,
and I'd have a Chinese translator with me.
And if I stopped moving, they would close in,
and they would just start firing questions
in Chinese to the translator.
And you know what those questions were?
How do you do your democracy? How do you elect a president?
They wanted me to go back to civics class
and like, spell it out for them.
So when I hear your comments
and I think about those exact human beings
that I encountered and their just thirst
for freedom and democracy,
and what I saw happen just days later,
where we're in the square, everything's peaceful.
Everything was completely peaceful.
The crime rate was way down.
The car accidents were way down
'cause there were just bicycles.
And the five abreast soldiers come marching down
the alleyway and turn into Tiananmen Square.
And they had no guns. They were unarmed.
And then the people were so angry,
and they just tore at them.
And then they could say, "Oh,
look at the hooligans in Tiananmen Square."
So I guess my question is,
if we think of the individual human beings
and if they could have gotten out and gotten to America,
you know, they would've embraced this.
They don't want that.
-: No, I believe it's a great question to close on.
I don't think they want that.
But here's what I think may have happened
in Tiananmen Square.
That the Chinese saw that there was a spirit of democracy
and freedom within their own people.
And they might have organized Tiananmen Square
so that those people you talked to, that they rose up.
That the communists are very sophisticated politically
when they engage in political war.
They do it in such a way as to expose, for instance,
if I'm right about this speculation about Tiananmen Square,
because it was General Chi Haotian who organized this,
the same person who's talking about the biological warfare.
He organized essentially Tiananmen Square.
And it was very possible the way he organized it was
to have people incite those good people within China
who believed in democracy and have them rise up
so that they could then be crushed.
That's how they think. They don't think like us.
Whatever way we think politically
and engaging in politics and rhetoric and discourse,
they don't think that way.
They are absolutely ruthless.
They mean to be masters of the earth.
If something is going to stand in their way, they crush it.
And yes, the Chinese people can stand up.
And I think the best thing for the Chinese people today
is if the American people stand up.
If we get a free country here, China can be free.
If we don't, they don't. Thank you.
(audience applauds)