I thought this would be a great place to post this to see if there are any holes in this?
Copied from a post by Brian Ellis on Facebook
Conspiracy realist or Coincidence theorist?
Here is an interesting one. Conspiracy realist or Coincidence theorist. What’s the difference? I’ll show you—THIS is a Coincidence Theory: “The Chinese biological laboratory in Wuhan is owned by GlaxoSmithKline who (by coincidence) owns Pfizer! The one who produces the vaccine for the virus that (by coincidence) started in the biological laboratory in Wuhan, which (by coincidence) was funded by Dr. Fauci who is (by coincidence) promoting the vaccine.
GlaxoSmithKline (by coincidence) is managed by Black Rock finances who (by coincidence) manages the finances of the Open Foundation Company (Soros Foundation) which (by coincidence) serves the French AXA!
By coincidence Soros owns the German company Winterthur which (by coincidence) built the Chines Laboratory in Wuhan and was bought by the German Allianz which (by coincidence) has Vanguard as a shareholder which (by coincidence) is a shareholder of Black Rock, which (by coincidence) controls the central banks and manages about one third of the global investment capital.
Black Rock (by coincidence) is also a major shareholder of MICROSOFT, the property of Bill Gates, who (by coincidence) is a shareholder of Pfizer (which-you remember? Is selling the miracle vaccine) and (by coincidence) is currently the first sponsor of the World Health Organization!!!
So now you understand how a dead bat sold in a wet market in China infected the ENTIRE PLANET!!
GlaxoSmithKline??
GlaxoSmithKline got involved in Haiti in 2010 to "help with earthquake victims."
6 months later, they announced they were experimenting making electronics with melanin. Melanin comes from dark skin.
Nice shell game
AND the Global Beat goes on...and the beat goes on..yada yada yee...yada yada yada dee
Vanguard manages index funds, mostly, so of course Vanguard is going to own all large publicy traded companies, and many smaller ones, too. They follow a published index, so they are not actively selecting to be owners of these companies. So, that part of this is a stretch. However, Vanguard is such a large money manager that they have influence over the boards of directors of these companies, and may pursue an objective that way. Pfizer is a publicy traded company (PFE) and is not wholly owned by Glaxo, but there may be a joint partnership or there may be some cross ownership. I'd need to look it up but am not going to bother bc it's irrelevant. The relevant "coincidences", which are also without sauce here and so unverified, would be the Fauci connection and the Soros connection, but since Soros has his hand in everything, I think the headline here is did Fauci have a conflict of interest that he did not disclose to the public. I don't even know if he legally had to disclose that, but ethics would behoove one to do so. I am an investmentfag.
Thank you for this comment. I am still learning how to go about researching all of this, but many of these "coincidences" seemed worth of some further investigation.
BlackRock, in addition to be a publicy-traded company itself (BLK), is another big time indexer, so of course it will own Microsoft.
Well, many of these "coincidences" are straight up false, others are potentially true or half-true but don't even really qualify as "coincidences".
For instance, GlaxoSmithKline doesn't own the Wuhan Institute of Virology (that's the Chinese government) or Pfizer (publicly traded). I did a cursory search & couldn't find any indication (other than variants of this post) that Black Rock "manages the finances" of the Soros Foundation, or that Winterthur (a Swiss company currently owned by the French insurance firm Axa, which is publicly traded) had a role in building the WIV.
Some others are half-true. The NIH (of which the NIAID, which Fauci runs, is part) gave a research grant to a U.S. based nonprofit called EcoHealth, which in turn parceled out some of the grant money to the WIV. So you could say Fauci (indirectly) funded the WIV. But you could equally accurately say "the Trump Administration (indirectly) funded the WIV."
Other points may be true, but aren't really "coincidences" if that's supposed to mean not just literally "two things happening at the same time" but something that's unusual or improbable enough to suggest design but nevertheless occurred merely by chance.
Is it JUST A COINCIDENCE that Black Rock or Soros own shares in Microsoft, and that Bill Gates owns shares in Pfizer (assuming all those things are true)? Well, no, in the same sense that it's not "just a coincidence" that Bill Gates and George Soros both breathe oxygen. It's not a "coincidence" that wealthy investors own shares in the world's biggest software company and one of the world's biggest pharmaceutical companies; it's just... normal. You don't say "what a coincidence" when you bump into your neighbor at the neighborhood grocery store; you say "what a coincidence" when you unexpectedly bump into him on a trip to a small town in Italy.
The rhetorical tactic of this post is to use the word "coincidence" to imply that all these connections are so cumulatively improbable that it's more reasonable and "realistic" to infer a conspiracy. But many of the connections are made up, and the ones that are either partly or potentially true aren't particularly improbable.
Fair enough!