In late August 1998 I found myself sitting in a private meeting room at the Cosmos Club in Washington, D.C., flanked by two journalists. Pensively standing next to his chair on the other side of the table was former GRU Col. Stanislav Lunev, who had defected from the Russian Federation in March 1992. As we listened, spellbound by his brilliance, we learned of Russia’s descent into corruption. But then he surprised us, quite unexpectedly, by saying that Russia’s degradation had occurred as blowback after a decades-long KGB campaign to spread moral corruption in America.

Really? Why would Soviet Russia want to spread corruption in America? What purpose could it serve? “Because,” he explained, “Americans were too honest. We could not effectively recruit your people as spies. We needed to soften you up.”

He said that Soviet agents had given money to people in Hollywood with the idea of putting more sex and violence in movies. It was an attempt to coarsen the moral sensibilities of average Americans. Lunev said this policy had backfired. “We had gotten rid of religion in Russia so we had no protection. Our people lost all sense of right and wrong. Your country still believed in God, so the damage was not as great.”

I then turned and asked, “What kind of people did you recruit as spies.” He had a one-word reply that was unforgettable: “Journalists.”

This perked the interest of the two journalists flanking me. “What is a journalist?” Lunev asked rhetorically. “A person who gathers information and makes reports.”

Many people today think the United States is a leader in disinformation and propaganda. But this idea can be readily dismissed by the fact that the United States has long been infiltrated by, and influenced, to accept anti-American messages and themes as a matter of course. Our centers of learning are anti-American hotbeds. In fact, anti-Americanism is so pervasive it is no longer recognized as such — so that being against one’s own country has been “normalized.”

Since the government does not control the media in the U.S., the larger cultural narrative has long been up for grabs. If the country had not been infiltrated and partly taken over from within, the rhetoric of many politicians and newspapers today could by no means be explained.

Our reality, to a large degree, is a construction, painstakingly built, brick by brick, with elements conceived abroad. Americans have been persuaded, by countless artifices of rhetoric, by the Fool’s Paradise of the shopping mall regime, that vigilance against the communist threat was paranoia, that Russia and China were not ruled by communists, that they were not using our openness and naïveté against us.

Then came the 9/11 attack. All of a sudden our military and intelligence resources were diverted from their Cold War-era targets to a new enemy. Islamic terrorists, hiding in caves, were the new threat. Russia was going to be our ally against this threat. We went to war with Baghdad and Kabul. We spent trillions. We wasted all our attention, all those years, all those resources, fighting people we had no real need to fight. The real threat was dismissed out of hand. The Chinese and Russians were now our partners. We forgot to maintain our nuclear weapons industry. The country’s vigilance slipped to a new low. Marxists flooded into government under Obama.

In November 1998 I asked Col. Lunev how a successful nuclear attack against America could be carried out. He said, “If you ever hear that Arab terrorists have attacked an American city with nuclear weapons? Don’t believe it.”

“Why wouldn’t I?”

“Because,” he said, “it will be my people. It will be [Russian] Spetsnaz.”

“What will happen after this [false flag] nuclear strike?” I asked.

“Some weeks or months later the missiles will come from Russia,” he said.

I never did ask Lunev what was meant by an interval of “weeks or months” between a false flag attack and nuclear strikes from Russia. I went back and reread a number of Soviet military books, searching for clues.

Reviewing the literature I made the following list: (1) Marshal Sokolovskiy’s book, Soviet Military Strategy, says that Russia must openly orient her people to make war on America before an attack is feasible; (2) this orientation would have to take place “in plain view,” but in a way that Americans would not take alarm; (3) the first crippling waves of any attack on the United States, using weapons of mass destruction, could not be direct attacks; (4) Russia and China would need a foolproof alibi (as suggested by Lunev’s 1998 scenario involving a false-flag terrorist attack); (5) the mystery of Lunev’s “weeks or months” interval has to do with the objective of collapsing the U.S. economy before the advent of war; (6) subsequent domestic unrest, with attending political divisions, would be more effectively inflamed; (7) financial collapse would negate early warning systems as well as command & control.

The seven points listed above might be called “The Sequence.” That is to say, in strategic terms, a cascading series of catastrophic events leading to the negation of the West’s defenses.

If we consider our current situation in light of “The Sequence,” we find many points coming into alignment. With regard to the COVID-19 outbreak, there may have occurred (in this regard) an “evolution of intentions.” Since the enemy intends to destroy the United States by means of “The Sequence,” the accidental release of the COVID-19 pathogen in China provides the occasion for a spontaneous if unintended denouement. In other words, why not roll with it?

COVID-19 offers the perfect alibi for China. It also gives cover for war mobilization disguised as measures for fighting the virus. It is obvious that a COVID-19 outbreak will hit United States in the coming days. The resulting panic will cause an unprecedented financial contraction. American society, softened by decades of loose living, is ideologically divided. Worse yet, a significant percentage of the country believes the president is a Russian stooge.

Are the pre-conditions for unleashing “The Sequence” in place? Are China’s intentions in relation to the COVID-19 virus “evolving”?