I'm not sure what to make of the Project Veritas story. Maybe it's all as it seems, but I'm just not sure. So...
1) How come someone in their late twenties / earliy thirties gets to be a director of R&D in a company as big as Pfizer ("Director, Worldwide Strategic Operations and mRNA Scientific Planning")?
2) How come that same person—who must be pretty exceptional to have risen so fast, also very sensitive to intellectual property issues, and acutely aware of the risks of industrial espionage—spills the beans on his company in such a careless and immature manner?
3) How come that same person says he's aware that journalists sometimes try to befriend Pfizer employees in order to get information out of them, yet goes ahead and acts as if that isn't happening in this case?
4) Isn't it odd that an MD should have so many aliases? ("Jordon Thrishton Walker", "Trishton Lee", "Trishton Lee Walker", "Jordan Walker", "Joran Trishtan Lee Walker")
5) Might the scrubbing of information about this man from the Internet not only be consitent with Pfizer's desire to make the story go away, but also consistent with someone's intention that Pfizer look like they're trying to make this story go away?
6) Might not this whole thing be a set-up to trap alternative media in a false story and thereby discredit them?
I don't know. I am literally just asking questions. Please understand, I'm not trying to defend Pfizer here—I wouldn't even buy an aspirin from them—but I can't get enthusiastic about this story at the moment because there are things about it that seem a little too odd.
Some impressive documentation captures here thanks to Brian O'Shea (https://brianoshea.substack.com/p/who-is-jordon-trishton-walker). But see comment by "DLerman" in the comments section.
Updates (I'm just adding to this page at random intervals)...
7) Does Pfizer's statement of 27 January 2023 (https://www.pfizer.com/news/announcements/pfizer-responds-research-claims), effectively confirm, by its silence, that Jordon Walker does in fact (or did until very recently) work for them?
8) Is Pfizer's statement—which appears to deny that they do "gain of function" or "directed evolution" (I'll call it "virus tinkering")—actually crafted to imply that they don't do these things when in fact they do?
9) Could it be that these very questions—whether they're doing "it" or not, or whether they should be doing "it" or not, or whether they're planning to do "it" or not—are intended to serve as a means of normalising the very existence of virus tinkering in the public's mind? ("Well, maybe companies like Pfizer shouldn't be doing it, but so long as governments are doing it, well that's OK then."
10) Some commentators are disturbed by what's in the Pfizer statement (such as Dr John Campbell); others aren't alarmed or surpised by it (such as "Eugyppius"). Will one of the results of this whole brouhaha be that Pfizer gets to establish in the public's mind what is, and what isn't, acceptable virus tinkering by companies such as itself, when maybe the whole business of virus tinkering shouldn't exist at all?
11) Is the journalist George Webb (and others) right that the title "director" doesn't mean all that much at a place like Pfizer? (https://twitter.com/RealGeorgeWebb1)
The Twitter Spaces conversations on George Webb's Twitter feed are worth listening to.
12) If so, would that help to explain why Jordon Walker behaved in such a careless manner?
13) What's the significance of Jordon Walker's connection to the Boston Consulting Group?
14) Is the whole thing a bit of a distraction from deeper questions about Big Pharma and its deep state connections? (I say "a bit", because I'm not saying it's not newsworthy, only that maybe it's tempting people to look in one direction only.)
15) One thing I'm noticing is that there's already something of a divisive mentality developing over this. Some people are being called "on the wrong side" because they were initially too dismissive of the story; others are being called "gullible" because they were too enthusiastic. We need to stop doing that. Being "right" or "wrong" is getting in the way of simply continuing to ask questions, being careful, and modifying our understanding of the story as new evidence comes to light.
16) Now to look around me to see what this might be distracting me from...