Please do your own research. The information I share is only a catalyst to expanding ones confined consciousness. I have NO desire for anyone to blindly believe or agree with what I share. Seek the truth for yourself and put your own puzzle together that has been presented to you. I'm not here to teach, preach or lead, but rather assist in awakening the consciousness of the collective from its temporary dormancy.
“In early times, it was easier to control a million people than to kill a million. Today, it is infinitely easier to to kill a million people than to control a million.”
Brzezinski would know, as he haunted to halls of the world’s most powerful organizations and think tanks for decades. He held a uniquely elitist perspective on the world, and in his classic globalist book The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives he shared an inside look at this mindset. Those in power view the entire world as a play ground to be manipulated, controlled, conquered, and destroyed if necessary. Our lives are the pawns of tyrants… as they see it.
This is the curse of government, which is nothing without force and violence, and Brzezinski was a key player and architect of the current global tension we all endure.
I wonder, though, had he lived long enough to play a role in the pandemic power grab, would he have been impressed by advances in the ability to control so many people without deploying troops, smart-bombs and sanctions? My magic eight-ball says, ‘you may rely on it.’
You see, one thing we’ve learned (whether you recognize it or not) is that it is now far easier to control people than ever before. How so?
Simple. You sideline them by programming them to engage in self-sabotage and self-destructive behavior.
Mind control comes in many forms, but in essence it is the ability to get people to believe, think, and act against their natural impulses and in accordance with an imposed agenda.
American psychologist and professor emeritus at Stanford University, Phillip Zombardo, refers to mind control as, “the process by which individual or collective freedom of choice and action is compromised by agents or agencies that modify or distort perception, motivation, affect, cognition or behavioral outcomes.” His ground breaking research project, The Stanford Prison Experiment, demonstrated that most people are highly susceptible to the influence of group behavior, and that many of us would go so far as to harm others just to be in compliance with the directives of someone in a perceived position of authority.
In today’s fustercluck world, the effects of mind control are evident everywhere, and under present conditions is even manifesting it its most dangerous form… mass psychosis. People living in this dark cloud of disillusionment are easily influenced and will readily sacrifice their own health and well-being in deference to the advice and mandates of ‘experts’ and policy makers who pimp fear then offer a phony respite from it.
Consider how this plays out in our society:
1. Dumb down the population with chemical sedatives including alcohol, pharmaceuticals and toxic food ingredients.
2. Monopolize the media under corporate control. Present biased, toxic opinions as ‘news’ 24 hours a day, deliberately creating division and discord amongst the majority population.
3. Censor any information and opinions which counter the propaganda of the corporate state, making it seem like minority authoritarian positions are of the majority.
4. Entrain the masses to believe that censorship is necessary for their protection, and that to speak out in opposition to the corporate state amounts to a physical threat to their safety.
5. Elevate a culture of celebrity worship, and promote degeneracy and stupidity as virtuous forms of pseudo-rebellion.
6. Indoctrinate children from an early age to learn obedience over critical thinking, while teaching them that the state is infallible no matter how many atrocities it commits.
7. Isolate people from each other. Disconnect them from the grounding and diverse influence of family and friends.
8. Assault the senses of the population with an endless stream of trauma based mind control and fear propaganda.
9. Entrain common people to believe that being broke and poor is virtuous, while encouraging a massive wealth gap between the elites and the rest of society.
10. Destabilize traditional communal and familial structures by encouraging promiscuity, divorce and dysfunctional relationships.
11. Gut the value of the only permissible currency so that typical gender roles are flipped and both members of a nuclear family must work in order to provide a basic life while children their must be sent to expensive daycares and government run schools.
12. Confuse people over simple biological issues like gender, and create a cult of official science followers who are unwilling to acknowledge such basic scientific facts.
13. Destroy the most powerful and capable members of society, the alpha-males, through media campaigns which demonize them.
14. Focus the attention of the masses on an invisible, intangible, omni-present fear such as an unstoppable plague that is constantly changing forms.
15. Require people to seek permission from the government for practically every productive endeavor possible.
16. Corral the masses into a system of technological control which prohibits free association and free enterprise, and punishes those most likely to resist.
15. Elevate the most criminally insane members of government, and give them open-ended, free access to 24 hour monopolized media.
16. Eradicate natural and holistic forms of medicine, corralling everyone into a top-down, one-size fits all, for-profit, absurdly expensive, allopathic medical system.
17. Disconnect people from genuine, personal spiritual connection, so that they live with an insatiable fear of death in constant inner turmoil.
18. Over time, socially engineer a societal tribe of dysfunctional, unhealthy, confused, resentful, broke, state-worshippers who may wish to live a prosperous life, but cannot ever manage to overcome the urges of their subconscious mind’s in order to act in their own best interests.
The end result of all this is an individual who has been so beaten down by circumstance and chronic stress that they require stimulants all day to function, and sedatives all night to cope with the madness of it all.
And conveniently, there just happens to be a coffee shop on every corner and a full service bar on every street.
Nearly all of us engage in self-sabotaging and self-destructive behavior, which is great for guys like Brzezinski, because it makes controlling the masses easier than ever before.
The act of living ‘normally’ in this environment makes you a non-threat to those managing the chessboard. You are controlled by virtue of your inability to stay on your own unique path of self-mastery.
Friends, this is social engineering at its most advanced, and while it’s informative to understand what has happened to our society, your imperative now is to internalize this as a demand to eliminate such influences from your life.
You must seek to understand how these influences have derailed your potential, and then you must engage in the work needed to reconnect you with you inner wisdom and authority.
Self-sabotage is a gift to the elite. It puts you on the sideline of life and has you constantly burning your energy in a permanent war against yourself.
It makes it nearly impossible for you to make positive changes in your life or have a positive impact on your community or this world. It makes you aloof and dependent on the directives of skilled profiteers who utilize the science of the mind against you.
So, yeah, in today’s world it is far easier to control billions of people than to murder them. And unless you commit to taking back control of your life, you are fulfilling your directive as their pawn.
The American Medical Association (AMA) wants people to die from the Wuhan coronavirus (Covid-19).
The reason we can safely say this is that the trade group is working overtime to restrict Americans’ access to hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) and ivermectin, two safe, effective and inexpensive early treatment remedies for the Chinese Virus.
Instead of recognizing that each individual has the God-given right to choose what goes into his body, the AMA is taking a position of medical fascism that does not even recognize the right of doctors to prescribe whatever medications they see fit for their patients.
Because using ivermectin breaks the plandemic script, however – everyone is supposed to just mask up and get “vaccinated,” they tell us – the AMA is trying to make it impossible to get (except for the black market, perhaps).
“The American Medical Association (which represents only 12% of practicing physicians and receives more money from the federal government than from its waning membership dues) and two national pharmacy associations (which receive corporate support from COVID-19 ‘vaccine’ manufacturers, Pfizer, AstraZeneca and Johnson & Johnson) have decided ivermectin should not be used to treat this virus despite widespread successful treatment with this drug (discovered in the late 1970s and used in humans since 1988),” write Robert Marshall and Dr. Bernard, Pegis, M.D., for LifeSiteNews.
“Ivermectin is currently available over the counter in many countries. If American drugstores implement this dangerous policy, many lives will be lost.”
Hypocritical AMA Supported Off-Label Prescription Of Drugs As Recently As 2020
In a September 1 press release, the AMA, along with the American Pharmacists Association (APHA) and the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists (ASHP), explained that they “strongly oppose the ordering, prescribing, or dispensing of ivermectin to prevent or treat COVID-19 outside of a clinical trial.”
“We are alarmed by reports that outpatient prescribing for and dispensing of ivermectin have increased 24-fold since before the pandemic and increased exponentially over the past few months,” that announcement further read.
Even though there are almost no risks associated with taking ivermectin as normally prescribed, the AMA, the APHA and the ASHP are freaking out about the fact that some doctors are administering it to their sick patients.
Off-label prescription of pharmaceuticals has been common practice for many decades. Now that covid is here and being highly politicized by the left, however, it is suddenly a mortal sin in the eyes of the medical establishment to even just try using ivermectin for treating Chinese Germs.
Just prior to when the Fauci Flu made its appearance, the AMA actually issued an official policy guideline confirming that it offers “strong support” for the off-label prescription of pharmaceuticals whenever a doctor deems that it may be helpful.
“Our AMA confirms its strong support for the autonomous clinical decision-making authority of a physician and that a physician may lawfully use an FDA approved drug product or medical device for an off-label indication when such use is based upon sound scientific evidence or sound medical opinion,” the organization confirmed at the time.
Now that the Biden regime wants everyone to get “vaccinated,” though, the AMA is doing everything possible to restrict access to ivermectin, which quite frankly would have put an end to this fake “pandemic” a long, long time ago.
“Jesus was severely criticized for healing a blind man on the Sabbath (John 9:13-30),” LifeSiteNews reported.
“Today, practicing physicians who save lives using drug therapy are ostracized. Mainstream medicine appears to be rejecting efforts to combat COVID-19 with drugs in favor of experimental mRNA ‘vaccines.’”
It is crucial to be aware of the New World Order mindset as we experience the intensification of its longstanding agenda. While each passing week seems to bring us more and more bizarre news in the unfolding of Operation Coronavirus, it is worthwhile taking a step back to look at the mentality which is orchestrating this scamdemic – this New World Order mindset. If we want to live free, we have to understand the nature of the force that is seeking to enslave us.
The New World Order mindset is psychopathic, paranoid, anxious and afraid. This article decodes the twisted psychology so you can see its weaknesses and rise above it.
This article is an attempt to sketch out some of the hallmarks of the depraved and twisted psychology of the New World Order (NWO) ruling class. By getting your head around how these people think, how they view those outside their cult (the public masses), how they view the world and what motivates them, hopefully you can begin to grasp what is needed to ensure we defeat them and maintain a world of peace, freedom and abundance.
Thanks as always to David Icke who, after 30 years of full-time research, has distilled and communicated the essence of this mindset to the world, in the hopes that we can understand and recognize this force.
1. It Can’t Stand Surprises
A hallmark of the New World Order mindset is a distinct intolerance for, or even a hatred of, surprises. For many people, it is a joy and a relief to live spontaneously, at least for some of the time, without having to spell everything out. Not so for the NWO. This mindset has to have absolutely every detail planned out.
Not only that, it needs to ensure nothing can happen to disrupt its plans. Everything must be precisely calculated and tightly controlled. Icke explains it by way of analogy with a sports match. If you want to influence the outcome, you control one team or side; if you want to totally control the outcome, you control both sides. This leaves nothing to chance.
It doesn’t take too much of a stretch of the imagination to see how this plays out in US politics, with rigged elections going all the way back to at least the days of JFK (whose well-connected father Joseph Kennedy bought votes for him) if not much further.
The recent fiasco where Biden got in was shockingly undeniable and blatant riggery, yet Biden still sits in (or rather hides in the basement of) the White House. The NWO doesn’t ‘hope’ a particular candidate gets elected. They make it happen, every time.
In short, the New World Order mindset is that of a control freak. And what is behind the psychology of a control freak? A lack of comfortability with the unknown and with not being in control. In other words, fear (see #11).
2. The PC Woke Movement And Virtue Signaling
The NWO mindset, being very far from a heart-based consciousness, clearly lacks kindness, compassion and empathy. In a world where such a distinct lack of empathy could render it ostracized, the NWO mindset has to make up for that by pretending to care.
However since it is all a ruse, it has to go to great lengths to impress others and visibly demonstrate its (fake) kindness. This is the reason for the Hollywood-style obsession with superficialities and appearances. It’s all about image, baby. This is also the foundation for the recent explosion in the PC (politically correct) woke movement, which never misses an opportunity to demonstrate just how kind it is through its constant virtue signaling.
People who are truly kind don’t need to boast how kind they are; people who are truly secure don’t need to show off to hide their insecurity; people who truly see others as humans, all equal, looking at their character not their skin color, don’t need to go around proclaiming how wonderfully anti-racist they are.
3. Military-Style Perception Management: More Spin Than A Washing Machine
To go further with this point, the NWO mindset doesn’t just obsess over image to virtue signal its woke credentials (to cover up for its lack of heart); it also obsesses over image to control mass belief, opinion and perception. It’s military-style perception management.
This is reflected in what some of its adherents have said. Take arch-NWO insider and war criminalHenry Kissinger, for example, who once stated that “it is not a matter of what is true that counts, but a matter of what is perceived to be true.”
In this case, what is driving the obsession over image is also a raw lust for control, and a lack of tolerance for widespread distribution of power and decentralized decision-making.
It’s about entrainment, the bringing of other mindsets down to its level and frequency so that it can control them. This leads the NWO mindset to spin the truth on every topic under the sun to make itself look better and to mold people’s perceptions to further its own objectives.
4. Always Right, Never Wrong
Ever met a person who always has to be right no matter what? What about a person who will argue, defend and find loopholes in every situation because they’re deadly afraid of being wrong? Either way, such people are characterized by a lack of responsibility and a lack of being willing to take the blame when they deserve it.
Former CIA director and Secretary of State under Trump, Zionist Mike Pompeo, proudly proclaimed that in his days at the CIA, “We lied, we cheated, we stole!” The NWO mindset will do whatever it takes to advance its agenda, even if it has to lie, cheat, steal, injure and kill.
5. It Can’t Do Empathy
Continuing on from point #2, the NWO mindset is devoid of compassion, so it doesn’t quite know how to do it. It doesn’t pull off empathy very well. An instructional example are the recent absurd CIA woke ads, where the CIA is desperately trying to convince you that they are something they are not.
Think about it – this is an agency that has consistently instigated, over the course of 7+ decades, some of the most evil and monstrous acts done by humans on the planet, including overthrowing foreign governments, assassinating foreign and domestic leaders (e.g. JFK), selling weapons illegally, bolstering the production of dangerous drugs (heroin and cocaine) so as import them into the US on the blackmarket, controlling the media by paying off journalists via Operation Mockingbird (see #3 on perception management) and running mind control experiments on its own citizens (MK Ultra).
Now, we are suddenly supposed to believe the CIA has grown a conscience and deeply, truly cares about minorities, racial issues and gender equality? It is beyond ridiculous, however the good thing about it all is that the NWO mindset doesn’t see how transparent its woke attempts are.
6. It Projects A False Sense Of Omnipotence
The New World Order mindset is very much like the Borg from Star Trek. One of their key mantras was: “Resistance is futile.” This is the message the mindset keeps projecting.
It desperately wants us to believe its nefarious agenda of control is a fait accompli, a forgone conclusion, when it is not. Think about it: a truly omnipotent force does not need to convince you that it is omnipotent and that you cannot resist. Its strength would become apparent and their would be no need for attempts at persuasion.
Only a force that is secretly weak, but is trying to project an image of strength, would resort to this kind of psychological messaging.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, many times: the New World Order is not set in stone. Your very act of reading these words, and taking this message to heart in an empowered way, is stopping the NWO nightmare from becoming a reality. The world is waking up and this process cannot be stopped.
7. Censorship And Cancel Culture: It Can’t Stand Shades Of Grey Or Opposing Views
Another clue that the NWO mindset is rigid, as well as inherently insecure and weak, is that it can’t stand shades of grey or opposing views. It gets very caught up in dogmatic black-and-white thinking.
The explosion of censorship and cancel culture over the last few years is indicative of a vast insecurity. Censorship is a tacit admission by the censors that their arguments, theories or beliefs are very weak, because they can’t hold their own in the battlefield of open debate, where ideas are exchanged freely and analyzed critically.
8. It Can’t Tolerate Humor
Stop laughing! No jokes allowed! The NWO mindset takes itself very seriously, so seriously in fact that it can’t tolerate humor. John Lennon instinctively realized this truth when he advised people to just laugh at the system:
“When it gets down to having to use violence, then you are playing the system’s game. The establishment will irritate you – pull your beard, flick your face – to make you fight. Because once they’ve got you violent, then they know how to handle you. The only thing they don’t know how to handle is non-violence and humor.”
The PC movement has been killing comedy, but those true comedians out there will realize that it’s their job to communicate the hard truths (that people would prefer not to hear or confront) under the guise of humor. Thanks George Carlin – you are a legend.
Laughing at the absurdity of the official narrative, whether it’s Operation Coronavirus or any other false flag kind of operation, is a great way both to communicate truth and defuse the sweat and tension that comes with being a truthseeker and freedom fighter.
9. It Looks At The Rest Of Humanity As Cattle
An empathetic mindset consider the feelings and needs of those around it. The psychopathic NWO mindset looks at people around it as things to be exploited or used for its own gain.
Some people studying the worldwide conspiracy believe it’s all about the money. It’s not. Yes, on many levels, it is about the money, because the New World Order mindset uses the manipulation of money to siphon off wealth from society via its bloodline banking families.
However, it’s not just about the money. Money is a tool of control, and the NWO agenda is about long-term power and control. Money is a means to an end. This agenda is millennia old, intergenerational and involves interdimensional beings, all of which is obviously well beyond the scope of this article. Money is just a tool to this mindset.
11. It Is Always Anxious And Afraid
Now we come to the penultimate point and the crux of the matter. The NWO mindset is paranoid, anxious and afraid. This explains the constant psychological projections it spews out, such as calling genuine truth seekers “paranoid conspiracy theorists” merely for questioning things and thinking critically.
It is paranoid that it will be exposed and uncovered at any moment. It is anxious, always on edge, always pushing its agenda, worried things may not work. The New World Order mindset promotes so much fear because it feels so much fear. It is fear!
(For those wanting a deeper understanding of this, please check out my articles on wetiko and the Archons.)
Beneath all the analysis, it is fear. The NWO mindset is deathly afraid of a united, awakened humanity rising up in a non-violent, non-compliant way to step into its true divine power. Unfortunately for the NWO mindset, that is our birthright and nothing can stop it.
“Based on the recurring behavior of these powerful families and individuals throughout history and today, we can observe what psychologists and psychiatrists call observable traits associated with a condition called clinical (primary) psychopathy. This is a genetic (congenital) condition characterized by the inability to feel the otherwise normal human emotions of empathy, guilt, and remorse. Innately devoid of these restraints, needless war, terrorist events, famine, genocide, assassinations, and mind control and manipulation become everyday business practices.”
12. It’s Cut Off From Spirit / Source / God / Infinite Consciousness
Call it what you like – Spirit, Source, God, Infinite Consciousness, etc. – whatever your notion is of what we come from, what we return into and what we are. The New World Order mindset is cut off from its connection with the infinite. It is so focused on the 5-sense world of particles and gross materialism that it has no appreciation for an expanded awareness.
To put it another way, the ruling class who is possessed by this mindset are so cut off from god they have to play god – and thus we get transhumanism, the desire to be immortal even though we already are. This transhumanistic desire is based on a denial and rejection of our souls, and a fear of death. Thus, so much of this mindset comes back to fear.
Operation Coronavirus Is A Rush To The Finish Line
Consider this point. The usual modus operandi of the New World Order is to use the frog-in-a-boiling-pot approach, to slowly introduce and force its agenda upon people step-by-step so that they don’t notice. However since the launch of Operation Coronavirus, the NWO has changed its tactics.
What is unfolding now appears to be more a mad rush to the finish line – before it gets overtaken and loses the race. As I have outlined above, the New World Order mindset is always afraid of getting caught in a lie and getting found out.
There seems to be a scramble underway to get as many people as possible vaccinated with the highly magneticCOVID non-vaccine while the official narrative still holds some sway over people’s minds. However, with a growing awareness that this entire COVID op is a giant scamdemic, replete with fake case counts, fake PCR tests, fake death counts and a fake virus, the truth has spread far and wide. It’s turning into a race against time. Will the NWO infuse their nanobots and fibers into humanity before people sufficiently awaken?
Solutions To Disrupt The New World Order Mindset
So what are the solutions? Well, give the NWO what it can’t stand and doesn’t like! It hates surprises, so give it surprises! It hates humor, so laugh at it! It thinks it’s omnipotent, so prod its weaknesses.
It loves to censor, so refuse to self-censor! It thrives on violence, so non-violently resist. It needs your energy, obedience and compliance, so refuse to comply!
Finally, do the inner work to weed out any aspect of the New World Order mindset within yourself. This is the hardest part of all of this, but each and every one of us must do this work. No one else can do it for you. Consider honestly how much of this mindset is within you, then work to identify it, integrate it and transform it.
As Jung said, “One who looks outside, dreams. One who looks inside, awakens.” Being aware of every detail of the NWO is good, and being aware of solutions is good, but we must transform ourselves within to change the world outside.
There is a sequence of outright lies and fabrications used to justify far-reaching policy decisions which in the course of the last 18 months are literally destroying people’s lives Worldwide.
“Fake science” is used to justify confinement, social distancing, the face mask, the prohibition of social gatherings, cultural and sports events, the closure of economic activity, all of which are upheld as a means to repealing the “killer virus”.
Who is this “Killer Virus” which has been personified by both the media and our governments, held responsible for triggering economic and social chaos Worldwide?
You might recall that at the height of the February 2020 financial collapse, “V the Virus” was held responsible for the largest stock market crash since 1929.
Has the “Killer Virus” been Identified. Has SARS-CoV-2 been Isolated?
This article will review this contentious issue starting at the outset of the crisis in January 2020. Part of this analysis is based on research conducted in early 2020.
The central question raised in this review is the following: is there reliable evidence provided by the WHO and national health authorities that the alleged SARS-CoV-2 virus has been isolated/purified from an “unadulterated sample taken from a diseased patient”?
While the alleged virus was initially defined as the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) in January 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) stated in January 2020 that it did not have in its possession details regarding the isolation/purification and identity of 2019-nCoV.
And because details concerning isolation / purification were not available, the WHO decided to “customize” The Real Time Reverse Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction (rRT-PCR) Test using the alleged “similar” 2003 SARS virus (subsequently renamed SARS-1) as “a point of reference” for detecting genetic fragments of the novel 2019-nCoV.
What this decision entails is that novel 2019-CoV-2 is NOT a novel virus. It was categorized by the Chinese authorities and the WHO as “similar” to the 2003 SARS-CoV as well as to MERS.
2003 SARS-CoV was subsequently renamed SARS-CoV-1.
History: Isolation of the Virus
Chinese Health Authorities
The Chinese authorities announced on January 7, 2020 that “a new type of virus” had been identified “similar to the one associated with SARS and MERS” (related report , not original Chinese government source). The underlying method is described below:
We prospectively collected and analysed data on patients with laboratory-confirmed 2019-nCoV infection by real-time RT-PCR and next-generation sequencing.
Data were obtained with standardised data collection forms shared by WHO and the International Severe Acute Respiratory and Emerging Infection Consortium from electronic medical records. (emphasis added)
The following article entitled “A new coronavirus associated with human respiratory disease in China, (Nature, February 3, 2021) was among the first to report on the China’s novel coronavirus:…[We] collected bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF) and performed deep meta-transcriptomic sequencing. The clinical specimen was handled in a biosafety level 3 laboratory at Shanghai Public Health Clinical Center. Total RNA was extracted from 200 μl of BALF and a meta-transcriptomic library was constructed for pair-end (150-bp reads) sequencing using an Illumina MiniSeq as previously described 4,6,7,8. .In total, we generated 56,565,928 sequence reads that were de novo-assembled and screened for potential aetiological agents. ….The genome sequence of this virus, as well as its termini, were determined and confirmed by reverse-transcription PCR (RT–PCR)10 and 5′/3′ rapid amplification of cDNA ends (RACE), respectively. This virus strain was designated as WH-Human 1 coronavirus (WHCV) (and has also been referred to as ‘2019-nCoV’) and its whole genome sequence (29,903 nt) has been assigned GenBank accession number MN908947. .The viral genome organization of WHCV was determined by sequence alignment to two representative members of the genus Betacoronavirus: a coronavirus associated with humans (SARS-CoV Tor2, GenBank accession number AY274119)  and a coronavirus associated with bats (bat SL-CoVZC45, GenBank accession number MG772933) . (Nature, February 3, 2020) .
It is unclear from the above quotations as well as from the documents consulted, whether the Chinese health authorities undertook an isolation / purification of a patient’s specimen.
US Centre for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)
Following the Chinese announcement on the 28th of January 2020, the US Centre for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) stated that the novela corona virus had been isolated.The CDC statement dated January 28th, 2020 (updated December 2020) is unequivocal:
SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, was isolated in the laboratory and is available for research by the scientific and medical community.
On January 20, 2020, CDC received a clinical specimen collected from the first reported U.S. patient infected with SARS-CoV-2. CDC immediately placed the specimen into cell culture to grow a sufficient amount of virus for study.
On February 2, 2020, CDC generated enough SARS-CoV-2 grown in cell culture to distribute to medical and scientific researchers.
On February 4, 2020, CDC shipped SARS-CoV-2 to the BEI Resources Repository.
An article discussing the isolation and characterization of this virus specimen is available in Emerging Infectious Diseases.
One important way that CDC has supported global efforts to study and learn about SARS-CoV-2 in the laboratory was by growing the virus in cell culture and ensuring that it was widely available. Researchers in the scientific and medical community can use virus obtained from this work in their studies.
SARS-CoV-2 strains supplied by CDC and other researchers can be requested, free, from the Biodefense and Emerging Infections Research (BEI) Resources Repositoryexternal icon by established institutions that meet BEI requirements. These requirements include maintaining appropriate facilities and safety programs, as well as having the appropriate expertise. BEI supplies organisms and reagents to the broader community of microbiology and infectious disease researchers. (Emphasis added).
See also related study which was posted on the CDC website.
The CDC Acknowledges that SARS-CoV-2 has not been Isolated.
The official CDC document, (dated July 21, 2021) entitled “CDC 2019-Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel reads as follows:
Since no quantified virus isolates of the 2019-nCoV were available for CDC use at the time the test was developed [January 2020] and this study conducted, assays designed for detection of the 2019-nCoV RNA were tested with characterized stocks of in vitro transcribed full length RNA (N gene; GenBank accession: MN908947.2) of known titer (RNA copies/µL) spiked into a diluent consisting of a suspension of human A549 cells and viral transport medium (VTM) to mimic clinical specimen. (emphasis added, page 40)
Compare the above statement to the CDC January 28th, 2020 advisory confirming the isolation of SARS-CoV-2:
On January 20, 2020, CDC received a clinical specimen collected from the first reported U.S. patient infected with SARS-CoV-2. CDC immediately placed the specimen into cell culture to grow a sufficient amount of virus for study.
See the analysis of CDC responses in the section below on Freedom of Information Requests.
The World Health Organization (WHO) Did Not Undertake The Isolation / Purification of a Specimen
From the documents quoted below, the Chinese authorities did not provide the WHO with a specimen ofisolated / purified SARS-CoV-2.
And because details concerning isolation were not available, the WHO decided to “customize” its Real Time Reverse Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction (rRT-PCR) test using a so-called isolate of the “similar” 2003 SARS corona virus (subsequently renamed SARS-CoV-1) as “a point of reference” (or proxy) for detecting genetic fragments of the 2019 SARS-CoV-2.
While Drosten et al’s study confirmed that “several viral genome sequences had been released”, in the case of 2019-nCoV, “virus isolates or samples from infected patients were not available … ”
The recommendations to the WHO were as follows:
“The genome sequences suggest presence of a virus closely related to the members of a viral species termed severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-related CoV,a species defined by the agent of the 2002/03 outbreak of SARS in humans [3,4].
We report on the the establishment and validation of a diagnostic workflow for 2019-nCoV screening and specific confirmation [using the RT-PCR test], designed in absence of available virus isolates or original patient specimens. Design and validation were enabled by the close genetic relatedness to the 2003 SARS-CoV, and aided by the use of synthetic nucleic acid technology.” (Eurosurveillance, January 23, 2020, emphasis added).
What this bold statement suggests is that the isolation / purification of 2019-nCoV was not required and that “validation” would be enabled by “the close genetic relatedness to the 2003-SARS-CoV.”
The investigative report provides detailed documentation based on Freedom of Information (FOI) requests addressed to ninety Health /Science institutions in a large number of countries.
The responses to these requests confirm that there is no record of isolation / purification of SARS-CoV-2 “having been performed by anyone, anywhere, ever.”
“The 90 Health /Science institutions that have responded thus far have provided and/or cited, in total, zero such records:
Our requests [under “freedom of information”] have not been limited to records of isolation performed by the respective institution, or limited to records authored by the respective institution, rather they were open to any records describing “COVID-19 virus” (aka “SARS-COV-2”) isolation/purification performed by anyone, ever, anywhere on the planet.”
The Centre for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)
The CDC was contacted by the author of this report in the form of four separate requests: November 2, 2020, March 1, 2021, March 3, 2021, which are reviewed below:
March 1, 2021:The CDC again made clear that they still have no records of “SARS-COV-2” isolation performed by anyone, anywhere on the planet, ever… just not in so many words. Instead, the CDC absurdly implied that isolation/purification of “SARS-COV-2” would require the replication of a “virus” without host cells and thus is impossible. (The request had nothing to do with replication.)
CDC again failed to provide/cite any records describing “SARS-COV-2” isolation/purification by anyone anywhere ever… but would no longer simply say so (as they did on November 2nd); instead they gave song and dance citing the study by Harcourt et al. which is the same one posted on CDC’s website:
Here are 5 compilation pdfs containing FOI responses from 79 institutions in 22 countries/jurisdictions, re the isolation/purification/existence of “SARS-COV-2”, as well as emails from authors of studies that claimed to have “isolated the virus” and an email from the Head of the Consultant Laboratory for Diagnostic Electron Microscopy of Infectious Pathogens at Germany’s Robert Koch Institut, last updated July 13, 2021
Screenshot of a selected responses are provided below : New Zealand, Canada, UK.
Consult the full archive of letters and responses. This work was undertaken over a period of more than 12 months.
“Gemma O’Doherty is an Investigative Journalist in Ireland.
“This Irish Investigation into Covid shows that The Department of Health refuses to confirm the existence of a “virus” in writing. Confirmation that the virus was never isolated.”
“As part of our legal action we had been demanding the evidence that this virus actually exists [as well as] evidence that lock downs actually have any impact on the spread of viruses; that face-masks are safe, and do deter the spread of viruses – They don’t. No such studies exist; that social distancing is based in science – It isn’t. it’s made up; that contact tracing has any bearing on the spread of a virus – of course it doesn’t. This organization here – is making it up as they go along.” – Gemma O’Doherty
Isolation of the Virus. The Legal Battle in Alberta. Patrick King
Patrick King. The Virus Has Not Been Isolated! “No I Did Not Win The Court Case”. “They Do Not Have the Evidence”.
The following video features Patrick King in his legal Battle against the Alberta Government. There are a lot of people in Alberta and around the World who are Fighting against the Big Lie.
Concluding Remarks: “Biggest Medical Fraud in World History”
SARS-CoV-2 has not been isolated. Does the virus Exist?
Neither the Chinese authorities nor the CDC, the WHO, national governments, scientific / health authorities have provided evidence that SARS-CoV-2 has been isolated /purified.
Based on the investigative research of Christine Malley we have access to the responses of numerous governments and health authorities, including that provided by the Republic of Ireland to journalist Gemma O’Doherty.
What this means is that the entire covid narrative falls flat.
We have been systematically misled.
Everything you have been told by your governments is a lie, a complexity of lies and falsehoods.
There is no pandemic. The isolation / purification of the virus has not been undertaken.
All the policies adopted by governments worldwide allegedly to “save lives” are illegal, socially destructive and in violation of fundamental human rights.
These policies have been instrumental in “destroying people’s lives”.
Dr. Stephen Frost refers to the alleged “Covid pandemic” as“The Biggest Medical Fraud in World History”.
From the outset in January 2020, the flawed and invalid RT-PCR test was used to “detect” the alleged 2019 SARS-CoV-2 virus, despite the fact that details regarding the isolation/purification of the original virus were not available.
Curbing the alleged SARS-CoV-2 pandemic through the imposition of face masks, social distancing, closing down of national economies are of a criminal nature, they have absolutely no validity,
The original strain of SARS-CoV-2 has not be isolated /purified: How does that affect the process of so-called “detection” of the “deadly variants” of the original virus?
Mortality and Morbidity: While there is “No Killer Virus”, there is a “Killer Vaccine”.
While the SARS-CoV-2 virus is presented by the media and the governments as a “killer virus” (when in fact the WHO and CDC describe it as “similar to seasonal influenza”, a totally invalid and dysfunctional Covid -19 vaccine is currently being imposed on the entire population of Planet Earth: 7.9 billion people.
It’s a multibillion dollar endeavour with Pfizer in the lead, establishing a near Worldwide monopoly for the sale and distribution of the mRNA killer vaccine.
How did Big Pharma manage to develop a vaccine (sponsored by the WHO, GAVI, the Gates Foundation, et al) with a mandate “to protect people” against a virus which has not been isolated/ purified?
Moreover, 2019SARS-CoV-2 has been categorized as similar to the 2003 SARS-CoV which means that the 2019 SARS-CoV-2 is not a novel virus.
The legitimacy of the Covid vaccine project hinges upon the hundreds of thousands of RT-PCR fake positive cases Worldwide combined with fake Covid related mortality data.
Big Pharma’s mRNA vaccine has resulted in countless deaths and injuries Worldwide which are barely reported by the mainstream media.
While we do not have figures for the entire Planet, the latest official figures for the European Union and the U.S are revealing. Bear in mind they vastly underestimate the real trends in vaccin related mortality and morbidity:EU/EEA/Switzerland to 31 July 2021 – 20,595 Covid-19 injection related deaths and over 1.94 million injuries, per EudraVigilance Database.
UK to 21 July 2021 – 1,517 Covid-19 injection related deaths and over 1.1 million injuries, per MHRA Yellow Card Scheme.
USA to 23 July 2021 – 11,940 Covid-19 injection related deaths and over 2.4 million injuries, per VAERS database.
TOTAL for EU/UK/USA – 34,052 Covid-19 injection related deaths and over 5.46 million injuries reported as at 1 August 2021
Nota Bene: It is important to be aware that the official figures above (reported to the health authorities) are but a small percentage of the actual figures. Furthermore, people continue to die (and suffer injury) from the injections with every day which passes. (D4CE
So why are governments pressuring people to get vaccinated?
Heads of State and heads of government Worldwide are being pressured, bribed, coopted and/or threatened by powerful financial interests into accepting the Covid vaccine consensus. The vaccine passport is the endgame, which constitutes a transition towards digital tyranny.
The study and reports analyzed in this article should be used to confront politicians.
Does the virus Exist?
The governments and the WHO do not have a Leg to Stand On. And neither does Bill Gates.
What we must seek is to confront a very fragile consensus, which is based on fraud and deceit.
PS: I remain indebted to Christine Massey for her extensive research and investigation on the issue of isolation /purification.
The covid-vaccine makers are allowed to create a one-size-fits-all product, with no testing on sub-populations (i.e. people with specific health conditions), and yet they are unwilling to accept any responsibility for any adverse events or deaths their products cause.
If a company is not willing to stand behind their product as safe, especially one they rushed to market and skipped animal trials on, I am not willing to take a chance on their product.
No liability. No trust.
#2: THE CHECKERED PAST OF THE VACCINE COMPANIES
The four major companies who are making these covid vaccines are/have either:
Never brought a vaccine to market before covid (Moderna and Johnson & Johnson).
Are serial felons (Pfizer, and Astra Zeneca).
Are both (Johnson & Johnson).
Moderna had been trying to “Modernize our RNA” (thus the company name)–for years, but had never successfully brought ANY product to market–how nice for them to get a major cash infusion from the government to keep trying.
In fact, all major vaccine makers (save Moderna) have paid out tens of billions of dollars in damages for other products they brought to market when they knew those products would cause injuries and death–see Vioxx, Bextra, Celebrex, Thalidomide, and opioids as a few examples.
If drug companies willfully choose to put harmful products in the market, when they can be sued, why would we trust any product where they have NO liability?
In case it hasn’t sunk in, let me reiterate…3 of the 4 covid vaccine makers have been sued for products they brought to market even though they knew injuries and deaths would result.
Given the free pass from liability, and the checkered past of these companies, why would we assume that all their vaccines are safe and made completely above board?
Where else in life would we trust someone with that kind of reputation?
To me that makes as much sense as expecting a remorseless, abusive, unfaithful lover to become a different person because a judge said deep down they are a good person.
No. I don’t trust them.
No liability. No trust.
Here’s another reason why I don’t trust them.
#3: THE UGLY HISTORY OF ATTEMPTS TO MAKE CORONAVIRUS VACCINES
There have been many attempts to make viral vaccines in the past that ended in utter failure, which is why we did not have a coronavirus vaccine in 2020.
In the 1960’s, scientists attempted to make an RSV (Respiratory Syncytial Virus) vaccine for infants.
In that study, they skipped animal trials because they weren’t necessary back then.
In the end, the vaccinated infants got much sicker than the unvaccinated infants when exposed to the virus in nature, with 80% of the vaccinated infants requiring hospitalization, and two of them died.
After 2000, scientists made many attempts to create coronavirus vaccines.
For the past 20 years, all ended in failure because the animals in the clinical trials got very sick and many died, just like the children in the 1960’s.
You can read a summary of this history/science here.
Or if you want to read the individual studies you can check out these links:
The vaccine makers have no data to suggest their rushed vaccines have overcome that problem.
In other words, never before has any attempt to make a coronavirus vaccine been successful, nor has the gene-therapy technology that is mRNA “vaccines” been safely brought to market, but hey, since they had billions of dollars in government funding, I’m sure they figured that out.
Except they don’t know if they have…
#4: THE “DATA GAPS” SUBMITTED TO THE FDA BY THE VACCINE MAKERS
When vaccine makers submitted their papers to the FDA for the Emergency Use Authorization (Note: An EUA is not the same as a full FDA approval), among the many “Data Gaps” they reported was that they have nothing in their trials to suggest they overcame that pesky problem of Vaccine Enhanced Disease.
They simply don’t know–i.e. they have no idea if the vaccines they’ve made will also produce the same cytokine storm (and deaths) as previous attempts at such products.
“Previous attempts to develop an mRNA-based drug using lipid nanoparticles failed and had to be abandoned because when the dose was too low, the drug had no effect, and when dosed too high, the drug became too toxic. An obvious question is: What has changed that now makes this technology safe enough for mass use?”
If that’s not alarming enough, here are other gaps in the data–i.e. there is no data to suggest safety or efficacy regarding:
Anyone younger than age 18 or older than age 55
Pregnant or lactating mothers
No data on transmission of covid
No data on preventing mortality from covid
No data on duration of protection from covid
Hard to believe right?
In case you think I’m making this up, or want to see the actual documents sent to the FDA by Pfizer and Moderna for their Emergency Use Authorization, you can check out this, or this respectively. The data gaps can be found starting with page 46 and 48 respectively.
For now let’s turn our eyes to the raw data the vaccine makers used to submit for emergency use authorization.
#5: NO ACCESS TO THE RAW DATA FROM THE TRIALS
Would you like to see the raw data that produced the “90% and 95% effective” claims touted in the news?
But they won’t let us see that data.
As pointed out in the BMJ, something about the Pfizer and Moderna efficacy claims smells really funny.
There were “3,410 total cases of suspected, but unconfirmed covid-19 in the overall study population, 1,594 occurred in the vaccine group vs. 1,816 in the placebo group.”
Did they fail to do science in their scientific study by not verifying a major variable?
Could they not test those “suspected but unconfirmed” cases to find out if they had covid?
Why not test all 3,410 participants for the sake of accuracy?
Can we only guess they didn’t test because it would mess up their “90-95% effective” claims?
Where’s the FDA?
Would it not be prudent for the FDA, to expect (demand) that the vaccine makers test people who have “covid-like symptoms,” and release their raw data so outside, third-parties could examine how the manufacturers justified the numbers?
I mean it’s only every citizen of the world we’re trying to get to take these experimental products…
Why did the FDA not require that? Isn’t that the entire purpose of the FDA anyway?
Foxes guarding the hen house?
Seems like it.
No liability. No trust.
#6: NO LONG-TERM SAFETY TESTING
Obviously, with products that have only been on the market a few months, we have no long-term safety data.
In other words, we have no idea what this product will do in the body months or years from now–for ANY population.
Given all the risks above (risks that ALL pharmaceutical products have), would it not be prudent to wait to see if the worst-case scenarios have indeed been avoided?
Would it not make sense to want to fill those pesky “data gaps” before we try to give this to every man, woman, and child on the planet?
Well…that would make sense, but to have that data, they need to test it on people, which leads me to my next point…
#7: NO INFORMED CONSENT
What most who are taking the vaccine don’t know is that because these products are still in clinical trials, anyone who gets the shot is now part of the clinical trial.
They are part of the experiment.
Those (like me) who do not take it, are part of the control group.
Time will tell how this experiment works out.
But, you may be asking, if the vaccines are causing harm, wouldn’t we be seeing that all over the news?
Surely the FDA would step in and pause the distribution?
#8: UNDER-REPORTING OF ADVERSE REACTIONS AND DEATH
According to a study done by Harvard (at the commission of our own government), less than 1% of all adverse reactions to vaccines are actually submitted to the National Vaccine Adverse Events Reports System (VAERS) – read page 6 at the link above.
While the problems with VAERS have not been fixed (as you can read about in this letter to the CDC), at the time of this writing VAERS reports over 2,200 deaths from the current covid vaccines, as well as close to 60,000 adverse reactions.
“VAERS data released today showed 50,861 reports of adverse events following COVID vaccines, including 2,249 deaths and 7,726 serious injuries between Dec. 14, 2020 and March 26, 2021.”
If those numbers are still only 1% of the total adverse reactions (or .8 to 2% of what this study published recently in the JAMA found), you can do the math, but that equates to somewhere around 110,000 to 220,000 deaths from the vaccines to date, and a ridiculous number of adverse reactions.
Bet you didn’t see that on the news.
That death number would currently still be lower than the 424,000 deaths from medical errors that happen every year (which you probably also don’t hear about), but we are not even six months into the rollout of these vaccines yet.
Why would I take a risk on a product, that doesn’t stop infection or transmission, to help me overcome a cold that has a .26% chance of killing me–actually in my age range is has about a .1% chance of killing me (and .01% chance of killing my kids), but let’s not split hairs here.
With a bar (death rate) that low, we will be in lockdown every year…i.e. forever.
But wait, what about the 500,000 plus deaths, that’s alarming right?
I’m glad you asked.
#12: THE BLOATED COVID DEATH NUMBERS
Something smells really funny about this one.
Never before in the history of death certificates has our own government changed how deaths are reported.
Why now, are we reporting everyone who dies with covid in their body, as having died of covid, rather than the co-morbidities that actually took their life?
Until covid, all coronaviruses (common colds) were never listed as the primary cause of death when someone died of heart disease, cancer, diabetes, auto-immune conditions, or any other major co-morbidity.
The disease was listed as the cause of death, and a confounding factor like flu or pneumonia was listed on a separate line.
To bloat the number even more, both the W.H.O. and the C.D.C. changed their guidelines such that those who are suspected or probable (but were never confirmed) of having died of covid, are also included in the death numbers.
If we are going to do that then should we not go back and change the numbers of all past cold and flu seasons so we can compare apples to apples when it comes to death rates?
According to the CDCs own numbers, (scroll down to the section “Comorbidities and other conditions”) only 6% of the deaths being attributed to covid are instances where covid seems to be the only issue at hand.
In other words, reduce the death numbers you see on the news by 94% and you have what is likely the real numbers of deaths from just covid.
Mr. Fauci, you have some explaining to do…and I hope the cameras are recording when you have to defend your actions.
For now, let’s turn our attention back to the virus…
#15: THE VIRUS CONTINUES TO MUTATE
Not only does the virus (like all viruses) continue to mutate, but according to world-renowned vaccine developer Geert Vanden Bossche (who you’ll meet below if you don’t know him) it’s mutating about every 10 hours.
How in the world are we going to keep creating vaccines to keep up with that level of mutation?
With so much at stake, why are we fed only one narrative…shouldn’t many perspectives be heard and professionally debated?
WHAT HAS HAPPENED TO SCIENCE?
What has happened to the scientific method of always challenging our assumptions?
What happened to lively debate in this country, or at least in Western society?
Why did anyone who disagrees with the WHO, or the CDC get censored so heavily?
Is the science of public health a religion now, or is science supposed to be about debate?
If someone says “the science is settled” that’s how I know I’m dealing with someone who is closed minded.
By definition science (especially biological science) is never settled.
If it was, it would be dogma, not science.
OK, before I get too worked up, let me say this…
I WANT TO BE A GOOD CITIZEN
I really do.
If lockdowns work, I want to do my part and stay home.
If masks work, I want to wear them.
If social distancing is effective, I want to comply.
But, if there is evidence they don’t (masks for example), I want to hear that evidence too.
If highly-credentialed scientists have different opinions, I want to know what they think.
I want a chance to hear their arguments and make up my own mind.
I don’t think I’m the smartest person in the world, but I think I can think.
Maybe I’m weird, but if someone is censored, then I REALLY want to hear what they think.
To all my friends who don’t have a problem with censorship, will you have the same opinion when what you think is censored?
Is censorship not the technique of dictators, tyrants, and greedy, power-hungry people?
Is it not a sign that those who are doing the censoring know it’s the only way they can win?
What if a man who spent his entire life developing vaccines was willing to put his entire reputation on the line and call on all global leaders to immediately stop the covid vaccines because of problems with the science?
What if he pleaded for an open-scientific debate on a global stage?
Would you want to hear what he has to say?
Would you want to see the debate he’s asking for?
#17: THE WORLD’S LEADING VACCINOLOGIST IS SOUNDING THE ALARM…
Here is what may be the biggest reason this covid vaccine doesn’t make sense to me.
When someone who is very pro-vaccine, who has spent his entire professional career overseeing the development of vaccines, is shouting from the mountaintops that we have a major problem, I think the man should be heard.
Within the World Economic Forum’s Great Reset, the mantra has come out that by the year 2030, “you’ll own nothing. And you’ll be happy.”
For those of us who haven’t been brainwashed by communism, this likely seems somewhat disturbing. But let us examine just how one can ensure “people don’t own anything.”
Let’s look at what a world without personal property looks like.
“If it were up to me, anybody not wearing a mask when they are out in public would be arrested … That’s an act of domestic terrorism and should be treated like one,” Lancaster, California, Mayor Rex Parris.
Let’s start with the low-hanging fruit, shall we? John Locke pointed out that “Every man has a property in his own person,” with Paul Skousen further adding that your body is your first piece of original property that you own. If you are to own nothing, does it not follow that your body will no longer be your own as well?
We already see the fruits of this type of thinking in forced (or coerced)vaccinations for people to work and travel (and not be arrested). We’ve most certainly seen this with mandatory masking. What could be the further logical progressions of this type of thought, though?
Is mandatory sterilization out of the question? What about forced organ donation? Are these indeed that far out of a concept – are they not the next logical step – in a world where you own nothing?
“The theory of communism may be summed up in the single sentence: abolition of private property.” – Karl Marx.
You will no longer own your house. And if you no longer hold the right to choice, your body, or your property, then you likely won’t have much of a say as to where you would reside either.
Perhaps climate change could be argued as a reason to move all people into cities. Maybe racism/equity could be claimed as to why your home is being given to somebody else.
Regardless of which form it takes place, there are excellent odds that you would not be permitted to live where you want for long.
The Death Of The Second Amendment
“The meaning of peace is the absence of opposition to socialism.” – Karl Marx
Your right to defend is centered around your right to life and right to own property. As illustrated above, if you no longer own the right to your own body, you in essence no longer own the right to your own life either. As such, there’s nothing for you to defend. “We – the government – will do that for you.”
Likewise, the Second Amendment must be destroyed to crush any potential opposition. In his masterpiece The Road to Serfdom, FA Hayek pointed out that people resist being robbed: whether that be by someone with a ski mask or by someone with a badge. The only way that a collectivist can thus ensure that his mandates are followed is by ever-increasing amounts of violence against resistors.
This act is sorely hampered by those who are capable of defending themselves against attack. It is much easier to force an unarmed populace to bend to your every whim (witness current Australia, Canada, or the UK), and thus, America must be disarmed.
Vaporization Of Savings Or Nationalization Of Savings
“Because we have been guided by a Republican administration who believes in the simplistic notion that people who have wealth are entitled to keep it and they have an antipathy to our means of redistributing wealth.” – Jim Moran (D-VA) November 10, 2008
If you are to own nothing, that means that you can no longer have anything in your savings. Any money you have put into a 401k, savings account, safety deposit boxes, or the like will be vaporized overnight. It can come about through three main mechanisms.
The first is through hyperinflation. As John Stormer pointed out in None Dare Call It Treason, hyperinflation was one of the prime reasons for the communization of China. If you can deflate a nation’s currency to the point that it is worthless (partially accomplished by abandoning the gold standard), you can drive a country into ruin. Once that has happened, you can rebuild out of the ashes – Karl Marx’s intentions for communism all along.
That destroyed nation is now ripe for the harvest by communists who will swiftly step into the void and create a government of their own.
The second way that savings can be confiscated is through nationalization. When a government simply decides that all retirement accounts will be nationalized, you just lost all of your savings through government-sponsored theft. You will likely be given the balm of, “But look, we’ll take care of you. There’s a government pension for you, a universal basic income, free education, free healthcare, free housing, food stamps. Don’t worry. You don’t have your savings anymore, but this ismuch better.”
Keep in mind that a cashless society makes it far easier for the government to control your every cent.
#3 Destruction Of A Nation
The third means that savings can be destroyed is through the destruction of a nation via war.
In much the same way as hyperinflation, invaders climb over the ruins to craft a “new” currency in a nation. It can occur via outright war/invasion or by “humanitarian aid” following some sort of national tragedy that leaves a nation in ruins.
Nationalization Of Your Business
“Socialism is the doctrine that man has no right to exist for his own sake. That his life and his work do not belong to him, but belong to society, that the only justification of his existence is his service to society, and that society may dispose of him in any way it pleases for the sake of whatever it deems to be its own tribal, collective good.” – Ayn Rand
Your business is a part of your property. It enables you to produce – with production being true wealth, as Ayn Rand pointed out – and thus, it must be taken from you as well. It will likely come via the nationalization of all businesses.
This already happened in the past (e.g., nationalization of railroads) and must be enforced for the WEF’s intentions of a ‘no property planet’ to be realized.
Whether you’ll still be permitted to work in your chosen field remains to be seen. Choice is an aspect of freedom (the second domain according to John Stuart Mill), and only a fool would believe that the WEF is about freedom.
Thus, it is highly likely that centralized planning would determine where some people would work (e.g., government-sponsored dams, roads, canals, etc.)
Anti-Hoarding Laws Endorsing Government Confiscation
“The family is now one of the major obstacles to improved mental health, and hence should be weakened, if possible, so as to free individuals and especially children from the coercion of family life.” – International Congress on Mental Health, London, 1948
Once more, collectivism throughout history has often resorted to children being held in common. Witness the government confiscation of children in ancient collectivist Sparta. Boys were taken at the age of 7. In the collectivist Incan empire, all girls were turned over to the state at 13.
A third became involved in religious practices, a third were given away as wives/concubines, and the remaining third were slaughtered at the altar. If we look at more recent history, we can see how the Hitler Youth impacted the future of their nation.
The Death Of All Human Rights
“If it were discovered that you had not character and industry enough to be worth all this trouble, you might possibly be executed in a kindly manner…” – George Bernard Shaw, socialist
As Ayn Rand pointed out, once property rights die, all other rights are soon to follow. Property rights are the foundation of all other rights.
Given that the destruction of property rights is the end goal of the World Economic Forum and the Great Reset – as illustrated by their own propaganda – this means that free speech, the right to defense, the right to life will not be that far behind.
In many cases and many ways, these freedoms are already being chiseled away. Do you want to live in a world where that destruction is brought to completion?
What Is To Be Done?
It may come across to some reading as if I am solely spreading fear for fear’s sake itself. I assure you, that is not the case. I am writing this to you because I am genuinely concerned. Think through the logical progressions for yourself.
If you are going to live in a society where you own nothing, what are the logical stepping stones of such a state? What can be inferred?
My conclusions on the matter are by no means original. They come from examining what already happened to humanity and looking at the full implications of a world without property.
By doing the same, I believe you’ll come to the same conclusions as I.
So what does a world where you own nothing look like?
I can guarantee you this: it is one where happiness is an emotion you will have long since forgotten.
A Big Tech-government coalition to control what people see online.
The World Economic Forum, an international group that works to “shape global, regional and industry agendas,” has formed a new “Global Coalition for Digital Safety” that’s made up of Big Tech executives and government officials and intends to come up with new “innovations” to police “harmful content and conduct online.”
The scope of so-called “harmful” content that will be targeted by this Global Coalition for Digital Safety is far-reaching and encompasses both legal content (such as “health misinformation” and “anti-vaccine content”) and illegal content (such as child exploitation and abuse and violent extremism).
Big Tech companies already censor millions of posts under their far-reaching rules that prohibit harmful content and misinformation. They also publish detailed quarterly reports about this censorship.
But according to the World Economic Forum, Big Tech’s current metrics, recommendation systems, and complaints systems are “deficient” which is why “more deliberate coordination between the public and private sector is needed.”
The World Economic Forum intends to deliver this “more deliberate coordination” through its Global Coalition for Digital Safety which will work to tackle what it deems to be harmful content through a series of measures.
These measures include exchanging “best practices for new online safety regulations,” taking “coordinated action to reduce the risk of online harm,” and creating global definitions of harmful content “to enable standardized enforcement, reporting, and measurement across regions.”
The members of this Global Coalition for Digital Safety include officials from the governments or government regulators in Australia, the UK, Indonesia, Ukraine, Bangladesh, and Singapore, an executive from the tech giant Microsoft, and the founder of the artificial intelligence (AI) powered content moderation and profanity filter platform Two Hat Security.
“Global online safety is a collective goal that must be addressed by working across borders as well as by individual nations,” Ofcom Chief Executive Dame Melanie Daws said.
“We look forward to collaborating with international Coalition members to reduce the risk of online harms and build a safer life online for everyone.”
Microsoft’s Chief Digital Safety Officer, Courtney Gregoire, added:
“The World Economic Forum is uniquely positioned to accelerate the public-private collaboration needed to advance digital safety globally, Microsoft is eager to participate and help build whole-of-society solutions to this whole-of-society problem.”
The formation of this global coalition is reflective of tech companies’ increased willingness to collaborate with global governments to censor legal content that they deem to be harmful and to push these governments to introduce more expansive speech regulations.
Similar global coalitions that have attempted to create global censorship standards, such as the Global Internet Forum to Counter Terrorism (GIFCT), have resulted in the automated censorship of satire, media reports, and other types of legal content.
One of our many dear Canadian subscribers emailed me a link to a press conference given in Ontario yesterday at Parliament Hill.
PM Derek Sloan arranged the press conference, and invited Dr. Bryan Bridle, Dr. Patrick Phillips, and Dr. Donald Welsh to give short presentations on how good doctors and scientists are being censored in Canada, and being harassed and threatened for speaking the truth, which is not getting out to the masses.
These men are true heroes! They have put their careers and lives on the line to speak the truth about the genocide currently being carried out and the crimes against humanity over the COVID-19 response and bio-weapon shots.
PM Derek Sloan stated:
“I’ve consistently stood up for Canadians, where no other federal party would.”
He issued a call for whistleblowers within the medical and scientific community in Ontario to contact him. Shocking stories were told, and all agreed that their stories were not being told in either Parliament or the national media.
So he did this press conference on Parliament Hill.
Dr. Bryan Bridle then spoke, explaining how he has been slandered, harassed, and attacked with fake social media accounts put up in his name. His own colleagues have attacked him, and given out confidential medical information about his own parents. His career has been destroyed for speaking out.
“I don’t recognize the country I was born into.”
Dr. Patrick Phillips was next and stated that due to the lockdowns:
“I’ve never seen so many suicidal children.”
He also related how on April 30th the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario came out with a very “chilling statement,” basically stating that only approved COVID measures could be discussed with patients, no proven effective early treatments like Ivermectin could be discussed, that Vitamin D is “fake” news, and they were not allowed to say anything negative about the COVID-19 shots.
Basically they just want people to die. That’s the apparent goal.
Threatening to take his license to practice medicine away for promoting early treatments like Ivermectin, he was not willing to let patients die:
“There’s something bigger going on than my medical career at this point, because lives are being lost and we need to speak out.”
Dr. Donald Welsh came next and gave an impassioned talk about the death of science in Canada.
The censorship of information is at an all time high, but do people really recognize the extent to which it has been and is being carried out? A recent article published in the British Medical Journal by journalist Laurie Clarke has highlighted the fact that Facebook has already removed at least 16 million pieces of content from its platform and added warnings to approximately 167 million others.
YouTube has removed nearly 1 million videos related to, according to them, “dangerous or misleading covid-19 medical information.”
Being an independent media outlet, Collective Evolution has experienced this censorship first hand. We’ve also been in touch with and witnessed many doctors and world renowned scientists be subjected to the same type of treatment from these social media organizations.
I did the same with Dr. Carl Heneghan, a professor of evidence based medicine from Oxford and an emergency GP who wrote an article regarding the efficacy of facemasks in stopping the spread of COVID.
His article was not removed, but a label was added to it by Facebook saying it was ‘fake information.’ There are many more examples.
Clarke’s article says, with regards to posts that have been removed and labelled, that,
“while a portion of that content is likely to be wilfully wrongheaded or vindictively misleading, the pandemic is littered with examples of scientific opinion that have been caught in the dragnet.”
This is true, take for example the ‘lab origins of COVID debate.’ Early on in the pandemic you were not even allowed to mention that COVID may have originated in a lab, and if you did, you were punished for doing so.
Independent media platforms were demonetized and subjected to changes in algorithms. Now, all of a sudden, the mainstream media is discussing it as a legitimate possibility.
It makes no sense.
This underscores the difficulty of defining scientific truth, prompting the bigger question of whether social media platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and YouTube should be tasked with this at all…”
I think it’s quite dangerous for scientific content to be labelled as misinformation, just because of the way people might perceive that,” says Sander van der Linden, professor of social psychology in society at Cambridge University, UK.
“Even though it might fit under a definition (of misinformation) in a very technical sense, I’m not sure if that’s the right way to describe it more generally because it could lead to greater politicisation of science, which is undesirable.” – Clarke
This type of “politicization of science” is exactly what’s happened during this pandemic.
Science is being suppressed for political and financial gain. Covid-19 has unleashed state corruption on a grand scale, and it is harmful to public health. Politicians and industry are responsible for this opportunistic embezzlement. So too are scientists and health experts. The pandemic has revealed how the medical-political complex can be manipulated in an emergency — a time when it is even more important to safeguard science. – Kamran Abbas is a doctor, executive editor of the British Medical Journal, and the editor of the Bulletin of the World Health Organization. (source)
NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden offered his thoughts on the censorship we’ve been seeing during this pandemic in November of last year stating the following,
In secret, these companies had all agreed to work with the U.S. Government far beyond what the law required of them, and that’s what we’re seeing with this new censorship push is really a new direction in the same dynamic.
These companies are not obligated by the law to do almost any of what they’re actually doing but they’re going above and beyond, to, in many cases, to increase the depth of their relationship (with the government) and the government’s willingness to avoid trying to regulate them in the context of their desired activities, which is ultimately to dominate the conversation and information space of global society in different ways… They’re trying to make you change your behaviour.
If you’re not comfortable letting the government determine the boundaries of appropriate political speech, why are you begging Mark Zuckerberg to do it?
I think the reality here is…it’s not really about freedom of speech, and it’s not really about protecting people from harm…I think what you see is the internet has become the de facto means of mass communication.
That represents influence which represents power, and what we see is we see a whole number of different tribes basically squabbling to try to gain control over this instrument of power.
What we see is an increasing tendency to silence journalists who say things that are in the minority.
It makes you wonder, is this “fact-checking” actually about fact checking? Or is something else going on here?
Below is a breakdown from Clarke’s article illustrating how fact checking works and what the problem is with following the science.
Since we have reported this many times over the last 5 years, we decided to let our readers hear it from someone else for a change as it’s truly quite vindicating to see more investigators coming to these conclusions.
How Fact Checking Works
The past decade has seen an arms race between users who peddle disinformation (intentionally designed to mislead) or unwittingly share misinformation (which users don’t realise is false) and the social media platforms that find themselves charged with policing it, whether they want to or not.1
When The BMJ questioned Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube (which is owned by Google) they all highlighted their efforts to remove potentially harmful content and to direct users towards authoritative sources of information on covid-19 and vaccines, including the World Health Organization and the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Although their moderation policies differ slightly, the platforms generally remove or reduce the circulation of content that disputes information given by health authorities such as WHO and the CDC or spreads false health claims that are considered harmful, including incorrect information about the dangers of vaccines.
But the pandemic has seen a shifting patchwork of criteria employed by these companies to define the boundaries of misinformation.
This has led to some striking U turns: at the beginning of the pandemic, posts saying that masks helped to prevent the spread of covid-19 were labelled “false”; now it’s the opposite, reflecting the changing nature of the academic debate and official recommendations.
Twitter manages its fact checking internally. But Facebook and YouTube rely on partnerships with third party fact checkers, convened under the umbrella of the International Fact-Checking Network — a non-partisan body that certifies other fact checkers, run by the Poynter Institute for Media Studies, a non-profit journalism school in St Petersburg, Florida.
Poynter’s top donors include the Charles Koch Institute (a public policy research organisation), the National Endowment for Democracy (a US government agency), and the Omidyar Network (a “philanthropic investment firm”), as well as Google and Facebook.
Poynter also owns the Tampa Bay Times newspaper and the high profile fact checker PolitiFact. The Poynter Institute declined The BMJ’s invitation to comment for this article.
For scientific and medical content the International Fact-Checking Network involves little known outfits such as SciCheck, Metafact, and Science Feedback.
Health Feedback, a subsidiary of Science Feedback, handpicks scientists to deliver its verdict.
Using this method, it labelled as “misleading” a Wall Street Journal opinion article2 predicting that the US would have herd immunity by April 2021, written by Marty Makary, professor of health policy and management at John Hopkins University in Baltimore, Maryland.
This prompted the newspaper to issue a rebuttal headlined “Fact checking Facebook’s fact checkers,” arguing that the rating was “counter-opinion masquerading as fact checking.”3
Makary hadn’t presented his argument as a factual claim, the article said, but had made a projection based on his analysis of the evidence.
A spokesperson for Science Feedback tells The BMJ that, to verify claims, it selects scientists on the basis of “their expertise in the field of the claim/article.”
They explain, “Science Feedback editors usually start by searching the relevant academic literature and identifying scientists who have authored articles on related topics or have the necessary expertise to assess the content.”
The organisation then either asks the selected scientists to weigh in directly or collects claims that they’ve made in the media or on social media to reach a verdict.
In the case of Makary’s article it identified 20 relevant scientists and received feedback from three.
“Follow The Science”
The contentious nature of these decisions is partly down to how social media platforms define the slippery concepts of misinformation versus disinformation.
This decision relies on the idea of a scientific consensus. But some scientists say that this smothers heterogeneous opinions, problematically reinforcing a misconception that science is a monolith.
This is encapsulated by what’s become a pandemic slogan:
“Follow the science.” David Spiegelhalter, chair of the Winton Centre for Risk and Evidence Communication at Cambridge University, calls this “absolutely awful,” saying that behind closed doors scientists spend the whole time arguing and deeply disagreeing on some fairly fundamental things.
“Science is not out in front telling you what to do; it shouldn’t be. I view it much more as walking along beside you muttering to itself, making comments about what it’s seeing and making some tentative suggestions about what might happen if you take a particular path, but it’s not in charge.”
The term “misinformation” could itself contribute to a flattening of the scientific debate. Martin Kulldorff, professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School in Boston, Massachusetts, has been criticised for his views on lockdown, which tack closely to his native Sweden’s more relaxed strategy.4
He says that scientists who voice unorthodox opinions during the pandemic are worried about facing “various forms of slander or censoring … they say certain things but not other things, because they feel that will be censored by Twitter or YouTube or Facebook.”
This worry is compounded by the fear that it may affect grant funding and the ability to publish scientific papers, he tells The BMJ.
The binary idea that scientific assertions are either correct or incorrect has fed into the divisiveness that has characterised the pandemic. Samantha Vanderslott, a health sociologist at the University of Oxford, UK, told Nature, “Calling out fake stories can raise your profile.”
In the same article Giovanni Zagni, director of the Italian fact checking website Facta, noted that “you can build a career” on the basis of becoming “a well respected voice that fights against bad information.”5
But this has fed a perverse incentive for scientists to label each other’s positions misinformation or disinformation.6 Van der Linden likens this to how the term “fake news” was weaponised by Donald Trump to silence his critics.
He says, “I think you see a bit of the same with the term ‘misinformation,’ when there’s science that you don’t agree with and you label it as misinformation.”
Health Feedback’s website says that it won’t select scientists to verify claims if they’ve undermined their credibility by “propagating misinformation, whether intentionally or not.”
In practice, this could create a Kafkaesque situation where scientists are precluded from offering their opinion as part of the fact checking process if they expressed an opinion that Facebook labelled misinformation.
Strengthening the echo chamber effect is the fact that Health Feedback sometimes verifies claims by looking at what scientists have said on Twitter or in the media.
Van der Linden says that it’s important for people to understand that in the scientific domain “there’s uncertainty, there’s debate, and it’s about the accumulation of insights over time and revising our opinions as we go along.”
Healthy debate helps to separate the wheat from the chaff. Jevin West, associate professor in the Information School at the University of Washington in Seattle, says that social media platforms should therefore be “extra careful when it comes to debates involving science.”
“The institution of science has developed these norms and behaviour to be self-corrective. So, for [social media platforms] to step into that conversation, I think it’s problematic.”
Experts who spoke to The BMJ emphasised the near impossibility of distinguishing between a minority scientific opinion and an opinion that’s objectively incorrect (misinformation).
Spiegelhalter says that this would constitute a difficult “legalistic judgment about what a reasonable scientific opinion would be … I’ve got my own criteria that I use to decide whether I think something is misleading, but I find it very difficult to codify.”
Other scientists worry that, if this approach to scientific misinformation outlives the pandemic, the scientific debate could become worryingly subject to commercial imperatives.
Vinay Prasad, associate professor at the University of California San Francisco, argued on the MedPage Today website:
“The risk is that the myriad players in biomedicine, from large to small biopharmaceutical and [medical] device firms, will take their concerns to social media and journal companies. On a topic like cancer drugs, a tiny handful of folks critical of a new drug approval may be outnumbered 10:1 by key opinion leaders who work with the company.”7
Thus the majority who speak loudest, most visibly, and with the largest number online, may be judged “correct” by the public—and, as the saying goes, history is written by the victors.
Social media companies are still experimenting with the new raft of measures introduced since last year and may adapt their approach.
Van der Linden says that the talks he’s had with Facebook have focused on how the platform could help foster an appreciation of how science works, “to actually direct people to content that educates them about the scientific process, rather than labelling something as true or false.”
This debate is playing out against a wider ideological struggle, where the ideal of “truth” is increasingly placed above “healthy debate.”
“To remove things in general, I think is a bad idea. Because even if something is wrong, if you remove it there’s no opportunity to discuss it.” For instance, although he favors vaccination in general, people with fears or doubts about the vaccines used should not be silenced in online spaces, he says.
“If we don’t have an open debate within science, then that will have enormous consequences for science and society.”
There are concerns that this approach could ultimately undermine trust in public health. In the US, says West, trust in the government and media is falling.
He explains, “Science is still one of the more trusted institutions, but if you start tagging and shutting down conversation within science, to me that’s even worse than the actual posting of these individual articles.”
Once men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope that this would set them free. But that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them.’ — Frank Herbert (1920-1986), in ‘Dune’
WEF: ‘Cyber Pandemic Will Make COVID-19 Look Like A Non-Event’
By sheer cowinkydink, another ransomware attack has taken down operations of another major American industry. This time, the target is America’s largest meat processer, JBS.
White House Deputy Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre on Tuesday said that the hacker group behind the attack is “likely based in Russia.”
Wednesday morning, in another of a series of whodathunk moments, the FBI issued a statement revealing that Russian-linked hackers “REvil and Sodinokibi” are behind the ransomware attack on JBS meat processing facilities.
JBS acquired a fake, plant-based meat company for $500 million, and its CEO has been using Joe Biden’s “build back better” slogan and other World Economic Forum and United Nations jargon. It has moved into the faux-burger market in Europe.
First, it was Texas energy, then the Colonial gas pipeline and now meat. All of this is happening as shortages are commonplace, caused by massive economic distortions from lockdowns, money printing crack up boom and “stimulus,” and putting people on permanent unemployment largesse. Is this a distraction to justify the rise in prices (aka inflation).
As another precursor to yet another drill going live — namely, the July 9, 2021, Cyber Polygon cyberattack “exercise” simulations — we learn that overnight downdector users reported AT&T service across the Baltimore–Washington metropolitan area experienced widespread outages.
About the same time, Apple reported problems with the functioning of its Apple Card credit card and payment system that was affecting all users.
The Cyber Polygon exercise will focus on simulating the downing of the global internet, as well as disruptions to power supplies and control grids. That’s right. In July, the summer month for peak heat in most of North America, there will be forced power outages.
What will happen when the air conditioning goes out while temperatures hover around 100 F in America’s largest cities?
The final spark for the long, hot, summer conflagration will be when Darren Chauvin is exonerated on a technicality.
And it’s not exactly like a warning hasn’t been issued by the Wizard of Oz, Mr. Diabolica himself, Klaus Schwab. He announced at the last World Economic Forum gathering that the coming “cyber pandemic will make COVID-19 look like a non-event.”
Anyone beginning to see a pattern?
Meat packers and gas pipelines can be hacked but not elections? Thanks, comrade.
Any company big enough to be a cyberattack target is big enough to design work-arounds.
They never attack Beyond Meat, Woka-Cola or Proctor & Gamble, do they? How odd. Somehow Tesla doesn’t have any semi-chip shortages. You won’t see a solar panel company “hacked” or a vaccine company.
It’s also engineered to remove humans from normal processes so that they can be laid off and the Crime Syndicate minions running the corporations still get a big bonus.
Of course, this is great for the shareholders until the day the automation breaks “Dune”-style, and then everything collapses because no one knows how to fix anything manually any more.
We’ve seen how easy it is to scare people with a flu that rarely kills old fat already ill people. Just think how scared and aggressive people will be with no gas in their tank or no food on their table, or in sweltering heat without air conditioning. You think Popeyes chicken shacks are dangerous now, just wait.
Shock the system and test the results. First an energy shock, then an oil shock, now a food shock; and, yes, they probably have a money shock planned for the future.
So, time to go with the nice, safe, government-backed, digital dollar? The best way to deploy it is to get people clamoring for it.
They will use this to disable access to “unsafe” dissident sites, just as Cass Sunstein and his ilk recommended.
This is a fifth-generation world war being run by a global Crime Syndicate, and the enemy is any and all competition. They use alarmist imperatives as a cover for yet more greed, corruption, enslavement and to feed their lust for power and control.