From Michael Green (taking off from those children’s books promoting “a very Corona Christmas”):
I am responding to the Nov 24 post by Andrew Saul
https://archives.simplelists.com/nfu/msg/15612456/ one of whose illustrations is below.
A Coronavirus Christmas: The Spirit of Christmas Will Always Shine Through Paperback – October 12, 2020
Andrew commented, “It is significant to me, given the publication dates, that the books were in the works quite early. That is at least one argument for a ‘plannedemic.’”
I can’t thank Andrew enough for these lovely children’s books that match our COVID holiday cheer. Because so much material goes up on Mark’s site it is easy to miss a lot of it. Allow me to chat about whether we are suffering through a plandemic by parsing that term into its three most likely scenarios.
1) Powerful globalists hoped and prayed that a deadly virus would come and allow them to implement the goals illustrated in these children’s books because there would be a global health crisis and so it came to pass.
2) Powerful globalists hoped and prayed that some virus would come that would allow them to implement the goals illustrated in these children’s books by pretending that there was a global health crisis and so it came to pass.
3) Powerful globalists did not need to hope or pray because they had plans to release the virus and were preparing the public mind so that the plan they implemented for it would seem natural, or normal.
James Corbett has two posts—neither of which contains a smoking gun—that detail many such elements of dramatic foreshadowing. One of these is a June 7, 2019 BBC article in which the leading man is the WHO’s compassionate Dr. Michael Ryan who would go on to warn us early this year that most transmission occurred within the household so family members with suspected COVID who could not isolate would have to be removed from the home and relocated elsewhere, with, of course, “dignity.” From June of last year:
“The world is entering “a new phase” where big outbreaks of deadly diseases like Ebola are a “new normal”, the World Health Organization has warned. …
“We are entering a very new phase of high impact epidemics and this isn’t just Ebola,” Dr Michael Ryan, the executive director of the WHO’s health emergencies programme told me.
He said the world is “seeing a very worrying convergence of risks” that are increasing the dangers of diseases including Ebola, cholera and yellow fever.
He said climate change, emerging diseases, exploitation of the rainforest, large and highly mobile populations, weak governments and conflict were making outbreaks more likely to occur and more likely to swell in size once they did.
Dr Ryan said the World Health Organization was tracking 160 disease events around the world and nine were grade three emergencies (the WHO’s highest emergency level).
“I don’t think we’ve ever had a situation where we’re responding to so many emergencies at one time. This is a new normal, I don’t expect the frequency of these events to reduce.”
As a result, he argued that countries and other bodies needed to “get to grips with readiness [and] be ready for these epidemics”. (emphasis added. Note that to confront this crisis population mobility must be reduced and government controls strengthened) https://www.bbc.com/news/health-48547983
To better prepare the public mind for such an impending catastrophe this message was rebroadcast from ever so many globalist mouthpieces as soon as the “catastrophe” had occurred, and more importantly, by the Catholic News Agency in a same-day June 7, 2019 segment whose host invites us to imagine the new reality of a “world where mass outbreaks of deadly diseases are commonplace…the WHO has warned that we’re entering a reality where such a phase is “‘a new normal.’ ” Watch at least the first 5 minutes https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F-XbHSpH4Qo New Normal: Pandemic Police State
Consider also a talk from the November 27-29, 2019 European Scientific Conference on Applied Infectious Disease Epidemiology (ESCAIDE 2019) Conference by Robb Butler Executive Director of the Regional Director’s Office of WHO. Butler led the vaccine-preventable diseases and immunization program at WHO/Europe from 2014-2018. In his talk Butler underscores how “vaccine hesitancy” must be smashed (and saves for the Q&A his apparent support for mandatory vaccinations) because “immunization is a best buy” since it satisfies 14 of 17 SDG’s including such implausibly related “sustainable development goals” as “increased equality,” “mitigation of climate change” and “empowered women and girls.” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1LCcaYoaZWg&t=981s Vaccination refusal, hesitancy, acceptance and demand | Robb Butler
If you are not aware of SDG’s they are part of the United Nations Agenda 21 program which is described accurately by one of its critics, Rosa Koire, as follows:
[The] United Nations Agenda 21 Sustainable Development…has its basis in Communitarianism. …The plan calls for government to take control of all land use and not leave any of the decision making in the hands of privacy property owners. …Individual rights in general are to give way to the needs of communities as determined by a globalist governing body. Moreover, people should be rounded up off of the land and packed into human settlements or islands of human habitation …close to employment centers and transportation. [MG: For now, staying at home may do.] …UN Agenda 21 cites the affluence of Americans as being a major problem which needs to be corrected. It calls for lowering the standard of living for Americans so that the people in poorer countries will have more; a redistribution of wealth. …Only then will there be social justice which is a cornerstone of the UN Agenda 21 plan. Behind the Green Mask: U.N. Agenda 21, 2011, pp. 12-13.
Lest such social justice sound like a noble goal—the socialist utopia of which some of us sometimes dreamed—Koire debunks it as a cover for what it is but not so economically as Gary Allen did in his 1971 book, None Dare Call It Conspiracy:
The men at the apex of this movement are not Communists in the traditional sense of the term. They feel no loyalty to Moscow or Peking. They are loyal only to themselves and their undertaking. And these men certainly do not believe in the clap-trap pseudo-philosophy of Communism. They have no intention of dividing their wealth. Socialism is a philosophy which conspirators exploit, but in which only the naïve believe. Just how finance capitalism is used as the anvil and Communism as the hammer to conquer the world will be explained in this book. (p.14)
The “communism” of the 1970s has been replaced by the gentler “communitarianism” of today. MCM has bemoaned the loss of collective action from the Left he used to embrace and I have mordantly opined that it has been stolen by transmutation into the “collectivism” of today’s “all in it together” against COVID by wearing masks and making sacrifices for this imaginary common good. It’s hard to find a better example of this posture of solidarity than that conveyed by the political activism of Julia Jackson, the NYU student who wants MCM fired for even questioning the policy of wearing masks:
When it comes to conflicting studies that refer to the effectiveness of masks, Jackson said even if they are actually ineffective, the risk of spreading a potentially deadly virus is higher than the inconvenience of covering her face.
“I would rather wear a mask and it not have done anything to help, than not wear a mask and risk hurting other people. I hope everyone feels this way, too, because like it or not, we’re in this together,” she said. https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/nyu-student-calls-for-professors-firing-after-he-urged-masks-are-propaganda/2631450/
Also, it is difficult to find two clearer examples of the fraud of wealth redistribution than the two videos below. In the first an epicene male smiles blankly to express a mindless happiness of non-ownership without—I assure you—even the temptation to ask Who Does Own It?, let alone What happens if you don’t behave as they want? In the second, globalists Bill Clinton and Gavin Newsom can’t help but grin like Cheshire cats that swallowed the canary throughout most of this April 18, 2020 video allegedly devoted to measures necessary to fight COVID. Near the very end they both manage to put on straight faces while Newsom says that the food insecurity produced by the destruction of the productive economy in America “also underscores the original sin in this country and that is income and wealth inequality,” which, if you have any understanding of Newsom’s assets, let alone the Clintons wealth through theft and corruption, this should convey that there is another agenda than fighting COVID. See (24-25).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lBBxWtKKQiA WEF by 2030 You’ll own nothing And you’ll be happy
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RLSo41RaAFk CGI U 2020 – A conversation between President Clinton and Governor Newsom on the COVID-19 pandemic
And to underscore what the plan is, simply note that Newsom’s conditions for re-opening California no longer require merely that it be safe to do so, but that problems of social equity first be reduced if not eliminated. https://reason.com/2020/10/09/infection-rates-in-neighborhoods-with-low-voter-turnout-many-bars-few-trees-could-slow-californias-reopening-under-new-equity-metric/ Coronavirus Infection Rates in Neighborhoods With Low Voter Turnout, Many Bars, Few Trees Could Slow California’s Reopening Under New ‘Equity Metric’ California’s new approach to combating coronavirus layers on yet more requirements for counties looking to reopen businesses. Christian Britschgi | 10.9.2020 11:15 AM
Just to be clear about the argument, I consider it additional evidence of pre-planning for the pandemic when the public mind is prepared for its coming and then it is publicly and blatantly misused, pace the shock doctrine.
Finally, one of the great globalists has been kind enough to step out from behind the curtain to take his bow. In an essay from Winter Oak previously forwarded to MCM that he posted, Founder and Executive Chairman of the World Economic Forum, Klaus Schwab, made excruciatingly clear that he among others at the WEF has been behind the current instantiation of this plandemic. (The 2009 H1N1 plandemic was the rehearsal for COVID but it failed for complicated reasons. For the sake of brevity I am also omitting analysis of the 2010 Rockefeller Foundation “Scenarios for the Future of Technology and International Development” that reveals their complicity.)
In his 2018 book, Schwab discusses the problem of pesky regulations and how best to “overcome these limits” in the context of data and privacy.
He comes up with the suggestion of “public-private data-sharing agreements that ‘break glass in case of emergency’. These come into play only under pre-agreed emergency circumstances (such as a pandemic) and can help reduce delays and improve the coordination of first responders, temporarily allowing data sharing that would be illegal under normal circumstances”. (89)
Funnily enough, two years later there was indeed a “pandemic” and these “pre-agreed emergency circumstances” became a reality.
This shouldn’t have been too much of a surprise for Schwab, since his WEF had co-hosted the infamous Event 201 conference in October 2019, which modelled a fictional coronavirus pandemic.
And he wasted little time in bringing out a new book, Covid-19: The Great Reset, co-authored with Thierry Malleret, who runs something called the Monthly Barometer, “a succinct predictive analysis provided to private investors, global CEOs and opinion- and decision-makers”. (90)
Published in July 2020, the book sets out to advance “conjectures and ideas about what the post-pandemic world might, and perhaps should, look like”. (91)
Schwab and Malleret admit that Covid-19 is “one of the least deadly pandemics the world has experienced over the last 2000 years”, adding that “the consequences of COVID-19 in terms of health and mortality will be mild compared to previous pandemics”. (92)
They add: “It does not constitute an existential threat, or a shock that will leave its imprint on the world’s population for decades”. (93)
Yet, incredibly, this “mild” illness is simultaneously presented as the excuse for unprecedented social change under the banner of “The Great Reset”!
And although they explicitly declare that Covid-19 does not constitute a major “shock”, the authors repeatedly deploy the same term to describe the broader impact of the crisis.
Schwab and Malleret place Covid-19 in a long tradition of events which have facilitated sudden and significant changes to our societies.
They specifically invoke the Second World War: “World War II was the quintessential transformational war, triggering not only fundamental changes to the global order and the global economy, but also entailing radical shifts in social attitudes and beliefs that eventually paved the way for radically new policies and social contract provisions (like women joining the workforce before becoming voters). There are obviously fundamental dissimilarities between a pandemic and a war (that we will consider in some detail in the following pages), but the magnitude of their transformative power is comparable. Both have the potential to be a transformative crisis of previously unimaginable proportions”. (94)
They also join many contemporary “conspiracy theorists” in making a direct comparison between Covid-19 and 9/11: “This is what happened after the terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001. All around the world, new security measures like employing widespread cameras, requiring electronic ID cards and logging employees or visitors in and out became the norm. At that time, these measures were deemed extreme, but today they are used everywhere and considered ‘normal’”. (95) https://winteroak.org.uk/2020/10/05/klaus-schwab-and-his-great-fascist-reset/
I haven’t argued for which of the three possible plandemics is the actual one and won’t, but if required to do so would argue for #3 using what is a pretty ordinary easily treated virus. Of course, even talking this way presumes a vast network of coordinated activities by operatives using, among other techniques, Milgram-like controls on their non-operative colleagues. To be brief, it takes something like the “triple-front-penetration in politics, education, and journalism” of which Carroll Quigley wrote in The Anglo-American Establishment in describing the controls that the Milner Group put into place before 1910 (p.15).
You might wonder what all that means, so let me offer a simple illustration—it’s a test I use to see whether someone is ready for PSY-OPS 101. First go to the Wikipedia page and read the Official Account of the 1995 OKC bombing of the Murrah Federal Building. You will learn that Timothy McVeigh drove a rented Ryder truck up to the building, blew up the truck and brought down most of the building. This official history is confirmed by the FBI website. Then go watch the segment on the OKC bombing prepared by the much maligned and supposedly wholly despicable “conspiracy theorist” Alex Jones in a video that is still, quite miraculously, on YouTube; Jones’s channel is banned. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6VyN5E-PhWw&t=2505s
9/11 The Road to Tyranny (2002) – Alex Jones Infowars Documentary It starts @ 17:14. You will notice that the Official Story is a complete fabrication. You do not have to like Alex Jones or take his word for it—he has live local news footage, and much more. Better yet, state Congressman Charles Key, who lost friends in the carnage, spent years investigating the event and published a definitive account, The Final Report on the Bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Building, that can still be bought on Amazon. Key was rewarded for his courage with the loss of his office and his business, but that’s not the point. The point is that if you want a simple concrete example of complete success of a triple-front-penetration, it’s a good place to start. But you need to ask yourself how it is possible that anything so bloody plain and clear could be kept from the American people. And then you have to realize that it is not kept from the American people—it is readily available on YouTube and Amazon—and yet the Official Story prevails. Understanding that fact should disabuse you of any notion that our conspirators are deceiving a rational truth-seeking population, and demands a great deal more be said.
For the present, COVID is another, much more complex example of a PSY-OP but for anyone with the rare capacity these days of sustaining focus for 7 pages you might also want to recall Meryl Nass’s account of how the “official medical research” into Hydroxychloroquine seemed to persistently get it all wrong and smear a perfectly sound cheap treatment for COVID that would have obviated the need for a (mandatory) vaccine, almost as though an invisible hand were driving the engine of competition to keep the COVID threat alive and very very well. She told a small but very important part of this story.