Keeping track of the latest developments in the ever-blossoming wisdom of our leaders and protectors has been a trying task for those of us that still haven’t learned to trust the decrees of corporate and state propaganda outlets. With the huge volumes of information doing the rounds, and an atmosphere of angst and upheaval in the air, it isn’t hard to lose one’s bearings among all the noise.
This may well be no accident. In the list of recommendations [link] from the now somewhat notorious ‘Event 201’ Coronavirus drill held in October 2019 (about which more below), point 7 concerns “mis- and disinformation”. Quote:
“Governments and the private sector should assign a greater priority to developing methods to combat mis- and disinformation prior to the next pandemic response.
Governments will need to partner with traditional and social media companies to research and develop nimble approaches to countering misinformation. This will require developing the ability to flood media with fast, accurate, and consistent information. Public health authorities should work with private employers and trusted community leaders such as faith leaders, to promulgate factual information to employees and citizens. Trusted, influential private-sector employers should create the capacity to readily and reliably augment public messaging, manage rumors and misinformation, and amplify credible information to support emergency public communications. National public health agencies should work in close collaboration with WHO to create the capability to rapidly develop and release consistent health messages. For their part, media companies should commit to ensuring that authoritative messages are prioritized and that false messages are suppressed including though the use of technology.”
Governments partnering with media companies – who’d have thought? In light of this, we’d do well to ruminate on the combined effect of the hyperbolic official propaganda on the one hand, and the often highly speculative and/or inaccurate ‘alternative media’ reports on the other – by which we mean those with subject matters commonly assigned (or perhaps more accurately, banished) to the disreputable categories of ‘conspiracy theory’ and ‘fake news’.
Here, as is often the case, we find that both ostensibly opposing sides in reality tend to complement one other, in this case by drowning out the voices of those offering a more nuanced and well-reasoned take on things. Which in turn raises the question as to what proportion of said ‘alternative media’ is being created and disseminated by corporate or state intelligence funded disinfo agents. At any rate, the upshot of all this is that criticism of the official line is now being clamped down upon with ever-greater severity on various online platforms. Cui bono?
(*At the bottom of this article, we’ve provided links to what we consider to be more useful sources of information – which is not to say that we implicitly ‘trust’ any of them, simply that they at least have important parts of the puzzle on display, and in the majority of cases take the trouble of providing references for their claims – in our view, a basic requirement for serious research into contentious subjects.)
Here, meanwhile, is an interesting diagram which came across our path recently. We’ll try and use it to reach a fuller synthesis in our understanding of the Coronavirus story, and hopefully through this begin to free ourselves from the polarising effects of the disinfo deluge.
“It’s OK to be all three”.
This suggests the mindset of someone who is overly concerned about soliciting approval from their peers with respect to their intellectual position. ‘Possible’ would have been a better word to use. Anyway…
“People taking Coronavirus seriously”.
A statement that needs unpacking if ever there was one. It’s worth taking a moment to consider precisely which aspects of ‘Coronavirus’ we’re being encouraged to ‘take seriously’. Mostly, that it’s supposedly HIGHLY CONTAGIOUS AND DEADLY, COULD AFFECT YOU AND YOUR LOVED ONES, that YOUR LACK OF SELF-ISOLATION COULD CAUSE THE DEATH OF OTHERS, and that IT CAN ONLY BE STOPPED BY AUTHORITARIAN MEASURES AND A VACCINE.
Meanwhile, we’re not being asked to consider why it is that those succumbing to the hypoxia associated with the condition appear to all be significantly immunocompromised in various ways (yes, this includes the young people that have died – keep reading), and if there’s anything about their lifestyles that has brought this about. Could it be, that a sedentary, indoor lifestyle (= vitamin D deficiency), combined with a nutrient-deficient diet, high in inflammatory substances (sugars, processed vegetable fats and agrochemicals), and more recently, chronic exposure to high levels of electromagnetic radiation and blue light, may be playing a significant contributing role (without mentioning a whole host of other factors, or indeed the underlying economic causes of many of them)?
One might therefore hold some concern for the deeper reasons why a growing number of people in industrial societies are becoming susceptible to ‘infectious diseases’ (which, one might add, are being selectively bred for virulence – both as an inadvertent result of the heinous overuse of antibiotics, and very deliberately in biological warfare laboratories)? Apparently not if one is invested in the allopathic medical model, since these aren’t things that can be addressed by administering more vaccines or pharmaceutical drugs.
Germ theory, and an obsession with infectious microbes have, as a result, become a cornerstone of corporate science and medicine – the history of which is explored in a 2007 book entitled ‘Virus Mania: How the Medical Industry Continually Invents Epidemics, Making Billion-Dollar Profits at Our Expense‘ [link]. For this industry – and likewise for the state, as we’re now witnessing – it’s actually very useful to have such a compromised ‘client population’ at one’s disposal. Hence, one might concede that to merely be concerned about ‘Coronavirus’ without perceiving the bigger picture at play could be something of a blinkered view. We’ll leave it to other, better qualified people to attempt to prove what exactly this ‘Coronavirus’ is, or isn’t; the overall appraisal of the situation seems valid regardless of its origin, or indeed the dubious nature of many of the statistics.
“People very concerned about impending economic devastation.”
Here there’s less that needs to be qualified. Only to underline the fact that the banksters have been steadily making advances to phase out the use of the oh-so dirty and dangerous cash (whose use, of course, can’t be easily tracked) in an attempt to get us all using trackable digital currencies, while simultaneously seeking to bring about an economic ‘reset’ that would allow for the institution of a new economic order, in alignment with the current goals of the Rockefeller/UN/IMF/World Bank system (defined in the UN’s Agenda 2030 programme).
These goals have in recent years been coupled with increasingly shrill discourse around ‘anthropogenic global warming’ and hence ‘carbon taxation’ – see ex-Bank of England governor and current UN Special Envoy for Climate Action Mark Carney’s various declarations on the subject as a case in point. The fact that this Coronavirus circus, coming as it did ‘from out of left-field’ for many, has all of the usual Rockefeller-aligned suspects at its helm (Gates Foundation/WHO), and only serves to reinforce the aforementioned goals, might (one would hope) awaken certain questions in one’s mind as to what agenda the ‘pandemic’ could be serving as a pretext for. (That is, if one hasn’t simply lapped up David Icke’s prefab ‘explanations’ – someone who appears to be playing the role of a modern Emmanuel Goldstein in this drama, whether or not he’s even aware of it).
We’ll add that as with George Soros, the Rockefeller clan seem to be relatively more prominent representatives of a larger bankster network, the remainder of whom apparently prefer to stay more hidden. Having said that, by tracking the myriad outgrowths of the Rockefeller Foundation since its inception in 1913, one can begin to gain an understanding of how that network has gone about capturing institutions and bending them to their will.
“People worried about expansion of totalitarian government policies”.
In the same way that the ‘9/11 event’ rather conveniently provided the “New Pearl Harbor” impetus which the Project for a New American Century think tank had declared necessary to advance its geopolitical goals, so here we find that the Corona lockdown response had already been mapped out in 2010 by (you guessed it) the Rockefeller Foundation in their document “Scenarios for the Future of Technology and International Development” [link]. Therein we find described their imagined “Lock Step” strategy in response to a ‘viral pandemic’, recommending procedures that we’ve all become very familiar with recently. This as well as the more widely known ‘Event 201’, where a simulation for a global Coronavirus pandemic was run by John Hopkins University in collaboration with the World Economic Forum and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation in October 2019. Somehow those darned ‘coincidences’ keep stacking up. As the late George Carlin used to say, “it’s a big club, and you ain’t in it!”
For some time, storm clouds have been slowly but surely gathering about our liberty in the form of ‘big data’ – i.e. the vast amounts of information being accumulated about us and our behaviour by way of surveillance systems and the increasing number of internet-linked devices that we compulsively use; and the processing of this information by the state for profiling and subsequently, as in the case of China’s ‘social credit’ scoring system, overt control. With the expansion of the Internet of Things through a centralised ‘smart grid’, based on highly biologically unfriendly 5G/microwave systems, and its integration with ‘digital identity’, ‘digital currency’ and quite possibly a ‘universal basic income’ as a sweetener, one can observe the various bricks of the Technocratic edifice quietly being put into place.
The thing to note here is that in the case of both ‘Coronavirus’ and the globalist ‘climate change’ narrative, these things are paradoxically being instigated on the basis that they’re for ‘the common good’. We’re being asked to believe that the miniscule class whose power derives from the parasitism which our economic system facilitates, is acting in the best interests of all. In fact, they care so much about us that they wish to see to it that ‘no one is left behind’ – this actually being a favourite slogan among the UN types [link]. The message in the medium is seemingly rather simple: ‘more surveillance = more centralised control = more safety/stability’.
Given that we live in an increasingly chaotic world, where people’s means of support are becoming more precarious by the day, it’s not hard to see how such ideas can take root – in the same way that Stockholm Syndrome can take root in the minds of those that have been kidnapped. The answer, as it always has been, is for those of us who haven’t yet succumbed to this sickness to engage in solidarity, mutual aid and direct action, and set up underground support systems that are outside of these vampires’ reach. Understanding the implications of our situation is only the first step. This is a call to action. The time to realise our visions of a new way of being is now.
RESOURCES FOR FURTHER RESEARCH:
James Corbett / The Corbett Report:
Wrong Kind of Green:
Alison Havwer Macdonell:
Derrick Broze / The Conscious Resistance Network:
Rune Soup’s ‘The All Red Line’ newsletter:
[Subscription form at top of page:] https://runesoup.com/
Jay Dyer on Technocracy: