In Article 132, published on 21st April, 2020, I referred to Event 2O1. This took place in New York City on 18th October, 2019 and was funded by the World Economic Forum and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. During this ‘theoretical exercise’, the participants imagined a coronavirus pandemic, despite one never having previously occurred. When the World Health Organization (WHO) declared this very thing just a few months later, only the hopelessly naïve could have insisted that it was all merely a stupendous coincidence.
In March 2021, a similar event took place. In Munich, Germany, the Nuclear Threat Initiative, a ‘global security’ organization, held an identical ‘theoretical exercise’ of ‘a deadly, global pandemic involving an unusual strain of monkeypox virus that first emerges in the fictional country of Brinia and eventually spreads globally’. Participants included senior representatives of Johnson & Johnson, the Wellcome Trust, the WHO and, of course, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation – in other words, the usual suspects.
The results of this ‘theoretical exercise’ were presented in a 32-page report (Figure 194.1) dated November 2021 and can be found at:
The full (APA) citation is:
Yassif, J. M., O’Prey, K. P., & Isaac, C. R. (2021). Strengthening Global Systems to Prevent
and Respond to High-Consequence Biological Threats. Washington, District of Columbia,
United States of America: Nuclear Threat Initiative.
Figure 194.1: Let us see whether this latest ‘theoretical exercise’ comes true.
Copyright © 2021 Nuclear Threat Initiative
The first lie is in the report’s very first paragraph:
‘As of this writing [November 2021], the SARS-CoV-2 virus has ... killed more than five million ...’
What this means is that five million deaths have occurred following a fraudulent PCR ‘test’ which has a false-positive rate exceeding 90%. In Italy, for example, it was proven that, of all the ‘COVID’ deaths, only 6% involved infectious respiratory disease.
The most pathetic conjecture is on page 11:
‘... the fictional Republic of Dranma prompty adopted aggressive measures ... by shutting down mass gatherings, imposing social-distancing measures, and implementing mask mandates. By contrast, the scenario depicts another group of countries, including fictional Cardus, that have prioritized keeping their economies open. These countries have experienced much worse outcomes in terms of illness and mortality than those that responded early and energetically.’
There follows a smart-looking graph showing that, in this fictional scenario, Dranma’s strategy was far more effective than that of Cardus. (I had to laugh at this. It reminded me of when, as a young schoolkid, I would draw the football league table with my club perched at the top, because, in my make-believe world, it would win every one of its matches.)
Who are these devious fantasists trying to kid? There are numerous studies exposing these falsehoods, as they all well know. For example, a comprehensive meta-analysis conducted by Johns Hopkins University established the futility of lockdowns (Herby, Jonung & Hanke, 2022); and, as has been proven countless times, by, among others, the Royal College of Surgeons (UK), masks are useless in the prevention of viral transmission (Alexander, 2021).
The smoking gun, however, is the ‘Scenario Design Summary’ on page 10 (Figure 194.2). This shows a theoretical chronology of the ‘pandemic’ exercise. The initial outbreak is stated as occurring on 15th May, 2022. This is mindblowing. In recent days, mass media have reported outbreaks of monkeypox in twelve countries, including Italy, Sweden, Spain, Portugal, USA, Canada and UK. The first such reports were published on ... 15th May, 2022!
One would need to be unfathomably stupid to accept that old BillyBoy’s ‘theoretical exercise’ miraculously foretold, 14 months in advance, not only the exact disease but also the exact date on which the initial outbreak would occur. Imagine a lawyer arguing such a colossal coincidence in a court of law. He would lose both the case and any vague reputation for being compos mentis.
The rest of the timeline is as follows:
________________________________________________________________
5th June, 2022: The first 4 deaths occur. No international warnings as yet.
________________________________________________________________
23rd January, 2023: 83 countries affected. 1.3 million deaths. Disease found to be vaccine-resistant. National responses.
________________________________________________________________
10th May, 2023: 27 million deaths. Revelation of terror group origin.
________________________________________________________________
1st December, 2023: 271 million deaths. International financing for pandemic preparedness.
________________________________________________________________
Figure 194.2: A plan disguised as an exercise
Copyright © 2021 Nuclear Threat Initiative
The first ‘theoretical’ date was spot-on, so it follows that the others might turn out to be miraculously accurate, too. Points worth noting are: (a) presumed ‘vaccine ineffectiveness’, which implies an urgent need for new ones (!); (b) the virus would be ‘released by terrorists’, strongly implying Russia; and (c) 3.4% of the world’s population would be wiped out within a year-and-a-half. When Gates boasted that the next ‘pandemic’ (after the ‘COVID’ scam) would get the world’s attention, he was brazenly showing his cards in advance. Surely, now, he has overplayed them.
So, here we go again. ‘COVID’ failed to convince the whole world to be injected with dangerous drugs because too many of us had been overwhelmed by the smell of bullshit. I can smell it again. Gates et al. are doubling down on their insane plot to take control of humanity via: another contrived ‘plandemic’; economic measures which render the many utterly dependent on the few; universal ‘vaccination’, however lethal; and the eventual establishment of a totalitarian digital ID system.
2023 promises to be a blast. Who will be duped a second time?
Copyright © 2022 Paul Spradbery
References
Alexander, P. E. (2021). More than 400 studies on the failure of compulsory Covid interventions (lockdowns, restrictions, closures). Retrieved from https://brownstone.org/articles/more-than-400-studies-on-the-failure-of-compulsory-covid-interventions
Herby, J., Jonung, L., & Hanke, S. H. (2022). A Literature Review and Meta-Analysis of the Effects of Lockdowns on COVID-19 Mortality. Studies in Applied Economics, 200. Retrieved from https://sites.krieger.jhu.edu/iae/files/2022/01/A-Literature-Review-and-Meta-Analysis-of-the-Effects-of-Lockdowns-on-COVID-19-Mortality.pdf
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.