Do you have more money than you know what to do with? Do you have big dreams and connections in high places? Do I have a plan for you!
Getting Started
- First, make a plan. World domination isn’t just going to fall into your lap. Read old school case studies like The Project for a New American Century and from more recently, the World Economic Forum’s Great Reset, the WHO’s Agenda 2030, ID2020 and UN Agenda 2030.
- Create a crisis. It must be a “catastrophic and catalyzing event.” It will be easier to implement your plan in the chaos that follows.
- Fear is your friend. Paralyze them with fear. They’ll go along with anything.
- The crisis should have mysterious foreign origins. Cave-dwelling terrorists in Afghanistan, cave-dwelling bats in Wuhan. For some reason, caves work, maybe something about their primitive connotations. Plus, it’s not like journalists are going to investigate something that happened in some God-forsaken foreign nation when they can earn a paycheck by “reporting” on what happened last night on Twitter from the comfort of their own beds.
- But the place can’t be totally random. You’re going to need some connections in high places. Remember, Bush’s connections with Saudi Arabia, the CIA with Osama Bin Laden, Bill Gates with China, and Anthony Fauci with that Wuhan lab?
- Psychologically prepare the population. This is most easily accomplished by making movies for the plebes. See Pearl Harbor (May 2001) and Pandemic (January 2020).
- You need an “invisible enemy” that “knows no borders,” one that is impossible to definitively eradicate. But don’t use terrorists or a virus again. That’s played out. You’ll have to come up with something bigger and better next time. Aliens might be cool.
- Make the epicenter the Big Apple, because those folks are generally on our side and always easy to work with. Also, take a cue from Hollywood: Godzilla didn’t invade Charleston, and I Am Legend doesn’t take place in Helena. There is a reason for this.
- Go big or go home. Is it likely that commercial airliners would manage to fly through some the most heavily defended airspace in the world and hit two buildings, 18 minutes apart, and the Pentagon? No — LOL! Is it likely that a virus would manage to escape one of the most highly secured and secretive labs in the entire world? Probably not. But the good news is: You don’t have to worry about what is likely or probable or believable. Just concern yourself with what is plausibly deniable and go from there. Seriously, the bigger the lie, the easier it is to believe, because they won’t be able to believe that someone would tell a lie that big. It’s all about chutzpah!
- Plant a few seeds or make sure there is some precedent for the incredulous, like this and this.
- Practice makes perfect! We recommend running some simulations, like the Pentagon Mass Casualty Project or the September 11 NORAD drills or Event 201. They can be good for cover or confusion or just for looking like you are trying to prepare for a crisis instead of planning one.
D-Day
Now that you’re ready, you can trigger your “catastrophic and catalyzing” event. (D-Day stands for “Demo Day,” by the way. Ha ha.)
Ellen Finnigan [send her mail] teaches writing and literature at an online, Catholic school for homeschoolers. She runs a website and a podcast called Catholics Against Militarism. You can find her on Twitter @EllenFinnigan and read more of her writing here.
Copyright © Ellen Finnigan
Related:
Moon of Alabama: Ukraine - Putin On Why The War Started, Failed Attempts On Snake Island, Other Issues
If only this were comedy.
ReplyDeleteI've been trying to develop a hypothesis for why vaccinated people would be more prone to reinfection than the unvaccinated.
That wasn't as hard to do as I thought.
Anyway, as I looked around, I came upon a Lancet article I thought would have bearing on the matter. I was reading it and had to pause: a lot of what the Lancet article was premised upon seemed false to me based on what I'd seen elsewhere.
As just one example: remember the other day when I cited a figure of 250,000 Covid19 mortalities FOR ALL Africa? (Due to the young population of Africa.)This Lancet article cited figures showing Africa as one of the world's hotspots for Covid19 mortality. (Due to lower vaccination rates in Africa.)
This is the Lancet. I consider it reputable. Then I made an amazing discovery. The Lancet article was funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.
Can it possibly be the Lancet has been induced to publish "tobacco science"? Oh yes, it surely can be. We're all for sale, even scientists. The audacity of it, though. The sheer audacity. I would call it breathtaking. I would, despite myself, have sympathy for the many who would jump to the conclusion such a thing couldn't be happening.
All of the technical difficulties of viral vaccination don't just go away SNAP because we need (supposedly) a vaccine for a virus. Yet we'd have to believe precisely this happened, as if the universe is governed most by what's convenient just for us. We'd believe that the vaccine rushed into production was saving us, even as we observe the vaccinated re-infected, after shorter and shorter times.
"During this ongoing severe acute respiratory illness coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic, few speculative reports on significant association of influenza vaccines with an increased risk of coronavirus infection appeared both in media and academic circles. The speculation of vaccines paradoxically increasing the
risk of infections possibly originated first following 2009 influenza A (H1N1pdm09) pandemic when four Canadian studies suggested that receipt of seasonal influenza vaccine increased the risk of laboratory-confirmed 2009 pandemic influenza A (H1N1pdm09) virus infection [1]. This led to five additional studies, each of which substantiated these initial findings. One proposed mechanism behind this phenomenon is ‘original antigenic sin’ which was first used to describe how first exposure to influenza virus shapes the outcome of subsequent exposures to antigenically related strains. When an individual is infected by an ‘evolved’ strain with a new dominant antigen, slightly different from the ‘original’ strain against which the person has been vaccinated, the immune system produces antibodies against the ‘original’ strain through preformed high-affinity memory B cells that inhibit activation of naïve B cells
resulting in a weak immune response against the new ‘dominant’ strain. Hence, the risk of infection paradoxically increased in vaccinated individuals as compared to unvaccinated individuals (2)." --https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7444173/pdf/13312_2020_Article_1936.pdf
See, my "hypothesis" isn't necessary. I'm late to the party. Immunologists already understood beyond mere speculation what might happen. A response of the immune system to vaccination could be to inhibit production of "naive" B memory cells which would be capable of more effectively adapting their response to something new.
Reference (2) from above:
ReplyDelete2. Zhang A, Stacey HD, Mullarkey CE, Miller MS. Original antigenic sin: How first exposure shapes lifelong antiinfluenza virus immune responses. J Immunol. 2019; 202:335 340.
That's the Journal of Immunology. That's not fly by night.
It is really just a question of how terrible the consequences of being stampeded like a herd of cattle will turn out to be. Stampeded by Bill Gates, big bad Bill Gates. Maybe off a cliff, just the way the plains Indians used to stampede buffalo.
Thank you for these and earlier comments and literature references concerning ways in which an antigen injected for the purpose of inducing protective immunity from an infectious disease (i.e., a vaccine candidate) may enhance disease severity.
DeleteThat the SARS-CoV2 vaccines can indeed enhance disease severity seems consistent with emerging data. I will therefore review your comments and literature references with close attention in the morning.
As for the Lancet publishing bogus stats, well any publisher can make a mistake, but bogus Covid death data, coming so soon after they published the bogus hydroxychloroquine trial paper, does suggest undue gullibility.
Wow, see this?
ReplyDeleteNonprofit Watchdog Uncovers $350 Million In Secret Payments To Fauci, Collins, Others At NIH
All those trusty public watchdogs were taking hundreds of millions in payoffs from those they watched.
“We now know that there are 1,675 scientists that received payments during that period, at least one payment. In fiscal year 2014, for instance, $36 million was paid out and that is on average $21,100 per scientist,” Andrzejewski said."
DeleteYeah, man, but you know what? This is standard operating procedure and my bet is on it not being illegal. It has been going on for years.
That's an average of $21,100 per scientist. Yeah, the "average". The average is not the statistical parameter for representing the distribution of that 36 million. We need to know the median.
Part of the sorrow has to be how these people came to be trusted in the first place. If you revisit the AIDS crisis unfolding back in the 80s, the NIH's performance was dismal and inspired no trust. Plagiarism and theft at the highest levels, and Fauci was a part of that.
ReplyDelete"During the entire meeting, nary a public whisper was heard about the blood test patent feud that led to a peace treaty of sorts signed by no less than former French President Jacques Chirac and former U.S. President Ronald Reagan, as well as multilayered government probes, the enrichment of many lawyers, microscopic press coverage, books, an HBO movie, and vociferous outrage from Gallo's many supporters who assailed the decision to cut him out of the Nobel Prize, which in 2008 went to Barré -Sinoussi and her associate, Luc Montagnier. Instead, the attendees heard talks from researchers and clinicians who treated the first AIDS patients in early 1981, discovered the causative virus, elucidated details of HIV's genetics and the infection process, identified effective immune responses, developed the first anti-HIV drugs, traced the epidemic's origins, and now are at the forefront of the search for a cure and a vaccine."
https://www.science.org/content/article/gathering-hivaids-pioneers-raw-memories-mix-current-conflicts
The journalist Jon Cohen notes there is nary a whisper about the crimes, but with a whisper. He whispers through some truly monumental and serious malfeasance to get on over to the positive achievements...Which in my opinion should not allow us to pretend the seriously bad things weren't bad or serious. Look at that: resolution of sorts required a kind of peace treaty between Reagan and Chirac. Cohen hobnobs with these scientists and apparently can't resist partially covering for them.
In this time of collapse after collapse, there has never been satisfactory housecleaning. Even more serious, there haven't been constructive efforts to build accountability into governmental bureaucracy through the legislative process.
Why hasn't mandatory retirement been invoked for Anthony Fauci? He's been in the civil service since 1969. This in itself is suspicious.
"President Reagan and Prime Minister Jacques Chirac of France ended a festering international scientific dispute today, announcing that researchers from the two countries would share credit for discovery of the AIDS virus.
ReplyDeleteThe countries agreed that patent rights to a blood test that emerged from that discovery would also be shared, with most of the royalties donated to a new foundation for AIDS research and education.
The unusual agreement, announced today in the White House by Mr. Reagan and Mr. Chirac, sidestepped the bitter dispute between French and American scientists over who deserves main credit for discovering the AIDS virus. But the two chief contending scientists jointly signed a detailed, seven-page chronology specifying the contributions of each, in effect leaving it to historians to sort out the credit. A New Era Is Predicted
The announcement by heads of state was seen as extraordinary in the annals of disputes over scientific credit. Throughout the history of science, major researchers have been involved in bitter disputes and international rivalries and litigation. But experts said they could not remember when settlement of such a dispute had such direct involvement from the highest levels of government."
https://www.nytimes.com/1987/04/01/us/us-and-france-end-rift-on-aids.html
The level of contentiousness between France and the USA is lost in the mists of time, and I don't believe you'd know of it at all based on what is officially "remembered".
It wasn't as if there were two teams of scientists, one French and the other American, both well-intended and researching diligently and in good faith. There were allegations one of the teams was cheating, lying, plagiarizing, and outright stealing. I was never satisfied it all boiled down to technical questions of viral nomenclature and taxonomy, though it might be I am in accord with the scientists who feel it is ultimately for the best for everyone it was allowed to be resolved that way.
Notice, though, there were allegations of patent theft. (Patent infringement?) Patent theft within a government agency. What is a government agency doing concerning itself with owning patents? This was in the 80's. There were things going on and they were went on unchecked and in a way almost unnoticed.
There is a lot.
"Ron Robertson, general counsel to the United States Department of Health and Human Services, said royalties from the blood test for antibodies to the AIDS virus have been about $5 million each year, or about 5 percent of the sales throughout the world. Scientists in the United States and France have been collecting those royalties." -https://www.nytimes.com/1987/04/01/us/us-and-france-end-rift-on-aids.html
ReplyDeleteYou get rich enough and the rules don't apply any more. You're above the law.
I'm all for free enterprise, but can it be called free enterprise if you work for the government, receive a salary from the government, have your research funded by the government, but privately reap additional juicy rewards for your work, and research?