The Exposé provided text excerpted testimony from Dr.
Kirk Milhoan, Dr. Ryan Cole, and Dr. Peter McCullough given in testimony at “a
hearing on blood-related adverse events post-COVID vaccination…”
presided by Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene held on 1/12/24 (https://tinyurl.com/4xscvdzh).
At the end of the post The Exposé places a 2:42:40-hours Youtube of the
hearing if you wish to watch the entire drama of Medical Tyranny that will find
its way into the Congressional Record.
I was a person who was on the trust bandwagon of Medical
professionals, especially Medical Doctors. After nearly four years of government-science-MSM
lies with greedy Big Pharma and the Globalist-Left apparently pulling the
puppet strings; I have doubts I will ever have trust in Medical Professional
and the Big Pharma drugs pushed on patients. The Exposé article and
testimony I’ve solidifies those doubts.
AND FURTHER solidifying the NO-TRUST issues I have is a Substack
Vigilant Fox post focusing on a 3:22-minute Dr. David Martin audio
clip zeroed in on Davos 2024, Disease X and a seeming phase II Plandemic to
bring the world’s masses UNDER CONTROL. I BEGIN with Dr. Martin because that
post is more recent and shorter.
PLEASE! I need more Patriots to step up. I need Readers willing to chip
in $5 - $10 - $25 - $50 - $100. PLEASE YOUR generosity is NEEDED. PLEASE
GIVE to Help me be a voice for Liberty:
The World Economic Forum held a 47-minute meeting in Davos
this week titled “Preparing for Disease X.” In that meeting, Dr. Tedros Adhanom
Ghebreyesus, the Director-General of the World Health Organization, warned that
the next pandemic is not a matter of if but when.
Technologist and entrepreneur Dr. David Martin, often known
for his viral address to
the European Parliament, agrees — but from a slightly different
perspective. He said, during a space
hosted on 𝕏, that
the next terror campaign on the world is already being planned:
“What they’re doing right now is they’re planning the
sequence of events where they can actually cascade another terror
campaign, which then triggers not only the need for allegedly another
medical countermeasure, but it also, this time, is going to involve the other
piece that they failed to achieve with the COVID campaign, which is the eradication
ofcash-based transactions in commercial interaction
because it turns out that one of the things that they desperately need to do is
to make sure that they have central control on the flow of value exchange and
the mapping of the networks associated with that.”
Dr. David Martin mentioned that his organization, M•CAM
International, “continues to maintain vigilance on all the 64 scheduled and
funded pathogens that are in the queue for release against humanity."
He highlighted that the ongoing events in Davos serve as a
preliminary exercise for yet another pandemic exercise “to get
ready for the passage of the IHR (International Health Regulations) World
Health Organization Treaty reform, which is intended to take over a
supra sovereignty on any declared emergency …”
“They blundered their way into Covid,” remarked Dr. Martin,
“and unfortunately (for them), they did not do the full control takeover that
they wanted, which is exactly what is on the agenda for Davos this week.”
The World Economic Forum’s 2024 meetings can be watched
at weforum.org.
United States Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene held a
hearing on blood-related adverse events post-COVID vaccination on the 12th
January 2024 and explained that the hearing was “once again truly doing the
people’s work and trying to get to the bottom of the detrimental effects of the
covid vaccine that the government forced on so many Americans.” The
congresswoman also had witnesses to give their expertise and experience – Dr.
Peter McCullough, Dr. Ryan Cole, and Dr. Kirk Milhoan. The doctors, along with
addressing the subject of the “vaccine” also explained what they thought had
happened with their colleagues in the medical community who had not
acknowledged the issues with the jab.
Four Years Into the Plandemic.
By Peter A. McCullough, took to his Substack following
the hearing and wrote “We are now four years into the COVID-19 pandemic. After
hundreds if not thousands of physician media appearances, OPEDs, peer-reviewed
publications and public presentations, the US House of Representatives will
finally host medical specialists who have vast experience in treating
SARS-CoV-2 infections and managing the injuries resulting from COVID-19
vaccination.”
Dr McCullough said that he had “often wondered what were our
Congressman thinking as myself, Dr. Ryan Cole, and Dr. Kirk Milhoan appeared on
national television and told America that the infection was treatable and the
vaccines were ill-advised? Were they hoping this would “just blow over.” As the
years wore on and the causality count rose from both the illness and the
vaccines it appears things have come to a head.” Source
Perhaps medical practitioners worldwide who were going along
with governmental interventions, hoped that it would all blow over?
Will We Ever Trust the Medical Profession Again?
The video of the hearing has been posted below, but I would
like to share a small excerpt from it where Senator Johnson asks the panel of
doctors a question that I think is something we all perhaps would like to know
as many of us struggle to understand how our medical profession were able to
let us down so terribly.
They either did not do their due diligence, at best, or they
suspected or knew what was going on with the covid lies, and the toxic jab, but
were too financially trapped in the medical system to adhere to their oaths.
I wonder, if those of us, the layperson, who read every bit
of information and data we could get access to, will ever trust a doctor again?
We know that it was blatantly clear there were discrepancies in the data,
research that proved at the very least the inefficacies of masks, lockdowns,
and the jab etc etc yet they simply followed orders even when it was shown that
all these interventions were hazardous to our health.
Perhaps, for many of them, they know it is too late to admit
they were wrong, but how do we trust a doctor that has either no common sense,
cannot do research, and/or values his/her pay-packet more than thousands of
lives?
Senator Johnson asks the panel of doctors what was happening
in the medical establishment. I have provided a transcript for the conversation
responding to his question.
Senator Ron Johnson
“So my question, I actually have
a question, why isn’t the rest the medical community acknowledging this I mean
you obviously we’ve got eminently qualified doctors I know how you’ve been
vilified how they tried to marginalize you but anybody who’s listening to this
panel realized these are highly qualified compassionate doctors what is
happening throughout our medical establishment?”
“The Honest thing to say is I have no idea we have jumped
the rails we were you we’re used to a I sort of as a pediatrician when I would
give I I I was comfortable with treatments if I thought they were effective
with about a one in a million for vaccines a one in a million chance of getting
it what you were trying to prevent a one in a million of death.
I felt comfortable with that so when you have something and
we knew very early the signal was early it wasn’t it wasn’t late for the covid
vaccines they were very early probably within a month we met we met we met
criteria that previous vaccines had been taken off the market whether it was
Roshield(?) or whether it was swine flu and many others,
There are a whole bunch of times we make mistakes in
medicine.
What the country counted on, is that not only the doctors
would speak up, but then the regulatory bodies would say, “okay you’re right”
that meant signal, we gotta pull it off.
I don’t know what’s going on because when I look at the
Cleveland Clinic data when there are 51,000 employees that are looked at and
they study and they say, “what’s your risk of getting covid?” and it looks at
how many vaccines you had the lowest risk for getting covid is if you’ve had
zero vaccines. As you add vaccines your risk to get covid goes up.
I’ve never seen a vaccine like this, that’s not the basis of
vaccines, they shouldn’t have what we would call “negative efficacy,” that is a
peer reviewed beautiful study from Cleveland Clinic, completely ignored!
I think that a lot of times some of our colleagues, what I
hear from most of my colleagues:
“Kirk you’re right but I’m not going to stick my head
out, I’m gonna work one or two more years and then I’m retiring.”
I want to piggy back on Dr Milhoan’s excellent comment. Fear
,the simple answer is fear.
The body of the profession of medicine is almost all
employed now, the number of people that have spoken out have mostly been
independent and those who weren’t independent did pay that price, lost their
jobs for speaking truth.
And, are our colleagues, awake? Are people getting these
boosters?
No they’re not, because the people are awake, they’re still
pretty quiet as well. There’s obviously a vocal 30% of Americans that are
speaking out, we have a booster for something that’s extinct and
it’s still being pushed by our government agencies. xbb 1.5 is now 0.0%
prevalent we’re at jn1 which is 62% prevalent we have a booster vaccine from
Pfizer for something that doesn’t exist and we still have a government pushing
it.
But we have Physicians and we have Health Care Systems that
are dependent on the government teet and they’re nursing that teet for every
dollar they get and anybody that speaks against that cash flow gets the
hatchet.
So why are people not speaking up? I don’t know why they
forgot the oath that we all took yes we took that oath and we’ve paid the
price. Would I pay the price over again? would all you bet we would, because
this is about humanity and it’s about the long-term health of humanity.
And so I just I encourage my fellow Physicians around the
world speak up don’t be afraid even if you’re in the truth of one, be that
voice of truth.
And that’s what we’re up against, fear, and how do you
overcome fear? With courage.
I want to add to that I think the body of practicing
Physicians and nurses and medical technologist and all the Allied health
professionals. The vast majority took the vaccines and were under mandates,
under Biden’s mandates, to take the vaccine.
They all have a deep conscious or subconscious fear
themselves of what’s in their bodies. They likely had their families
vaccinated, they likely promoted these vaccines with their patients.
Think about how deep this is. This goes back to doctors
smoking cigarettes, advertising cigarettes smoking in the operating room,
saying that smoking cigarettes is good for them.
It took 40 years before doctors diverse course and
capitulated and said, “oh we were wrong on this” and in this horror as they
woke up to recognise this.
And the
Emperor of all Maladies written by written by Siddhartha
Mukherjee, at the Dana Farber
Institute he describes the lead lung cancer surgeon for John’s
Hopkins he was smoking as he was removing lung Cancers and vehemently denied
that smoking caused lung Cancers and he himself died of lung cancer.
You know, that these are historical types of observations
that I think we will go down in history.
It was an early Texas A&M survey done to show only 4% of
doctors didn’t take the vaccines. These doctors are at a premium right now
because patients want some Fair evaluation.
Gaslighting
As a doctor I can fairly give somebody an opinion regarding
an aortic valve problem, because I don’t have the problem myself. I can
actually be objective. Once people, doctors have taken the vaccine, they simply
can’t be objective and what we’re hearing from patients is that they’re being
ignored and what’s going on is called “gaslighting“
That they’re told that this is in their head because the
doctors themselves and the nurses do not want to come to their own personal
recognition that they themselves have taken a vaccine.
This is a unique problem that is going to Bear out over time
and I hope that these individuals in a sense become aware, Now clearly I have
doctor after doctor nurse after nurse coming to me saying “I’ve developed
myocarditis”, “I’ve developed a blood clot.”
Now I’m regretful but I’m hoping that they themselves don’t
have to develop a personal medical problem to become aware and be activated
because they have a duty to warn others.
TODAY is only a drop in the bucket in the amount of info of
the Globalist-Elitist few to dominate the many by any means necessary even if
it means depopulating to a more controllable amount of people.
The drop in the bucket of available information on UN Agenda
21/2030, WEF and the WHO. I’m posting 2-videos I uploaded to my Bitchute
Channel and a Telegram Natural News post. The titles:
oAgenda
21 (2030) Globalist Plan
oNo
Farmers No Food: Will You Eat The Bugs? EPOCH TV
oDr. Meryl Nass warns: WHO pandemic treaty
is about global dominion by the few and total control of the masses
Then if that whets your thirst for knowledge I’m adding a
couple of older videos aimed at exposing the World Economic Forum (WEF). The
titles:
oWEF
Scientist Testifies 'Man-Made Climate Change Is a Depopulation Scam' – The People’s
Voice (Rumble)
oI
WENT TO THE WORLD ECONOMIC FORUM AS A SPY —THIS IS WHAT SCARED ME THE MOST
(EDITED) – Picked up by Bitchute Channel Some Guy of
Glenn Beck going clandestinely to WEF meetings as well as conducting interviews
pertaining to his discoveries.
YOU
CAN ALSO SUPPORT via buying women’s menstrual health, healthy collagen,
vitamin supplements/products, coffee from my wife’s Online store: My Store
(please use referral discount code 3917004): https://modere.co/3f9x6xy
Big Tech Censorship is
pervasive – Share voluminously on all social media platforms!
‘"The goal of Agenda 21 is
one world government, and total control from a central unit."
Author of 'Behind
the Green Mask', the late Rosa Koire,
breaks down the totalitarian United Nations control plan known as 'Agenda 21'
(which later became Agenda 2030).’ [Amazon link to purchase book added
by Blog Editor]
[Blog Editor: This info not on my Bitchute Channel but
added as a reference for the Blog:
As the title indicates, the documentary focuses on Agenda
21/2030 & WEF designs to limit food production they perceive or deceive to
affect Climate Change. My perception is the agenda is to decrease the world
population for easier Globalist-Elitist control of humanity.
Here’s the EPOCH TV description:
‘“No Farmers No Food: Will You
Eat The Bugs?” is an Epoch Original documentary exposing the hidden agenda
behind global “Green Policies,” the untold stories of farmers forced out of
business, the disruption this will have on our food supply, and why edible bugs
are suddenly being pushed to the fore as a "Global Green Solution."
EpochTV program “Facts Matter”
host Roman Balmakov investigates the rapidly changing landscape of our global
food source—the farming industry—through interviews with farmers in The
Netherlands, Sri Lanka, and the United States. This is the next global crisis
that is being ignored by the world’s media.
Meryl Nass, a biowarfare and epidemics expert, has warned
about the globalist agenda to impose a "global dominion by the few and
total control of the masses" disguised as an international pandemic
treaty under the World Health Organization (WHO).
According to Nass, whose medical license was suspended in
January 2022 by the Maine medical board for allegedly spreading "COVID
misinformation" and prescribing ivermectin, the current draft of the
treaty and the proposed amendments to the International Health Regulations
(IHR) would require the public to have mRNA-based vaccination. [Bold Text
Emphasis Blog Editor’s] However, these vaccines are only produced in 100
days by skipping human trials and reducing safety and efficacy testing to the
bare minimum.
The treaty gives the director-general of the WHO additional
power to determine which medications can be used in medical emergencies. This
means that the WHO will gain authority over the healthcare of the public in
different states, obliging local healthcare practitioners to adhere to their
directives.
The WHO is also set to implement nationwide biosurveillance
programs to identify potential pandemic-causing pathogens by testing humans,
domesticated and farm animals and wildlife, as well as inspecting farms,
factories, wastewater, and more. Additionally, the WHO director-general can
declare a pandemic or even a potential one, but with no predefined criteria to
declare one.
Furthermore, the director-general can act based on little
more than hearsay. Concrete evidence of an impending or ongoing pandemic is not
a prerequisite. Nations are also obliged to monitor and censor social media to
push the WHO's narrative.
This globalist agenda, disguised as a treaty, implies a loss
of medical freedom and bodily autonomy for the masses.
WHO pandemic treaty encourages gain-of-function research
In an article published by Nass entitled "The
WHO’s Proposed Treaty Will Increase Manmade Pandemics," [Brownstone Institute link
added by Blog Editor and dated 8/17/23] she pointed out that the treaty
encourages "gain-of-function" research, a euphemism for biological
warfare research, to predict future pandemic threats or potential bioweapons.
Meaning, the WHO obliges its members to actively search for
potentially pandemic-causing pathogens and, once found, share them and any
associated research globally. With this strategy, it would be harder to blame a
country or organization as all nations are working with the same pathogens.
Moreover, the treaty proposes that governments share all
viruses and bacteria with "pandemic potential" with the WHO and other
governments, even putting their genomic sequences online. However, this plan
risks exposing dangerous pathogens to hackers and other malicious actors,
undermining global security.
In short, gain-of-function research is explicitly
incentivized by the treaty.
Ultimately, the WHO treaty pushes people in the opposite
direction of what is required to prevent future pandemics. To effectively
prevent pandemics, it is necessary to stop gain-of-function research, as it
represents the most significant pandemic threat.
"It is the public who pays the cost of the research,
and then pays again for the accidents and deliberate leaks. Wouldn't it be
better to end gain-of-function research entirely, by restricting funding or
closing the laboratories, rather than encouraging the distribution of
biological weapons?If we want a decent
future, it is crucial that we control these weapons instead of proliferating
them," Nass wrote.
[Blog Editor: Natural News places a Brighteon video link
at the end of the post - https://www.brighteon.com/3420c36d-61eb-4343-96f5-b1f8e1949797.
Brighteon is difficult to embed so I’ll be using Bitchute. The video is Mike
Adams interviewing Dr. Francis Boyle on bioweapons & biowarfare dated “10
months ago”. The Brighteon title is a bit different than the Bitchute version
but it’s the same: “Dr. Francis Boyle issues URGENT WARNING about WHO pandemic
treaty designed to enslave & exterminate humanity: “Dr. Francis Boyle
issues URGENT WARNING about WHO pandemic treaty designed to enslave &
exterminate humanity”.]
A top climate change scientist has become the latest expert
to blow the whistle on the globalist elite and admit the so-called climate
crisis is a hoax to depopulate the world, humiliate the masses, and bolster the
coffers of the elite at the expense of ordinary, working people.
That’s the problem with perpetuating a massive, ongoing hoax
that affects literally every single person on the planet. A hoax of such
enormous scale requires a lot of people to be in on the secret, and eventually
some of them are going to blow the whistle and tell the truth.
Mainstream media is still trying to keep up appearances and
pretend the hoax isn’t falling apart. That’s what they are paid to do by the
global elite, after all. But the media is fighting a losing battle.
At this point the media is like the proverbial Dutch boy
with his finger in the dam wall, plugging the leaks that are threatening to
burst the dam wall.
Unfortunately for the mainstream media, the leaks are
growing by the day, and the wall is about to come crashing in.
SHOCKING SUPER SMART CITY PLAN - The reason Dutch farmers
are being targeted (depopulation adjacent)
Globalist plans to make a super (smart) city taking over the whole of the
Netherlands, parts of Germany & Belgium too, all under the pretence of
alleged damage to the environment from Nitrogen!
Trudeau (Canada) has identical plans. + There is zero news coverage of any of
the farmers protests etc. on CBS in Canada.
In this episode of Ideas Have Consequences, Larry engages in
an enlightening conversation with Jim Ferguson, a passionate advocate standing
shoulder-to-shoulder against the World Economic Forum and its intricate global
strategies. Jim, a devoted patriot from Scotland with a fervent belief in
individual liberties, delves into the meticulous research he has undertaken,
unraveling the intricate web woven by the WEF. Unveiling their intentions to
exercise control over the worldwide food chain by unsettlingly seizing farms,
Jim’s insights bring to light the gravity of the situation.
Furthermore, the video sheds light on the disconcerting
connection between prominent WEF benefactors and their zealous promotion of
Covid-19 and other vaccines. Astonishingly, these very individuals ardently
advocate for a drastic reduction in the global populace by several billion
souls. The discourse takes an alarming turn as we explore openly discussed
aspirations of globalist powers. The urgency for ordinary citizens to be
prepared and resolute in opposing the affluent utilitarian puppeteers
orchestrating the World Economic Forum becomes undeniably apparent. Join us to
delve into these crucial issues that demand the vigilance and determination of
all those who champion the cause of freedom.
I am a concerned Senior Citizen and I am fully aware I come
across as a disgruntled curmudgeon in my outlook of today’s current society. My
reasoning is largely due to a sense of evaporating Liberty and Bible-based
morals I experienced in younger days.
AND SO, I grouse on.
Today’s sharing largely confirms the societal evaporation
that only an awakening youth might resist and reverse. Will I live to see such
an awakening? Currently I have my doubts, but I do have seeds of hope. Seeds I
pray grow roots and sprout crops of faith driven by confidence in God’s Word
above the agenda of human Elitists trying to elevate a select few to a transhumanist
blasphemous godhood.
So, consider this information which I am certain
Globalist-Elitists rather you not dwell on. WHY? Simply because the Elitists
fear an awakening that throws the proverbial monkey wrench into the
machinations of an agenda NOT favorable for most of humanity.
AND I leave you with an awakened choice of activism. I pray
I am wrong about America’s upcoming Election 2024. If the election cycles of
2020 (THE DEM-MARXIST COUP) and 2022 are any indicator, massive fraud and voter
manipulation will perpetuate a growing Globalist tyranny. AND you can toss in
seemingly perpetual LAWFARE against the legitimately 2020 elected Donald Trump
to prevent a potential reelection as another indicator. [As an aside:If
Trump pulls off a GOP nomination even under the intense political persecution,
I’ll be voting for him. BUT I DO HAVE A HUGE PROBLEM with President Trump’s
idiotic support with (as far as I’m concerned PROVEN) unsafe and
ineffective mRNA Jab. The whole ordeal of government science lies STILL going
on with mRNA has essentially turned me into an anti-vaxxer. If the government
lies about mRNA, what else about vaccinations have they lied about.]
With the existence of a corrupt government, it’s time think
and build resistance locally and work outward nationally – ONE PATH:
Thank you to those who have stepped up! I need Readers
willing to chip in $5 - $10 - $25 - $50 - $100. PLEASE YOUR generosity is
appreciated. PLEASE GIVE to Help me be a voice for Liberty:
YOU CAN ALSO SUPPORT via buying women’s menstrual health, healthy collagen,
vitamin supplements/products, coffee from my wife’s Online store: My
Store (please use referral discount code 3917004): https://modere.co/3f9x6xy
Big Tech Censorship is
pervasive – Share voluminously on all social media platforms!
*************************
Report: UN ‘Pact For The Future’ Seeks Permanent
Emergency Powers For ‘Complex Global Shocks’:
Any new major event will see globalists attempt
to take complete control
The UN is set to outline a far reaching plan to secure
emergency powers that would allow the global body to lead a “common agenda” for
all nations during any “complex global shocks” such as a new pandemic.
The
Federalist reports that the plan is to be finalised at a
September 2024 ‘Summit of the Future,’ where the UN will adopt a ‘Pact for the
Future,’ to include policies that have been outlined in the
globalist body’s ‘Our
Common Agenda’ report.
One such policy is an “emergency platform” during any
events that have a global impact that would provide the UN the authority to
“actively promote and drive an international response that places the
principles of equity and solidarity at the centre of its work.”
Meanwhile:
“..the United Nations would be given unprecedented authority over the public and private sectors of huge swaths of the world, all in the name of battling a yet unknown crisis.”
The report notes that some details of the emergency platform
were outlined in a paper
from March with the UN secretary-general declaring “I
propose that the General Assembly provide the Secretary-General and the United
Nations system with a standing authority to convene and operationalize
automatically an Emergency Platform in the event of a future complex global
shock of sufficient scale, severity and reach.”
The paper gives several examples of what could trigger the
emergency authority, including “major climatic event,” “future pandemic risks,”
a “global digital connectivity disruption,” “major event in outer space,” and
generic “unforeseen risks, (‘black swan’ events).”
It goes on to suggest that the UN would have the power to
oversee the “stakeholders” of the world, including academics, governments,
private sector actors, and “international financial institutions” to ensure
there is a unified, global response to whatever crisis is declared.
The paper further suggests that such authority would “Ensure
that all participating actors make commitments that can contribute meaningfully
to the response and that they are held to account for delivery on those
commitments.”
It also states that while the emergency authority would have
an initial finite lifespan, the UN would be able to extend it indefinitely if
it saw fit to do so.
The Federalist report notes that the Biden Administration
has backed
the proposal on multiple occasions, prompting reporter Justin
Haskins to warn that “If the emergency platform is approved, the United
States as we know it could cease to exist.”
I’ve read of this before, and it’s alarming. The US would relinquish its sovereignty. This must not happen. Americans WILL lose their freedom. The pushback to stop it should be intense
In a recent Time Magazine article, Ray Dalio of Bridgewater
Associates hedge funds warned that the world is on the brink of disaster. He
came to this conclusion based on current events that haven’t happened since the
nineteen thirties. The largest amounts of debt and inflation. The biggest gaps
in wealth and values resulting in the rise of populism on both the left and the
right against the elites. And the greatest international conflict between world
powers, most importantly between the U.S. and China.
Peter Onge writes that
the easy way out of this mess would be for the elite to proactively shrink in
scope. Get government out of the economy, out of social engineering, and out of
propagandizing kids. But of course, this won’t happen.
Common sense and simple observation will tell you that the
so-called elites will continue on their path towards economic destruction and
world war. Which is likely what the international bankers had planned all
along. Let us not forget that the fast-growing BRICS monetary system was born
in 2001 out of Goldman Sachs.
In 1971, President Nixon officially ended the Gold Standard
and replaced it with the petrodollar in which OPEC agreed to price their oil in
US dollars in exchange for US military protection. This blood money deal
preserved US control over the world economy. But when the US weaponized the
SWIFT payment system against Russia, BRICS became the only viable solution for
the rest of the world.
Reuters in New Delhi reported that last May, the State Bank
of India rejected Indian Oil Corp's planned payment in US dollars for Russian
oil. And so they went to a private bank and settled their trade for Russian oil
by paying in yuan to the Bank of China. And have continued to do so since.
A shortage of US dollars in Argentina has caused commercial
banks to allow the Chinese yuan as a form of currency in savings and checking
accounts. Argentina has already been issuing securities in the Chinese yuan and
has made a two-point-seven billion dollar payment to the International Monetary
Fund using the Chinese BRICS currency.
The Federal Reserve Bank’s FedNow is scheduled for launch by
the end of July. FedNow is officially an update to the Federal Reserve’s
payment processing and settlement system. And appears to be a backdoor to
creating a Central Bank Digital Currency. Private blockchain operator Tassat
has partnered with the Federal Reserve’s new payment system and will serve as
an interface for FedNow.
FedNow will also connect with Metal Blockchain, whose CEO
and founder claims will allow banks to prepare for an eventual central bank
digital currency, along with bank-issued stablecoins.
The idea of a Central Band Digital Currency is already
hugely unpopular with the majority of Americans. But according to Dale Houser,
it is being set up to destroy alternative blockchain solutions such as Ripple
and Stellar. And if the powers that be are successful in destroying the US
economy, then the only other option to accepting a CBDC would be some sort of
revolution. Which would be nearly impossible seeing as how divided the populist
movement is within the left/right paradigm.
Last week in China, the World Economic Forum proclaimed that
the entire world needs to switch to a Central Bank Digital Currency with expiry
dates and restrictions on undesirable purchases. They proposed using artificial
intelligence to censor hate speech and disinformation on the internet. And
using artificial intelligence to control a global social credit system that
will involve wearable devices with sensors to monitor everyone’s actions.
If we the people fail to unite against the powers that be,
then their solution will most certainly be world war, depopulation, and total
control. And this is all happening right now.
The American Mind Editors’ Note: The following is
adapted from the author’s remarks at a panel presented by the Ethics and Public
Policy Center.
Fran Maier is right that
we are now at a hinge in history—the end of an age and the beginning of
something new. Anyone who thinks he or she knows exactly what will emerge next
is probably wrong. Whatever is coming next, it will be a very different world
from the one we’ve inhabited since World War II. I am quite certain that many
things will get worse before they get better. Our societal
institutions—governmental, educational, communications, media, medical, public
health, etc.—have failed us. The degree of rot in these institutions makes
reform or repair, in the short term at least, impractical.
I believe our task is analogous to that undertaken by the
Czech dissidents of the Soviet era. Many of us are familiar with Vaclav Havel,
who became the first president of the Czech Republic after the fall of
Communism and wrote the now classic essay, “The Power of the Powerless.” Maier
mentions another Vaclav: a close friend and collaborator of Havel, Vaclav Benda
is less well-known but no less important. In contrast to Havel, Benda was a
faithful Catholic and remained grounded in his Christian convictions as he
faced the challenges of his time and place.
Some readers will doubtless wonder whether the historical
analogy to a communist totalitarian regime might not be a bit overblown. Things
may be bad, but they surely cannot be that bad. But consider,
as Eric Voegelin taught us, that the common feature of all totalitarian systems
is neither concentration camps, nor secret police, nor mass surveillance—as
horrifying as all these are. The common feature of all totalitarian systems is
the prohibition of questions: every totalitarian regime first monopolizes what
counts as rationality and determines what questions you are allowed to ask.
At the risk of offending my audience I will suggest: if you
don’t see that precisely this is happening on an unprecedented scale globally,
you have not been paying close attention. If you still remain skeptical,
consider Polish philosopher Leszek Kolakowski’s brilliant formulation to describe the
totalitarian method of imposing unity on an entire population: perfect
integration through perfect fragmentation. Mull over this phrase while you
watch T.V. or scroll social media: perfect integration through perfect
fragmentation.
In the Czech context of the 1970s and 1980s, as Professor F.
Flagg Taylor writes, “[Vaclav] Benda saw that the Communist regime either
sought to infiltrate and co-opt independent social structures for its own
purposes, or to de-legitimate and destroy them. It sought to maintain a
populace of isolated individuals without any habits or desires for
association.” In other words, as he put it, the Iron Curtain had not just
descended between East and West, but between one individual and another, or
even between an individual’s own body and his soul.
Benda recognized that any hopes for the regime’s fundamental
reform or even moderation were futile. It was time to ignore the regime’s
official structures and build new ones where human community could be
rediscovered and human life could be lived decently. Benda proposed building
new small-scale institutions of civil society—in education and family, in
productivity and market exchange, in media and communications, literature and
the arts, entertainment and culture, and so on—what Benda called “The Parallel
Polis” (1978).
He described this idea as follows: “I suggest that we join
forces in creating, slowly but surely, parallel structures that are capable, to
a limited degree at least, of supplementing the generally beneficial and
necessary functions that are missing in the existing structures, and where
possible, to use those existing structures, to humanize them.” And he clarified
that this strategy “need not lead to a direct conflict with the regime, yet it
harbors no illusions that ‘cosmetic changes’ can make any difference.” Benda
explained:
In concrete terms this means
taking over for the use of the parallel polis every space that the state has
temporarily abandoned or which it has never occurred to it to occupy in the
first place. It means winning over for the support of common aims…everything
alive in society and its culture in the broadest sense of the word. It means
winning over anything that has managed somehow to survive the disfavor of the
times (e.g., the Church) or that was able, despite unfavorable times, to come
into being.
The parallel polis is not, Benda emphasized, a ghetto or
an underground; it is not a black-market system hiding in the
shadows. As the word polis suggests, the purpose of these
institutions was to eventually renew the wider society, not to retreat from it
entirely. “The strategic aim of the parallel polis,” Benda wrote, “should be
the growth, or the renewal, of civic and political culture—and along with it,
an identical structuring of society, creating bonds of responsibility and
fellow-feeling.”
Benda acknowledged that every institution of the parallel
polis was a David facing the Goliath of a massively powerful totalitarian
state. Any one or another of these institutions could be crushed by the state
machinery if the state specifically targeted it for liquidation. The task,
therefore, was to create so many of these parallel structures and institutions
that the corrupt state would finally be limited in its reach: while it could
crush any one institution at any time, there would eventually be too many such
institutions for the state to target them all simultaneously. Elements of the
parallel polis would always survive: as the state crushed one institution, two
others would arise elsewhere.
Plan of Action
The parallel polis requires a deliberate strategy: it does
not develop automatically. As Benda proposed in his own day, I am convinced it
is time to build these new parallel institutions of civil society. We need to
be thinking in 50-year increments. This means planting mustard seeds that may
not fully germinate in our lifetimes. I suggest that today’s Parallel Polis
should be grounded in three principles:
Sovereignty, Solidarity, Subsidiarity. [Blog
Editor Bold Text Emphasis] I will conclude with five brief points to
illustrate the application of these principles in our current moment. (I am
simply going to state these points, since time does not allow me to argue for
or explain each one.)
First: governments during COVID demanded we become
disempowered and isolated. People globally ceded their sovereignty and
abandoned social solidarity. By contrast, the new parallel institutions of
civil society must return sovereignty to individuals, families, and communities
and strengthen social solidarity.
Second: markets, communications, and governing
structures have become increasingly centralized at a national and global level,
robbing individuals, families, and local communities of legitimate authority,
privacy, and freedom. Thus, the new institutions must be grounded in
technologies and models of decentralized communications, information sharing,
authority, and markets of productivity and exchange.
Third: individuals, families, and local communities
especially have been robbed of their legitimate authority and targeted. To
rectify this, the new institutions must support the principle of subsidiarity
and empower practical efforts at the local level.
Fourth: fear has been weaponized to coerce
individuals, families, and communities to cede their sovereignty and even make
them forget they once had it. To help individuals, families, and small
communities reclaim their sovereignty—their ability to self-govern—we must help
people overcome their fear and find their courage.
Fifth, with the rollout of new mechanisms of social
surveillance and control—the biosecurity model of governance, biometric digital
IDs, Central Bank Digital Currencies, surveillance capitalism, and so on—the
temporal window to reclaim solidarity and regain sovereignty is closing fast.
Therefore, the time to begin is now.
Aaron Kheriaty MD is
the director of the Bioethics and American Democracy Program at the Ethics and
Public Policy Center and a senior fellow at the Zephyr Institute.
The American Mind
presents a range of perspectives. Views are writers’ own and do not necessarily
represent those of The Claremont Institute.
The American Mind
is a publication of the Claremont Institute, a non-profit 501(c)(3)
organization, dedicated to restoring the principles of the American Founding to
their rightful, preeminent authority in our national life. Interested in
supporting our work? Gifts
to the Claremont Institute are tax-deductible.
The New World Order (NWO) perpetrated largely under the
leadership of the World Economic Forum (WEF) under what many might consider an
odd mixture of Marxism, Fascism and Corporatism is being pushed not only in
America but also on people of the once-considered Free World.
The masses are being brainwashed with 1984-style/Brave
New World-style Newspeak or Double-Speak in which lies are called truth and
the truth is called lies.
The masses are everyday people which once imagined they lived
free making a living planning for their future or a better posterity for their
progeny. The Elite are the modern wealthy and powerful who desire to construct
a cultural world in which the masses serve the whims of the Elite. If significant
portions of the masses are considered irrelevant, a hindrance or a threat to
Elitist whims and cultural agendas; THEN those particular portions of the
masses are then considered expendable worthy of elimination.
As you read and/or watch the below intentions/actions exposed
among the Elitist designs, YOU should reflect: “Are YOU worthy of
being one of the ELIMINATED?”
“In the 1971 book, Schwab and
Kroos suggested that “the management of a modern enterprise must serve not only
shareholders but all stakeholders to achieve long-term growth and prosperity.” The
stakeholders are the compliant and complicit corporations and governments, not
the citizenry.”
I also have discovered that the propaganda for the Left MSM
has attempted to discredit the Project Veritas expose by lying about the
credentials of drunken Jordon Trishton Walker spilling the Pfizer beans by
questioning his youthful appearance and his level as a Pfizer executive.
Project Veritas actually provides the documentation credentials of Walker which
can be examined:
So yup, AGAIN the Left Lies and the Right exposes the TRUTH!
THEN, I subscribe to a Bitchute Channel with the
lengthy name of Americans United
Against The New World Order. A great channel for informative
re-broadcast videos however a bit lacking in providing the Who-What-Where info
of the videos. Of interest is WHO Whistleblower Astrid Stuckelberger interviewed
by Del Bigtree of The HighWire (the info garnered from watching and
not in the description): “W.H.O. WHISTLEBLOWER ASTRID
STUCKELBERGER EXPOSES GLOBALIST AGENDA”.
The fifty-third annual meeting of the World Economic Forum
(WEF) brought together fifty-two world leaders, seventeen hundred corporate
executives, sundry artists, and other personalities to address “Cooperation in
a Fragmented World.” Fragmentation is the nemesis of the World Economic Forum
and its United Nations (UN) and corporate partners. “Fragmentation” means that
segments of the world population are not adhering to the agenda of climate
change catastrophism and the precepts of the Great Reset.
The Great Reset, meanwhile, amounts to a hybrid
state-corporate woke cartel administering the global economy (and by extension
the world’s political systems) under the direction of the WEF, the UN, the
International Monetary Fund (IMF), the European Central Bank (ECB), and the
World Health Organization, as well as top corporate decision-makers like
BlackRock’s CEO, Larry Fink.
Lest we imagine that the WEF and its meetings merely
represent the grandiose delusions of some ineffectual clowns, it should be
noted that the WEF’s “stakeholder capitalism”—introduced in 1971 by Klaus
Schwab, the WEF founder and chair, and Hein Kroos, in Modern
Enterprise Management in Mechanical Engineering—has been
embraced by the UN, by most central banks, as well as by the world’s leading
corporations, commercial banks, and asset managers. Stakeholder capitalism is
now considered to be the modus operandi of the world economic system.
In the 1971 book, Schwab and Kroos suggested that “the
management of a modern enterprise must serve not only shareholders but all
stakeholders to achieve long-term growth and prosperity.” The stakeholders are
the compliant and complicit corporations and governments, not the citizenry.
BlackRock, the world’s largest asset manager, holds upwards
of $10 trillion in assets under management (AUM), including the pension funds
of many US states. In 2019, BlackRock’s CEO, Larry Fink, led the US Business Roundtable on stakeholder
capitalism. CEOs from 181 major corporations redefined the common purpose of
the corporation in terms of Schwab’s brainchild, stakeholder capitalism,
signaling the supposed end of shareholder-driven capitalism. In his 2022 letter to CEOs, Fink made BlackRock’s own
position on investment decisions quite clear. “Climate risk is investment
risk,” Fink declared. He promised a “tectonic shift in capital,” an increased
acceleration of investments going to “sustainability-focused” companies.
Fink warned CEOs: “And because this will have such a
dramatic impact on how capital is allocated, every management team and
board will need to consider how this will impact their company’s stock”(emphasis
mine). According to Fink, stakeholder capitalism is not an aberration. Fink
provides evidence of stakeholder capitalism’s woke imperative in his denial of
the same: “It is not a social or ideological agenda. It is not ‘woke.’ It
is capitalism.” This definition of capitalism would certainly have come as
news to Ludwig von Mises.
Fink sits on the board of trustees of the WEF, along
with former US vice president Al Gore; IMF managing director Kristalina
Georgieva; ECB president Christine Lagarde, and Canadian deputy prime minister
and minister of finance Chrystia Freeland, among others.
In his 2023 welcoming remarks and special address, Schwab
pointed to the multiple crises facing the world: “the energy transformation,
the consequences of covid, the reshaping of supply chains are all serving as
catalytic forces for the economic transformation.” Incidentally, these are all
factors that the WEF has promoted and/or exacerbated. And together they have
added to the “high inflation, increasing interest rates, and growing national
debt” that Schwab also decried.
Schwab pointed to the problem of social and geopolitical
fragmentation and “a messy patchwork of powers,” alluding to the war in
Ukraine. But Schwab also bemoaned “large corporate and social media powers, all
competing increasingly for power and influence. As a result, the trend is again
moving toward increased fragmentation and confrontation”—no doubt referring, at
least in part, to the recent takeover of Twitter by Elon Musk, the loss of a
major platform for propaganda and censorship. Naturally, Schwab referred to
“climate change” and “viruses” as existential threats that could lead to “the
extinction of large parts of our global population.” The question is whether
“climate change” and “viruses” or rather the responses to these supposed
menaces will be the cause of mass extinctions.
But “the most critical fragmentation” threat, Klaus argued,
is posed by those who “go into the negative” and hold a “critical and
confrontational attitude” to the Davos agenda—those with the temerity to oppose
a global agenda of climate change catastrophism, with its attendant control
over production and consumption and the virtual elimination of property and
property rights for the vast majority.
A central issue that the fifty-third annual meeting
addressed was “the Current Energy and Food Crises in the Context of a New
System for Energy, Climate and Nature.” The theme accords with the WEF’s
earlier and repeated claims that the agricultural supply chain is too
“fragmented” for “sustainable” farming. “A resilient, environmentally-friendly
food system will require a shift away from our current fragmented supply
chains,” wrote Lindsay Suddon, chief strategy officer
of Proagrica, in 2020. In Suddon’s and many other WEF papers, the
“fragmentation” refrain is repeated. Sustainable farming cannot be achieved
under the “fragmented” agricultural conditions that currently obtain.
As the heads of leading
multilateral and commercial agricultural finance institutions, we are
convinced that fragmentation within the current food systems represents the
most significant hurdle to feeding a growing population nutritiously and
sustainably.
Written by Wiebe Draijer, then chairman of the managing
board at Rabobank, and Gilbert Fossoun Houngbo, the director general–elect of
the International Labour Organization (ILO), the paper was quite telling. It
warned that unless fragmentation is addressed, “we will also have no hope of
reaching the Sustainable Development Goal of net zero emissions by 2050, given
that today’s agricultural supply chain, from farm to fork, accounts for around
27% of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.”
Rabobank is one of the financial sponsors of the WEF’s Food Action Alliance (discussed below). On
its website, Rabobank notes that it operates in the
Netherlands, serving retail and corporate clients, and globally, financing the
agricultural sector. The ILO is a UN agency that sets labor standards
in 187 countries.
What interests could an international bank and a UN
international labor agency have in common? According to their jointly authored
paper, they have in common a resolve to eliminate fragmentation in agriculture.
The banking interest in defragmentation is to gain a controlling interest in
fewer and larger farms. The labor union management interest is to have more
workers under its supervision and control. The banking and labor interests
combined result in large farms worked by organized farm
laborers—nonowners—under the controlling interest of the bank. A bonus
rationale (more likely the main one) for this “scheme” is that the sustainable
development goals (SDGs) of the UN’s Agenda 2030 can thereby more easily be
implemented across “agricultural value chains and farming practices.” The
authors conclude: “Most critically, we need to aggregate opportunities,
resources and complementary expertise into large-scale projects that
can unlock investment and deliver impact” (emphasis mine). “Collective action”
is the “cure.”
In terms of agriculture, that is, “fragmentation” means too
many discrete and disparate farms. The solution to this problem is
consolidation, or the ownership of agricultural assets by fewer and fewer
entities. Enter Bill Gates in the US. The “large-scale projects” will be owned
by those who can afford to abide by the European Commission’s (EC) Farm to Fork Strategy. “The Farm to Fork Strategy
is at the heart of the European Green Deal.” The goal of the European Green
Deal is “no net emissions of greenhouse gases by 2050.” (More on the Farm to
Fork Strategy and its effects on hunger and starvation below.)
The issue of food supply was addressed in a session entitled
“Sustainably Served.” The summary caption for the
session notes that “nearly 830 million people face food insecurity and more
than 3 billion are unable to afford a healthy diet. Challenges to human and
planetary health have been further compounded by rising costs, supply chain
disruptions and climate change.”
The highlight of the “Sustainably Served” panel, which otherwise amounted
to virtue signaling, came in the form of questions posed by an audience member,
“Jacob, from America”:
I want to ask a question about
food production. Last year the Dutch government announced harsh restrictions on
the use of nitrogen fertilizers. Such restrictions forced many farmers to put
much of their land out of production. And these policies led to 30,000 Dutch
farmers protesting these government policies. And this was being done at a time
when food production was already being severely curtailed because of the war in
Ukraine. My questions are, one, does the panel support similar policies being
implemented throughout the world? And do you support the Dutch farmers who are
protesting? Do not such strict policies leading to reduced food production
ultimately harm the poorest people of the world and exacerbate the problem of
malnutrition?
The questioner was one of four, yet his questions dominated
the rest of the session and led the moderator, Tolu Oni, and panelist Hanneke
Faber, the president of nutrition at Unilever, which is based in the
Netherlands, to become quite defensive. The latter replied:
I am Dutch, and our business is
based in Holland. It’s a very difficult situation in Holland. I have a lot of
sympathy for the farmers who are protesting, because it’s their livelihoods and
their businesses at risk. But I also have a lot of sympathy for what the
government is trying to do, because the nitrogen emissions are way too
high. . . . So, something needs to be done. . . .
But it’s a very Dutch problem. I
don’t think that you have to worry that those same solutions will have to go
somewhere else.
This last statement is belied by the fact that the
Netherlands is the headquarters of the WEF’s Food
Action Alliance program and the site of the Global
Coordinating Secretariat (GCS) of the WEF’s Food Innovation Hubs. Launched at the Davos Agenda
meeting in 2021, the Food Innovation Hubs have as their goal alignment with the
UN Food Systems Summit: “The role of the GCS will be to coordinate the efforts
of the regional Hubs as well as align with global processes and initiatives
such as the UN Food Systems Summit.” And the stated goal of
the UN Food Systems Summit is to align agricultural production with Agenda
2030’s SDGs: “The UN Food Systems Summit, held during the UN General Assembly
in New York on September 23 [2021], set the stage for global food systems
transformation to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals by 2030.”
“Sustainability” and “sustainable development” do not mean,
as the words seem to suggest, the ability to withstand shocks of various
kinds—economic crises, natural disasters, etc. They mean development
constrained by utopian, unscientific environmentalist imperatives, inclusive
of reduced production and consumption in the developed world and the thwarting
of development that would result in the production of additional GHGs in the
developing world. In terms of agriculture, this entails a reduction in the use
of nitrogen-rich fertilizers and their eventual elimination and the phasing out
of methane- and ammonia-producing cattle. In the Netherlands, the Food Hubs
initiative has already led to the government’s compulsory buyout and closure of as many as
three thousand farms, which will lead to dramatically reduced crop yields from
the world’s second-largest exporter of agricultural products.
The situation in the Netherlands is also part of the
European Commission’s Farm to Fork Strategy. Under the Trump administration,
the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) found that adopting the plan would result in a
decline in agricultural production of between 7 percent and 12 percent for the
European Union, depending on whether the adoption is EU-wide or global. With
EU-only adoption, the decline in EU agricultural production was projected to
be 12 percent, as opposed to 7 percent should the adoption become global. In
the case of global adoption, worldwide agricultural production was projected to
drop by 11 percent. Further, the USDA reported:
The decline in agricultural
production would tighten the EU food supply, resulting in price increases that
impact consumer budgets. Prices and per capita food costs would increase the
most for the EU, across each of the three scenarios [a middle scenario of
adoption of Farm to Fork by the EU and neighboring nation-states was included
in the study]. However, price and food cost increases would be significant for
most regions if [Farm to Fork] Strategies are adopted globally. For the United
States, price and food costs would remain relatively unchanged except in the
case of global adoption.
Production declines in the EU
and elsewhere would lead to reduced trade, although some regions would benefit
depending on changes in import demand. However, if trade is restricted as a
result of the imposition of the proposed measures, the negative impacts
are concentrated in regions with the world’s most food-insecure populations. . . .
Food insecurity, measured as the
number of people who lack access to a diet of at least 2,100 calories a day,
increases significantly in the 76 low- and middle-income countries covered in
our analysis due to increases in food commodity prices and declines in income,
particularly in Africa. By 2030, the number of food-insecure people in
the case of EU-only adoption would increase by an additional 22 million more
than projected without the EC’s proposed Strategies. The number would climb to
103 million under the middle scenario and 185 million under global adoption.
(emphasis mine)
Thus, we see that “sustainably served” means sustainably
starved.
Another panel of note was “Stewarding Responsible Capitalism,” which featured
Brian T. Moynihan, CEO of Bank of America and chair of the WEF business
council, among others. An arch proponent of stakeholder capitalism, Moynihan
suggested that companies that do not meet environmental, social, and governance
(ESG) criteria will simply be left behind. No one will do business with such
companies, he said.
Moynihan’s comments revealed the extent to which stakeholder
capitalism and the metric for measuring it, the ESG index, have penetrated
commercial banking. In fact, over three hundred major banks are signatories of
the UN’s “Principles for Responsible Banking,” “representing
almost half of the global banking industry.” Meanwhile, forty-seven hundred
asset management firms, asset owners, and asset service providers have signed the UN’s six “Principles for Responsible Investment.” These
principles are entirely focused on ESG compliance and meeting the UN’s Agenda
2030 sustainable development goals. ESG indexing now pervades every aspect of
banking and investment businesses, including what companies they invest in, how
they adhere to ESG metrics themselves, and how they cooperate with competitors
to promote ESGs. Thus, the goal of the principles is to universalize ESG
investing. ESG indexing raises the cost of doing business, starves the
noncompliant of capital, and creates a woke cartel of preferred producers.
In the “Philanthropy: A Catalyst for Protecting Our Planet”
session, US climate envoy John Kerry suggested that he and the people at Davos
were “a select group of human beings, [who], because of whatever touched us at
some point in our lives, are able to sit in a room and come together and
actually talk about saving the planet.” Betraying the religious, cultlike
character of the Davos group, Kerry suggested that his and others’ anointment
as saviors of the planet was “almost extraterrestrial.” If you tell them you
are interested in saving the planet, “most people,” Kerry continued, “they
think you are a tree-hugging leftie liberal do-gooder.” But I submit that “most
people” think Kerry and his ilk are not do-gooders at all but rather control
freaks and megalomaniacs bent on controlling the world’s population.
On other panels, the speakers stated that eating meat,
driving cars, and living outside the bounds of fifteen-minute
cities should be disallowed.
In short, with the Davos agenda, we are confronted with a
concerted, coordinated campaign to dismantle the productive capabilities in
energy, manufacturing, and farming. This project, driven by elites and accruing
to their benefit, is amounting to the largest Great Leap Backward in
recorded history. If it is not stopped and reversed, it will lead to economic
disaster, including dramatically reduced consumption and living standards. And
it will almost certainly result in more hunger in the developed world and
famines in the developing world. WEF chairman Schwab may outdo Chairman Mao.
If we let him.
Michael Rectenwald is
the author of twelve books, including The Great Reset and the
Struggle for Liberty: Unraveling the Global Agenda, Thought Criminal, Beyond
Woke, Google Archipelago, and Springtime for Snowflakes.
He is a distinguished fellow at Hillsdale College.
Mises Institute is a tax-exempt
501(c)(3) nonprofit organization. Contributions
are tax-deductible to the full extent the law allows. Tax ID# 52-1263436. Mises Wire.
Jack Posobiec & Noor Bin Laden report on the WEF-Davos
meeting that took place M-F (1/16 to 1/20/23). The video was originally on
Gettr on Sunday 1/22/23 under the production Human Events: https://gettr.com/streaming/p25yo2af49d
+++++++++++++++++++
The ‘Great Food Reset’: Who’s Behind Plan to Reengineer
the Global Food Supply?
Journalist James Corbett identifies the cast of
characters driving the Great Food Reset, a plan to reengineer the global food
supply under the guise of a fake food crisis.
Food, Corbett noted a week earlier on his Substack, has been
leveraged throughout human history as a “powerful
tool of control.”
But it’s not too late to “start formulating our own plans
for counteracting this agenda” of control, Corbett said.
What’s the first step? Look closely at who’s behind the
agenda.
According to Corbett:
“In order to truly do something
to derail the runaway train that is the Great
Food Reset, we must first understand it. And in order to understand
it, we have to know something about the people behind this agenda.”
Corbett provided an information-packed rundown of the groups
and individuals he believes are the drivers — historically and today — of the
Great Food Reset.
“From the beginning of the so-called ‘Green Revolution’ to
the so-called ‘Gene Revolution,’ the Rockefellers have been there,” Corbett
said, “helping to move things along with their ‘philanthropic’ donations.”
Corbett cited the Rockefellers’ recent work in Africa, which
operates under the name Alliance for a
Green Revolution in Africa. The alliance’s stated goal — to
“elevate the single African voice” — “sounds nice and fuzzy, until you learn
that 200 organizations have come together to denounce
the alliance and its activities,” Corbett said.
Corbett said the 200 critics of the alliance “claim that the
group has not only ‘unequivocally
failed in its mission,’ but has actually ‘harmed broader efforts to
support African farmers.’”
Bill Gates
Corbett pointed out that Bill
Gates, Sr., in 2009, admitted he had looked to the Rockefeller
Foundation as an example to follow when he helped his son set up the Bill &
Melinda Gates Foundation — so it comes as “no surprise” that Bill Gates is
heavily invested in the Great Food Reset.
Gates is “literally invested” in the food reset through his
financing of the fake
meat industry, Corbett said.
“Miraculously, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation Trust
was able to divest
itself of its Beyond Meat stock right before the shares tanked
in 2019,” Corbett said, adding, “The Gateses must be super-shrewd investors!”
Corbett also noted that Gates invested millions into “hacking
your microbiome” to reengineer humans’ gut bacteria.
“Gee, I wonder why someone who’s so obsessed with completely
reengineering the food supply and making us dependent on the lab-grown
synthetic food substitutes he funds would be buying up farmland?” Corbett said.
Among other goals, the WEF wants more people to eat more
insects.
“[Klaus]
Schwab’s desire to get humans off of traditional sources of
protein and nutrients is very much a part of that Great Reset plan,” Corbett
said.
“The fat cats are now unwinding after their hard
week at Davos,” Corbett said. “You can bet they’re not snacking
down on cricket croquette or mealmoth flambé . . . though they may expect you
to.”
Moreover, the EAT Forum, he said, also works with “nearly 40
city governments in Europe, Africa, Asia, North America, South America and
Australia, and helps the Gates-funded United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF)
create updated dietary guidelines.”
“The whole document is couched in the bland bureaucratic
doublespeak of ‘equity,’ ‘inclusion’ and ‘sustainability,’” Corbett said. “But,
if you know how to read between the lines, it isn’t hard to understand what the
report is really saying.”
“USAID’s ‘leverage’ over developing countries — specifically
referenced no less than 125 times — gives an insight into the Kissingerian
food-as-a-weapon mentality that is the very basis of USAID and
its mission,” Corbett said.
He added:
“The entire enterprise
reeks of a neocolonial landgrab masquerading as ‘philanthropy’ — the kind of
territorial taking that people in Africa and elsewhere have been warning about
for decades.”
Suzanne
Burdick, Ph.D., is a reporter and researcher for The
Defender based in Fairfield, Iowa. She holds a Ph.D. in Communication Studies
from the University of Texas at Austin (2021), and a master's degree in
communication and leadership from Gonzaga University (2015). Her scholarship
has been published in Health Communication. She has taught at various academic
institutions in the United States and is fluent in Spanish.
Pfizer Executive: ‘Mutate’ COVID via ‘Directed Evolution’
for Company to Continue Profiting Off of Vaccines … ‘COVID is Going to be a
Cash Cow for Us’ … ‘That is Not What We Say to the Public’ … ‘People Won’t Like
That’ … ‘Don’t Tell Anyone’
·Jordon
Trishton Walker, Pfizer Director of Research and Development, Strategic
Operations - mRNA Scientific Planner: “One of the things we're exploring is
like, why don't we just mutate it [COVID] ourselves so we could create --
preemptively develop new vaccines, right? So, we have to do that. If we're
gonna do that though, there's a risk of like, as you could imagine -- no one
wants to be having a pharma company mutating f**king viruses.”
·Walker:
“Don’t tell anyone. Promise you won’t tell anyone. The way it [the experiment]
would work is that we put the virus in monkeys, and we successively cause them
to keep infecting each other, and we collect serial samples from them.”
·Walker:
“You have to be very controlled to make sure that this virus [COVID] that you mutate
doesn’t create something that just goes everywhere. Which, I suspect, is the
way that the virus started in Wuhan, to be honest. It makes no sense that this
virus popped out of nowhere. It’s bullsh*t.”
·Walker: “From what I’ve heard is they [Pfizer
scientists] are optimizing it [COVID mutation process], but they’re going slow
because everyone is very cautious -- obviously they don’t want to accelerate it
too much. I think they are also just trying to do it as an exploratory thing
because you obviously don’t want to advertise that you are figuring out future
mutations.”
[NEW YORK – Jan. 25, 2023] Project Veritas released a new
video today exposing a Pfizer executive, Jordon Trishton Walker, who claims
that his company is exploring a way to “mutate” COVID via “Directed Evolution”
to preempt the development of future vaccines.
Walker says that Directed Evolution is different than
Gain-of-Function, which is defined as “a mutation that confers new or enhanced
activity on a protein.” In other words, it means that a virus such as COVID can
become more potent depending on the mutation / scientific experiment performed
on it.
The Pfizer executive told a Veritas journalist about his
company’s plan for COVID vaccines, while acknowledging that people would not
like this information if it went public.
“One of the things we [Pfizer] are exploring is like, why
don't we just mutate it [COVID] ourselves so we could create -- preemptively
develop new vaccines, right? So, we have to do that. If we're gonna do that
though, there's a risk of like, as you could imagine -- no one wants to be
having a pharma company mutating f**king viruses,” Walker said.
“From what I’ve heard is they [Pfizer scientists] are
optimizing it [COVID mutation process], but they’re going slow because everyone
is very cautious -- obviously they don’t want to accelerate it too much. I
think they are also just trying to do it as an exploratory thing because you
obviously don’t want to advertise that you are figuring out future mutations,”
he said.
“Don’t tell anyone. Promise you won’t tell anyone. The way
it [the experiment] would work is that we put the virus in monkeys, and we
successively cause them to keep infecting each other, and we collect serial
samples from them.”
Walker drew parallels between this current Pfizer project
and what may have happened at the Wuhan Institute of Virology in China.
“You have to be very controlled to make sure that this virus
[COVID] that you mutate doesn’t create something that just goes everywhere.
Which, I suspect, is the way that the virus started in Wuhan, to be honest. It
makes no sense that this virus popped out of nowhere. It’s bullsh*t,” he said.
“You’re not supposed to do Gain-of-Function research with
viruses. Regularly not. We can do these selected structure mutations to make
them more potent. There is research ongoing about that. I don’t know how that
is going to work. There better not be any more outbreaks because Jesus Christ,”
he said.
Walker also told the Veritas journalist that COVID has been
instrumental for Pfizer’s recent business success:
Walker: Part of what they
[Pfizer scientists] want to do is, to some extent, to try to figure out, you
know, how there are all these new strains and variants that just pop up. So,
it’s like trying to catch them before they pop up and we can develop a vaccine
prophylactically, like, for new variants. So, that’s why they like, do it
controlled in a lab, where they say this is a new epitope, and so if it comes
out later on in the public, we already have a vaccine working.
Veritas Journalist: Oh my
God. That’s perfect. Isn’t that the best business model though? Just control
nature before nature even happens itself? Right?
Walker: Yeah. If it
works.
Veritas Journalist: What
do you mean if it works?
Walker: Because some of
the times there are mutations that pop up that we are not prepared for. Like
with Delta and Omicron. And things like that. Who knows? Either way, it’s going
to be a cash cow. COVID is going to be a cash cow for us for a while going
forward. Like obviously.
Veritas Journalist: Well,
I think the whole research of the viruses and mutating it, like, would be the
ultimate cash cow.
Walker: Yeah, it’d be
perfect.
Walker went on to explain how Big Pharma and government
officials, such as at the Food & Drug Administration [FDA], have mutual
interests, and how that is not in the best interest of the American people:
Walker: [Big Pharma] is a
revolving door for all government officials.
Veritas Journalist: Wow.
Walker: In any industry
though. So, in the pharma industry, all the people who review our drugs --
eventually most of them will come work for pharma companies. And in the
military, defense government officials eventually work for defense companies
afterwards.
…
Veritas Journalist: How
do you feel about that revolving door?
Walker: It’s pretty good
for the industry to be honest. It’s bad for everybody else in America.
Veritas Journalist: Why
is it bad for everybody else?
Walker: Because when the
regulators reviewing our drugs know that once they stop regulating, they are
going to work for the company, they are not going to be as hard towards the
company that’s going to give them a job.
About Project Veritas
James O'Keefe established Project Veritas in 2010 as a
non-profit journalism enterprise to continue his undercover reporting work.
Today, Project Veritas investigates and exposes corruption, dishonesty,
self-dealing, waste, fraud, and other misconduct in both public and private institutions
to achieve a more ethical and transparent society and to engage in litigation
to: protect, defend and expand human and civil rights secured by law,
specifically First Amendment rights including promoting the free exchange of
ideas in a digital world; combat and defeat censorship of any ideology; promote
truthful reporting; and defend freedom of speech and association issues
including the right to anonymity. O'Keefe serves as the CEO and Chairman of the
Board so that he can continue to lead and teach his fellow journalists, as well
as protect and nurture the Project Veritas culture.
Project Veritas is a registered 501(c)3 organization.
Project Veritas does not advocate specific resolutions to the issues raised
through its investigations.
‘Never Again Is Now Global,’ a five-part docuseries directed
by holocaust survivor Vera Sharav highlights the
parallels between Nazi Germany and global pandemic policies, will premier
exclusively, for free on CHD.TV beginning Monday, Jan. 30, at 7 p.m.
EST.
Holocaust Survivors, featured in the docuseries explain how
Nazi interventions — including the suspension of freedoms, imposition of
lockdowns, coerced medical procedures and identity passports — are similar to
modern-day dictatorial constraints on citizens worldwide.
We sat down with Vera at her home in the Upper West Side of
New York City — for an hour and a half CHD.TV exclusive to discuss the
docuseries + the importance of disobeying the totalitarian continuum. Don't
miss this iconic interview.
[Blog Editor: For embed purposes I uploaded to my
Bitchute Channel. Note there is a little over a minute delay before the program
proceeds.]
.jpg)
