10.03.2020
LOCK STEP: This is No Futuristic Scenario
10.03.2020
Every day
world mainstream news reports more people in more countries diagnosed
“positive” for the coronavirus illness, now called COVID-19. As the
reported numbers grow, so does widespread nervousness, often in the form
of panic shopping for masks, disinfections, toilet paper, canned goods.
We are told to accept the testing results as science-based. While it is
next to impossible to get a full picture of what is taking place in
China, the center of the novel virus storm, there is a process, being
fed by mainstream media accounts and genuine panic in populations
unclear what the real dangers are, that has alarming implications for
the post-pandemic future.
During the last week
of January the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) ordered an unprecedented
lock down of an entire city of 11 million, Wuhan, in an attempt to
contain a public health situation that had clearly gotten out of
control. Never before in the history of modern public health had a
government placed an entire city in quarantine by imposing a cordon
sanitaire around it. That lock down was quickly extended to other China
cities to the extent that, for the past weeks, a major part of the
world’s second largest national economy has shut down. That in turn is
impacting the global economy.
At this point, as
cases and the first deaths are being reported in countries outside of
China, especially in South Korea, Japan, Iran and Italy, the prime
question everyone has is how dangerous this virus is. The fiasco with
the US CDC, where the putative tests for the novel virus were shown
defective, underscores the fact that the testing for the now-named
virus, SARS-CoV-2, said to cause the disease called COVID-19, is
anything but 100% reliable. Despite
this, influenced by a steady stream of mainstream media images of empty
shop shelves in Italy, of police cordons around Washington State
nursing homes said to house several presumed Coronavirus patients, of
pictures of Iranian hospitals filled with body bags, millions of
citizens are understandably becoming alarmed and fearful.
What is being done in
city after city and country after country is cancellation of major
events where many people come together. This has included the Venice
Carnival, major sports events, trade shows in Switzerland and elsewhere
being canceled. Major airlines are being financially devastated as
people around the world cancel holiday flights, as are cruise ship
lines. China orders burning of cash notes claiming they might be
contaminated. The French Louvre reopens but does not accept cash, only
cards, as paper might be contaminated. WHO warns about paper money
contagion risk. Countries are introducing laws such as in the UK
allowing legal detention of citizens who might have a virus. Growing
media promotion in the West of shop shelves bare of everyday essentials
such as rice, pasta, toilet paper is feeding panic buying everywhere.
Questions on Death Rate
It is important to have a perspective on the apparent deaths provably due to COVID-19. Here facts become very imprecise.
As of March 3, 2020
according to WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom, worldwide there were a
total of 90,893 cases of COVID-19, with 3,110 resulting in death. He
then called this a 3.4% mortality rate, a figure highly disputed by
other health experts. Tedros stated, “Globally, about 3.4% of reported
COVID-19 cases have died. By comparison, seasonal flu generally kills
far fewer than 1% of those infected.”
The problem is that
no one can say precisely what the true death rate is. That’s because
globally we have not tested all who might have mild cases of the virus
and the accuracy of those tests are anything but 100% certain. But a
statement about a death rate more than three times that of seasonal flu
is a real panic-maker if true.
The reality is very
likely a far lower true mortality according to epidemic experts. “We do
not report all the cases,” says Professor John Edmunds of the Centre for
the Mathematical Modelling of Infectious Diseases at the London School
of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine. “In fact, we only usually report a
small proportion of them. If there are many more cases in reality, then
the case fatality ratio will be lower.” Edmunds went on to say, “What
you can safely say […] is that if you divide the number of reported
deaths by the number of reported cases [to get the case fatality ratio],
you will almost certainly get the wrong answer.” The WHO under Tedros seems to be erring on the side of spreading panic.
The WHO and the USA
CDC some years ago changed the definition of deaths from seasonal flu to
“deaths of flu or pneumonia.” The CDC calculates only an approximate
flu death count by totaling death certificates processed that list
“pneumonia or influenza” as the underlying or contributing cause of
death. The CDC estimates 45 Million Flu Cases, and 61,000 what they
deftly call “Flu-Associated” Deaths in 2017-2018 US Flu Season. How many
were elderly with pneumonia or other lung diseases is unclear.
Naturally the numbers help spread fear and sell seasonal flu vaccines
whose positive effect is anything but proven. Worldwide,
the CDC estimated in a study in 2017 that, “between 291,000 and 646,000
people worldwide die from seasonal influenza-related respiratory
illnesses each year.”
In China alone the
estimate for seasonal influenza-associated (including pneumonia) deaths
was about 300,000 in 2018. Note that 3,000 corona-attributed deaths, as
tragic as it is, is but 1% of the “normal” annual deaths from
lung-related illnesses in China, and because of the mixed or changing
China accounting, it is not clear how many of the 3,000 China deaths are
even from seasonal pneumonia. But owing to dramatic videos, not
verifiable, of people allegedly dropping dead on the streets in China,
with no proof, or of Wuhan hospitals filled in the corridors with body
bags apparently of dead from COVID-19, much of the world is
understandably anxious about this strange exogenous invader.
Amid what is clearly
confusion among many well-meaning health officials and likely
opportunism by Western vaccine makers like GlaxoSmithKline or Gilead and
others, with alarming speed our world is being transformed in ways just
months ago we could not have imagined.
‘LOCK STEP’
Whatever has occurred
inside China at this point it is almost impossible to say owing to
conflicting reactions of the Beijing authorities and several changes in
ways of counting COVID-19 cases. The question now is how the relevant
authorities in the West will use this crisis. Here it is useful to go
back to a highly relevant report published a decade ago by the
Rockefeller Foundation, one of the world’s leading backers of eugenics,
and creators of GMO among other things.
The report in
question has the bland title, “Scenarios for the Future of Technology
and International Development.” It was published in May 2010 in
cooperation with the Global Business Network of futurologist Peter
Schwartz. The report contains various futurist scenarios developed by
Schwartz and company. One scenario carries the intriguing title, “LOCK
STEP: A world of tighter top-down government control and more
authoritarian leadership, with limited innovation and growing citizen
pushback.” Here it gets interesting as in what some term predictive
programming.
The Schwartz scenario
states, “In 2012, the pandemic that the world had been anticipating for
years finally hit. Unlike 2009’s H1N1, this new influenza strain —
originating from wild geese — was extremely virulent and deadly. Even
the most pandemic-prepared nations were quickly overwhelmed when the
virus streaked around the world, infecting nearly 20 percent of the
global population and killing 8 million in just seven months…” He
continues, “The pandemic also had a deadly effect on economies:
international mobility of both people and goods screeched to a halt,
debilitating industries like tourism and breaking global supply chains.
Even locally, normally bustling shops and office buildings sat empty for
months, devoid of both employees and customers.” This sounds eerily familiar.
Then the scenario
gets very interesting: “During the pandemic, national leaders around the
world flexed their authority and imposed airtight rules and
restrictions, from the mandatory wearing of face masks to
body-temperature checks at the entries to communal spaces like train
stations and supermarkets. Even after the pandemic faded, this more
authoritarian control and oversight of citizens and their activities
stuck and even intensified. In order to protect themselves from the
spread of increasingly global problems — from pandemics and
transnational terrorism to environmental crises and rising poverty —
leaders around the world took a firmer grip on power.”
A relevant question
is whether certain bad actors, and there are some in this world, are
opportunistically using the widespread fears around the COVID-19 to
advance an agenda of “lock step” top down social control, one that would
include stark limits on travel, perhaps replacing of cash by “sanitary”
electronic cash, mandatory vaccination even though the long term side
effects are not proven safe, unlimited surveillance and the curtailing
of personal freedoms such as political protests on the excuse it will
allow “identification of people who refuse to be tested or vaccinated,”
and countless other restrictions. Much of the Rockefeller 2010 scenario
is already evident. Fear is never a good guide to sound reason.
F. William Engdahl is
strategic risk consultant and lecturer, he holds a degree in politics
from Princeton University and is a best-selling author on oil and
geopolitics, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook.”
Source: https://journal-neo.org
Blogger's note:
subterrnews.blogspot.com does not send cookies, or collect any information on
those using the blog. However, the blogspot is on google, and google may
collect information, and send cookies. Many of the links that we
connect to do not send out cookies or collect information, but some do.
You are keying in to this blog, and you have agreed to this.
The views expressed in the articles
do not necessarily represent the opinions of this blog. They are the views, and opinions of the
author(s) of the article.
0 comments:
Post a Comment