Santa Surfing 10-26-20 VIDEOs… “Lude Reports”, “GESARA / NESARA – Greatness is Unveiling” (and a new YouTube channel (‘Beach Broadcast’)”

These videos were of interest as I watched them. Particularly the Gesara / Nesara video. Here’s a link to her article about that.

At about 35 min., she talks about her “anon insider” that said there will not be any “prosperity payments” or RV currency exchanges, unless you were part of a (vetted) group that made arrangements with the government to do this, and the money is strictly to be used for humanitarian purposes. Go to 35 minutes to hear that information, including the possible exchange of Zims, Dinars, etc. (I’m not sure I got it all precisely as she stated it, but that’s the gist of it).
.

https://youtu.be/-bjJXPm1zRo
.


https://youtu.be/7FCh-ykLSeU

TRUMP CARDS

NEW TWITTER (@PepeNewsNow)
.
https://www.facebook.com/668595353/posts/10166272474950354/?d=n
https://www.facebook.com/668595353/posts/10166272474950354/?d=n

CDC Report: 70.6% of COVID Patients Always Wore a Mask

In a case-control investigation of people with COVID-19 who visited 11 U.S. health care facilities, a U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention report revealed factors associated with getting the disease.1

People who spent time around others with COVID-19 had an increased risk, as did those who dined in restaurants. Those who reported going to restaurants or bars were twice as likely to have a positive test for SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, as those who did not.

This was the main focus of the report, with the researchers stating, “Exposures and activities where mask use and social distancing are difficult to maintain, including going to places that offer on-site eating or drinking, might be important risk factors for acquiring COVID-19.”2

But buried in a table at the end of the report were numbers related to the reported use of cloth face coverings or masks in the 14 days before becoming ill. The majority of them — 70.6% — reported that they “always” wore a mask, but they still got sick.

More People Wearing a Mask Got COVID Than Those Who Didn’t

Among the interview respondents who became ill, 108, or 70.6%, said they always wore a mask, compared to six, or 3.9%, who said they “never” did, and six more, or 3.9%, who said they “rarely” did. Taken together, this shows that, of the symptomatic adults with COVID-19, 70.6% always wore a mask and still got sick, compared to 7.8% for those who rarely or never did.3

The findings call into question the effectiveness of masks for preventing COVID-19, a controversial practice that’s been mandated in many parts of the world.

You may remember that in the early days of the pandemic, health officials spoke out against the use of masks and discouraged Americans from wearing them, then did an about-face and said they’re essential for lowering your risk. As noted by the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS):4

“COVID-19 is as politically-charged as it is infectious. Early in the COVID-19 pandemic, the WHO, the CDC and NIH’s Dr. Anthony Fauci discouraged wearing masks as not useful for non-health care workers.

Now they recommend wearing cloth face coverings in public settings where other social distancing measures are hard to do (e.g., grocery stores and pharmacies). The recommendation was published without a single scientific paper or other information provided to support that cloth masks actually provide any respiratory protection.”

Cloth Masks Are Useless Against Aerosolized Particulates

As AAPS pointed out, the theory behind cloth mask wearing is that the mask may trap droplets that come out of your mouth if you cough or sneeze. However, large respiratory droplets, which are greater than 5 micrometers/microns (?m), only remain in the air for a short time and can only travel for short distances, falling to the ground instead. This is why the CDC recommends maintaining social distancing of 6 feet from others.5

“Public health authorities define a significant exposure to COVID-19 as face-to-face contact within 6 feet with a patient with symptomatic COVID-19 that is sustained for at least a few minutes (and some say more than 10 minutes or even 30 minutes),” AAPS explains, adding, “The chance of catching COVID-19 from a passing interaction in a public space is therefore minimal.”6

Further, there’s evidence that aerosol transmission is involved in the spread of SARS-CoV-2,7 which are 0.125 ?m in size. Friday September 18, 2020, the CDC posted updated COVID-19 guidance on its “How COVID-19 Spreads” page that, for the first time, mentioned aerosol transmission of SARS-CoV-2, saying “this is thought to be the main way the virus spreads.”8

The CDC then deleted the mention of aerosols and the possibility of spread beyond 6 feet the following Monday, September 21, saying a draft version of proposed changes had been posted “in error.”9

It’s a noteworthy difference, if SARS-CoV-2 is spread via aerosolized droplets, which research suggests,10 as such droplets remain in the air for at least three hours and can travel over long distances of up to 27 feet.11 Further, it adds to the likelihood that cloth masks do little to stop you from getting COVID-19. AAPS explained:12

“The preponderance of scientific evidence supports that aerosols play a critical role in the transmission of SARS-CoV-2. Years of dose response studies indicate that if anything gets through, you will become infected. Thus, any respiratory protection respirator or mask must provide a high level of filtration and fit to be highly effective in preventing the transmission of SARS-CoV-2.”

Surgeon’s Analysis Shows Masks Are Ineffective and Harmful

Dr. Jim Meehan, an ophthalmologist and preventive medicine specialist who has performed more than 10,000 surgical procedures and who is also a former editor of the medical journal Ocular Immunology and Inflammation, has peer-reviewed thousands of medical research studies.

He used this expertise to conduct an evidence-based scientific analysis on masks, which shows that not only should healthy people not be wearing masks but they could be harmed as a result.13

“Decades of the highest-level scientific evidence (meta-analyses of multiple randomized controlled trials) overwhelmingly conclude that medical masks are ineffective at preventing the transmission of respiratory viruses, including SAR-CoV-2,” he writes. “Those arguing for masks are relying on low-level evidence (observational retrospective trials and mechanistic theories), none of which are powered to counter the evidence, arguments, and risks of mask mandates.”14

He first points out that the notion of mask-wearing defies common sense and reason, considering that most of the population is at very low or almost no risk of becoming severely ill from COVID-19. Children, especially, are at extremely low risk from this illness, making mask mandates in schools highly questionable.

“Based on CDC published data, 99.99815% of children that contract CoVID-19 survive,” Meehan states. “Transmission of SARS-CoV-2 among children in schools and daycares is very rare.”15 He compiled multiple studies that show masks are ineffective:

A working paper from the National Bureau of Economic Research16 found that nonpharmaceutical interventions, such as lockdowns, quarantines and mask mandates, have not significantly affected overall virus transmission rates.17

A CDC meta-analysis found that face masks did little to reduce virus transmission in the case of influenza, stating, “Although mechanistic studies support the potential effect of hand hygiene or face masks, evidence from 14 randomized controlled trials of these measures did not support a substantial effect on transmission of laboratory-confirmed influenza.”18

A rapid systematic review of 31 studies concluded, “The evidence is not sufficiently strong to support widespread use of facemasks as a protective measure against COVID-19,” adding that there was evidence for their use only for “particularly vulnerable individuals when in transient higher risk situations.”19

In a perspective article published in the New England Journal of Medicine, researchers state, “We know that wearing a mask outside health care facilities offers little, if any, protection from infection,” and go on to describe masks as playing a “symbolic role” as “talismans” to increase the perception of safety, even though “such reactions may not be strictly logical.”

“Expanded masking protocols’ greatest contribution may be to reduce the transmission of anxiety, over and above whatever role they may play in reducing transmission of Covid-19,” they add.20

A commentary published by the University of Minnesota’s Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy further added, “We do not recommend requiring the general public who do not have symptoms of COVID-19-like illness to routinely wear cloth or surgical masks because there is no scientific evidence they are effective in reducing the risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission …”21

Cloth Masks Pose Risks, May Increase Transmission

In addition to being ineffective, Meehan is among many experts suggesting that wearing a mask may actually increase the risk of disease transmission.

A study published in 2015, which compared the use of cloth masks with medical masks in health care workers, found that health care workers wearing cloth masks had the highest rates of influenza-like illness and laboratory-confirmed respiratory virus infections, when compared to those wearing medical masks or controls.22

Compared to controls and the medical mask group, those wearing cloth masks had a 72% higher rate of lab-confirmed viral infections. And according to the authors, such masks may also increase infection risk:

“Penetration of cloth masks by particles was almost 97% and medical masks 44%. This study is the first RCT of cloth masks, and the results caution against the use of cloth masks. This is an important finding to inform occupational health and safety.

Moisture retention, reuse of cloth masks and poor filtration may result in increased risk of infection. Further research is needed to inform the widespread use of cloth masks globally. However, as a precautionary measure, cloth masks should not be recommended for HCWs [health care workers], particularly in high-risk situations …”

What’s more, for the general public, wearing cloth masks may not be a matter of “something is better than nothing,” as wearing them may be harmful. Children forced to wear masks for long periods could experience mental and psychological repercussions, in addition to potential physical risks. Meehan further compiled 17 ways that masks can cause harm:23

Medical masks adversely affect respiratory physiology and function

Medical masks lower oxygen levels in the blood

Medical masks raise carbon dioxide levels in the blood

SAR-CoV-2 has a “furin cleavage” site that makes it more pathogenic, and the virus enters cells more easily when arterial oxygen levels decline, which means wearing a mask could increase COVID-19 severity

Medical masks trap exhaled virus in the mouth/mask, increasing viral/infectious load and increasing disease severity

SARS-CoV-2 becomes more dangerous when blood oxygen levels decline

The furin cleavage site of SARS-CoV-2 increases cellular invasion, especially during low blood oxygen levels

Cloth masks may increase the risk of contracting COVID-19 and other respiratory infections

Wearing a face mask may give a false sense of security

Masks compromise communications and reduce social distancing

Untrained and inappropriate management of face masks is common

Masks worn imperfectly are dangerous

Masks collect and colonize viruses, bacteria and mold

Wearing a face mask makes the exhaled air go into the eyes

Contact tracing studies show that asymptomatic carrier transmission is very rare

Face masks and stay at home orders prevent the development of herd immunity

Face masks are dangerous and contraindicated for a large number of people with pre-existing medical conditions and disabilities

Why Are Mask Mandates Persisting?

With the lack of solid evidence to support mask use among the general population, it appears as though mask mandates are being used as political and psychological tools rather than one aimed at protecting public health.

Meehan concluded, “… the great weight of scientific evidence shows unmistakably that wearing face masks for extended periods is harmful to people’s health, safety and emotional well-being, especially to young children.”24

Around the world, calls for peaceful civil disobedience against mandatory masking are growing. The U.S. nonprofit Stand for Health Freedom is also calling for civil disobedience, and has a widget you can use to contact your government representatives to let them know wearing a mask must be a personal choice.

Keep in mind, too, that in many areas with mask mandates, the rules state that you must wear a mask “unless you can maintain a 6-foot distance.” You will need to check the local guidelines in your area, but in many cases if you are 6 feet away from others, you can forgo wearing a mask and still be in compliance with the mandate.

How COVID-19 Vaccine Trials Are Rigged

There’s been a lot of talk lately about whether or not the fast-tracked COVID-19 vaccine will in fact be safe and effective. While vaccine makers insist that any vaccine reaching the market will have undergone rigorous testing, the way trial protocols are designed suggests these vaccines may leave a lot to be desired.

As reported1 by Forbes contributor William Haseltine, a former professor at Harvard Medical School and Harvard School of Public Health, while Moderna, Pfizer, AstraZeneca and Johnson & Johnson have all published their vaccine trial protocols in a rare display of transparency, “close inspection of the protocols raises surprising concerns.”

In a nutshell, the trial designs are such that the vaccines will get a passing grade even if their efficacy is minimal. Of course, we must also consider vaccine side effects and I’ve also written several articles about mounting safety concerns.

COVID-19 Vaccine Trials Rigged to Pass Efficacy Test

As noted by Haseltine, prevention of infection would typically be a critical endpoint of any vaccine trial. In other words, you want to ensure that when you take the vaccine, your risk of infection is significantly reduced.

However, when it comes to the COVID-19 vaccine, shockingly, preventing infection is not a criterion for success in any of these trials. The only criterion for a successful COVID-19 vaccine is a reduction of COVID-19 symptoms, and even then, the reduction required is minimal.

“We all expect an effective vaccine to prevent serious illness if infected. Three of the vaccine protocols — Moderna, Pfizer, and AstraZeneca — do not require that their vaccine prevent serious disease only that they prevent moderate symptoms which may be as mild as cough, or headache,” Haseltine writes,2 adding:

“The pharmaceutical companies intend to do trials ranging from 30,000 to 60,000 participants. This scale of study would be sufficient for testing vaccine efficacy.

The first surprise found upon a closer reading of the protocols reveals that each study intends to complete interim and primary analyses that at most include 164 participants. These companies likely intend to apply for an emergency use authorization (EUA) from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) with just their limited preliminary results.”

To get a “passing” grade in the limited interim analysis, a vaccine must show a 70% efficacy. However, again, this does not mean it will prevent infection in 7 of 10 people. As explained by Haseltine:3

“For Moderna, the initial interim analysis will be based on the results of infection of only 53 people. The judgment reached in interim analysis is dependent upon the difference in the number of people with symptoms … in the vaccinated group versus the unvaccinated group. Moderna’s success margin is for 13 or less of those 53 to develop symptoms compared to 40 or more in their control group.”

The other vaccine makers are basing results on a similar protocol, where only a limited number of vaccinated participants are exposed to the virus to evaluate the extent of their symptoms.

Johnson & Johnson’s interim analysis will include results from 77 vaccine recipients who have been infected with SARS-CoV-2, and if fewer than 18 of them develop symptoms of COVID-19, compared to 59 in the control group, the vaccine will be considered successful.

In AstraZeneca’s case, the interim analysis includes 50 vaccine recipients. The vaccine will be a success if 12 or fewer develop symptoms after exposure to SARS-CoV-2, compared to 19 in the 25-person control group.

Pfizer’s interim analysis is the smallest of the bunch, with just 32 vaccine recipients. Their success margin is seven or fewer vaccine recipients developing symptoms, compared to 25 in the control group. In the primary analysis, efficacy is set to about 60%, and at most, 164 volunteers will be included in that analysis.

Especially concerning are that those receiving the vaccine in these trials are young and healthy individuals who are not really at high risk of dying from COVID-19. This makes the results of these trials highly questionable in the far more vulnerable population of the elderly.

Trials Are Merely Testing Reduction of Common Cold Symptoms

As if that’s not eyebrow-raising enough, the minimum qualification for a “case of COVID-19” amounts to just one positive PCR test and one or two mild symptoms, such as headache, fever, cough or mild nausea. As noted by Haseltine, “This is far from adequate.”

All they’re doing is testing to see if this COVID-19 vaccine will minimize common cold symptoms. They are not actually ensuring the vaccine will prevent serious COVID-19 complications. Johnson & Johnson’s trial is the only one that requires at least five severe COVID-19 cases to be included in the interim analysis.

“One of the more immediate questions a trial needs to answer is whether a vaccine prevents infection. If someone takes this vaccine, are they far less likely to become infected with the virus?

These trials all clearly focus on eliminating symptoms of COVID-19, and not infections themselves. Asymptomatic infection is listed as a secondary objective in these trials when they should be of critical importance.

It appears that all the pharmaceutical companies assume that the vaccine will never prevent infection. Their criteria for approval is the difference in symptoms between an infected control group and an infected vaccine group. They do not measure the difference between infection and noninfection as a primary motivation,” Haseltine writes.4

Severe illness and death are also secondary objectives in these trials, and none of them include failure to prevent hospitalization or death as an important barrier to success. The increasingly disappearing common sense tells us that if the vaccine cannot reduce infection, hospitalization or death, then it cannot end the pandemic, which means everyone who takes the vaccine will be doing so in vain.

Some COVID-19 Vaccine Trials Are Not Using Inert Placebos

In addition to all of that, some COVID-19 vaccine trials are using other vaccines as “placebo” rather than truly biologically inert substances such as saline, which effectively makes if far easier to hide any vaccine side effects. While Moderna is using a saline solution placebo,5 AstraZeneca is using injected meningococcal vaccine rather than a true placebo.6

Another way AstraZeneca is masking potential side effects is by administering the vaccine along with certain drugs. In one of its study arms, subjects are given acetaminophen every six hours for the first 24 hours after inoculation. The pain and fever reducer could potentially mask and downplay side effects such as pain, fever, headache or general malaise.

In addition to masking side effects, it is widely recognized among literate natural medicine physicians that using acetaminophen during acute viral infections is not a wise strategy as it impairs the immune response to fight the infection.


As reported by Wired:7

“The press release for … results from the Oxford vaccine trials described an increased frequency of ‘minor side effects’ among participants. A look at the actual paper, though, reveals this to be a marketing spin …

Yes, mild reactions were far more common than worse ones. But moderate or severe harms — defined as being bad enough to interfere with daily life or needing medical care — were common too.

Around one-third of people vaccinated with the COVID-19 vaccine without acetaminophen experienced moderate or severe chills, fatigue, headache, malaise, and/or feverishness.

Close to 10 percent had a fever of at least 100.4 degrees, and just over one-fourth developed moderate or severe muscle aches. That’s a lot, in a young and healthy group of people — and the acetaminophen didn’t help much for most of those problems.”

Two Trials Paused Due to Safety Concerns

September 6, 2020, AstraZeneca paused its Phase 3 vaccine trial due to a “suspected serious and unexpected adverse reaction” in a British participant.8,9 The company did not initially divulge the nature of the adverse reaction, but it has since been revealed the volunteer developed severe inflammation of the spinal cord, known as transverse myelitis.10,11

September 12, 2020, the British Medicines Health Regulatory Authority gave AstraZeneca the go-ahead to resume its Phase 3 trial in the U.K., after an independent review found it “safe to do so.”12,13 According to an AstraZeneca spokesperson, the incident was a case of undiagnosed multiple sclerosis.14

Days later, September 19, 2020, The New York Times reported15 a second case of transverse myelitis had occurred in the AstraZeneca trial. According to one expert consulted by the NYT, the occurrence represented a “dangerous pattern,” and that a third incidence might shut down the vaccine trial indefinitely.

AstraZeneca, however, claims the two cases are “unlikely to be associated with the vaccine,” and that there’s “insufficient evidence to say for certain that the illnesses were or were not related to the vaccine.”16 October 21, 2020, it was reported17 that one of the volunteers in AstraZeneca’s Brazilian trial had died from COVID-19 complications, but that the trial would continue anyway.

October 12, 2020, Johnson & Johnson halted its trial due to “unexplained illness” in one of its participants.18,19 Like AstraZeneca, Johnson & Johnson has kept mum about the details of the illness, saying “it’s important to have all the facts before we share additional information.”

Side Effects Are Commonplace

The fact that more trials have not been halted is surprising considering the rate of side effects20 occurring in perfectly healthy volunteers. As reported in “Gates Tries to Justify Side Effects of Fast-Tracked Vaccine,” after the first of two doses of the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine, 80% of Phase 1 participants receiving the 100 microgram (mcg) dose developed systemic side effects.21

After the second dose, 100% reported side effects ranging from fatigue (80%), chills (80%), headache (60%) and myalgia or muscle pain (53%).

Despite that, the 100-mcg dose was ultimately chosen to move on to Phase 3 trials.22 In the highest dosage group, which received 250 mcg, 100% of participants suffered side effects after both the first and second doses.23 Three of the 14 participants (21%) in the 250-mcg group suffered “one or more severe events.”

An October 1, 2020, report24 by CNBC reviews the experiences of five participants in Moderna’s and Pfizer’s SARS-CoV-2 vaccine trials. One of the participants in Pfizer’s vaccine trial “woke up with chills, shaking so hard he cracked a tooth after taking the second dose.”

A Moderna trial participant told CNBC he had a low-grade fever and felt “under the weather” for several days after his first shot. Eight hours after his second shot he was “bed-bound with a fever of over 101, shakes, chills, a pounding headache and shortness of breath. He said the pain in his arm, where he received the shot, felt like a ‘goose egg on my shoulder.’ He hardly slept that night, recording that his temperature was higher than 100 degrees for five hours.”25

Two others reported similar side effects, and a third warned you would need to take a day off after the second shot. CNBC also noted that “as companies progressed through clinical trials, several vaccine makers abandoned their highest doses following reports of more severe reactions.”

Might Certain COVID-19 Vaccines Raise Risk of AIDS?

Disturbingly, a group of researchers are now expressing concern that some COVID-19 vaccine candidates might put certain people at a higher risk of acquiring HIV, the virus that causes AIDS.26,27,28

Using the failed attempt to create an HIV vaccine as an example, researchers explain29 that the genetically engineered adenovirus, Ad5, used in the HIV vaccine trials, is the same one being used now in four COVID-19 candidates being studied in the U.S., Russia and Pakistan.

At the time of the failed HIV vaccine, scientists were unable to identify the exact reason why Ad5 seemed to increase the risk of HIV; it just inexplicably did. Interestingly, Dr. Anthony Fauci was the lead author on the HIV study,30 in which he questioned “whether the problem extends to some or all of the other recombinant vectors currently in development or to other vector-based vaccines.”

Reflecting on that question, the researchers say they decided to go public with this information now, because Ad5 vaccines for COVID-19 might soon be tested in populations with high HIV prevalence, and they believe that informed consent about the HIV/AIDS risk should be part of the COVID-19 clinical studies.

Will COVID-19 Vaccine Be Mandatory?

According to one September 2020 poll,31 only 51% of Americans said they “definitely or probably” would get the COVID-19 vaccine when it comes out. Another survey32 found only 44% would take the first-generation vaccine even if they were paid $100. Mounting vaccine hesitancy was bemoaned in an October 1, 2020, article33 in the New England Journal of Medicine, and the answer, the article suggests, is to make it mandatory for all.

And, to entice compliance, the authors recommend implementing severe penalties for noncompliance, such as the suspension of employment and/or house arrest.

An October 19, 2020, article 34 by Wisconsin Public Radio also warns that if precedents hold, employers may have the right to force workers to get vaccinated. Potential exceptions might include certain medical issues, bona fide religious objections, and certain union contracts that bar vaccine requirements.

Operation Warp Speed recently selected Walgreens and CVS as nationwide partners in the coming vaccine distribution effort.35 Nursing homes and long-term care facilities around the U.S. can opt in by signing up to have either of these companies come and administer the vaccine to its residents and staff, once available.

So-called “health passports” are also becoming reality. Ireland, for example, has already begun its national trial. The Health Passport Ireland initiative uses an app to track and display results of COVID-19 testing. Vaccination status will be added once a vaccine becomes available.

Untold amounts of money are also being spent on programs to tag, track and trace the human population in the name of public health and safety. According to an article36 in the journal JAMA, the estimated cumulative costs of the COVID-19 pandemic related to lost output and health reduction amounts to more than $16 trillion in the U.S. alone, or about 90% of our annual gross domestic product.

“For this reason, policies that can materially reduce the spread of SARS-CoV-2 have enormous social value,” the article claims. However, testing, tracing and isolation rules, all of which are promoted in this article, also have a price, and it’s one that any sensible person would reject, namely the loss of privacy and liberty.

As reported37 by The Last American Vagabond, governments are selling our freedom in the name of public health. Do we really want to live in a “biosecurity state”? These freedom-robbing strategies are being sold to us as the path back to normalcy, but the reality will be anything but normal.

As detailed in “The Global Takeover Is Underway,” the pandemic and the global response to it is far from accidental. Overwhelmingly, the evidence points to it being part of a much larger scheme to implement the last stages of a technocratic takeover. 

I’ve also covered various aspects of this globalists agenda in “COVID Symptoms of Power: Tech Billionaires Harvest Humanity,” “Tech Billionaires Aiming at a Global Currency,” “Harvard Professor Exposes Surveillance Capitalism,” “How Medical Technocracy Made the Plandemic Possible” and “US Surveillance Bill 6666: The Devil in the Details.”

The COVID-19 pandemic has dramatically widened the economic gap between average people and the wealthy elite,38,39 and continuing down the path we’re currently on will only make this disparity worse, not better.

The globalist plan isn’t about creating a better world for the average person, it’s about enslaving us so that we cannot reject or even resist what’s ultimately coming. Forced vaccinations are but one aspect of the plan that must be resisted at all cost.

16 Glaring Parallels Between the 9/11 and COVID Ops

By Makia Freeman,

AT A GLANCE…

  • THE STORY:There are numerous striking 9/11 COVID similarities, ranging from before the operation/event happened (foreknowledge) to how it was covered up afterwards.
  • THE IMPLICATIONS:Ops like 9/11 and COVID are psychological in nature. We can discern the pattern of manipulation if we pay attention, and thus become immune to it.

There are numerous 9/11 COVID similarities

to be seen and understood as the world goes ever deeper into Operation Coronavirus. Many nations around the world, including Canada and Australia, are making moves to roll out the next phase of the operation, which involves digital identities, biometrics and digital vaccine certificates (or immunity passports), just as Bill Gates foretold all those months ago. It is imperative that we all understand that this is a far-reaching operation or live exercise designed to fundamentally transform society in alignment with the goals of the New World Order (NWO). By comparing the current COVID op to the 9/11 op, we can discern the patterns and become wiser to the agenda, for there is a certain way that evil hijacks good. Below is a list of 16 different 9/11 COVID similarities that I have noticed, however there may well be many more.

1. MSM and Governments Amp Up the Fear with Incessant Coverage and Propaganda

The MSM (Mainstream Media) has barely focused on anything other than COVID since March, with the purpose of almost all the ‘news’ being to scare the living daylights out of people and render them into docile submission. Many of the initial projections turned out to be completely and utterly wrong. The Gates-owned WHO (World Health Organization) predicted the IFR (Infection Fatality Rate) would be 3.4%, when later a Stanford University study and the CDC put it at more like 0.1 – 0.26%; the Gates-funded Imperial College predicted 2 millions American would die when actually only around 225,000 have so far (and those official statistics are embarrassingly fake due to COVID death certificate fraud). Likewise, in the aftermath of 9/11, there was unending propaganda about how freedom itself was under attack by radical Islamic terrorism. People were first traumatized and then besieged with a slew of misinformation which disguised the true conspirators, shifted attention to fictitious enemies and fostered the desire in people to want to be saved (the basis for increased governmental control). One of the interesting 9/11 COVID similarities is the color-coded threat chart.

DHS color coded threat chart

hawaii covid color chart2. Governmental Reaction Kills Way More People than the Event Itself

In both cases, the governmental reaction is worse than the supposed threat itself, just as in Western Medicine, where frequently the cure is worse than the disease. Chemo, anyone? The official narrative of 9/11 tells us that around 3,000 Americans died from the event, however the 9/11 spawned the War on Terror, under whose auspices the US invaded Iraq, Afghanistan and later many other Middle Eastern nations, killing at least 1 million people in Iraq alone. When Operation Coronavirus began, we were told to lock down for 2 weeks to ‘flatten the curve’ however here we are 7+ months later and people are still walking around wearing masks and not getting too close. Meanwhile, the result of governmental lockdown policies has been increased stress, anxiety, depression, joblessness, poverty, crime and suicide. Many people and organizations (herehere and here) have predicted the lockdown will kill more people than it has supposedly saved.

3. No Investigation of Coincidences

The 9/11 false flag op was characterized by a stunning series of coincidences which were never investigated and which the authorities swept under the rug, such as passports magically surviving office fires and falling to the ground intact, a building crumbling of its own accord 8+ hours after planes had hit nearby buildings (but not it) and fighter jets failing to be scrambled from the nearest base. In the COVID op, it was quite an astonishing coincidence that Fauci via the NIH funded Chinese virology labs in Wuhan to the tune of $7.4 million (2 lots of $3.7 million) for gain of function research, or in plain English, weaponization of virus research. It was also rather coincidental that the US Military, Bill Gates and other NWO organizations and people were planning for this exact scenario years before it happened.

4. Introduction of a Fundamental New Paradigm (War on Terror vs. War on Bioterror)

As I covered in my March 2020 article The New War on Bioterror: Everyone is a Suspected or Asymptomatic Carrier, we are being steadily indoctrinated into a new paradigm of biosecurity, whereby the authorities hope to advance their agenda of control by appealing to the need for public safety against a new enemy. In the post-9/11 world, there was the War on Terror and the concocted enemy was bin Laden and radical Islamic terrorists; in the post-COVID world, there’s the War on Bioterror and the concocted enemy is an invisible virus. In both cases, we were told the enemy could be lurking anywhere and everywhere, and only increased governmental surveillance and control could save us.

5. 9/11 COVID Similarities: False Official Narratives

In both operations, the official narrative has more holes than a piece of Swiss cheese. In the 9/11 op, we were supposed to believe the terrorists managed to fly planes into buildings with such skill using maneuvers that even experienced pilots could not manage, while the laws of physics were suspended that day as jet fuel magically burnt through concrete and steel, despite the fact that jet fuel doesn’t have a high enough burning point to do so. In the COVID op, we are supposed to believe that the virus is literally everywhere, can be transmitted via cash, can live on surfaces of days or weeks and thrives on asymptomatic transmission when no other known virus has ever done so.

6. Foreknowledge

Why did BBC report Building 7 had fallen 30 minutes before it actually did? Why did San Francisco mayor Willie Brown and author Salmon Rushdie both get calls beforehand telling them not to board planes going to NYC? Why did the Chinese Government run a drill for a coronavirus outbreak 30 days before the Wuhan Military Games? Why did the US Government run or pass so many simulations, drills and laws that planned for the coronavirus?

7. Event Preceded by Exercises/Drills that “Went Live” or Eerily Mimicked What Later Happened

According to Kevin Ryan, NORAD practiced 28 hijacked events within 2 years of 9/11, 6 of which focused on hijackings within US and 1 which practiced interception of hijacked planes headed for the UN building in New York City. Webster Tarpley researched that there were 46 drills and exercises taking place on the day of 9/11! Meanwhile in Operation Coronavirus, in addition to things such as Dark Winter (2001), Atlantic Storm (2005), Clade X (2018), Crimson Contagion (2019), there was the now infamous Event 201 (October 2019) which simulated an actual coronavirus outbreak that comes from Brazil and enters the US to infect millions (see above link on simulations, drills and laws).

8. Insider Trading

9/11 was marked by massive amounts of insider trading. This study Initiation of the 9-11 Operation, with Evidence of Insider Trading Beforehand does a good job of exposing the details. Meanwhile before COVID struck the US, there were many politicians (especially senators) who bought or sold stock before the US economy crashed.

9. Suspicious Benefits to a Powerful Few

Isn’t it interesting how the big players seem to benefit the most from these catastrophes and crises? During 9/11, Halliburton, defense contractors, oil and gas companies and others invested in Iraq/Afghanistan to make a killing. During COVID, we learnt that certain billionaires increased their wealth by a whopping 27%. In both cases, the rich and powerful got more rich and powerful.

10. Intel Agency Control of Information

Manufactured crises like 9/11 and COVID open the door for private corporations linked to the MIC (Military Intelligence Complex) to gain a foothold in terms of greater access to our data. 9/11 was good business for surveillance companies; Peter Thiel’s CIA-initiated company Palantir manages the databases used by the CDC (in the US) and the NHS (in the UK) that are the basis of COVID decision-making.

11. 9/11 COVID Similarities: A Fictitious, All-Powerful and Elusive Enemy

Think about it for a minute: Al-Qaeda and SARS-CoV-2 can rarely be seen, can’t be easily stopped (or stopped at all), require great amount of time, money and focus to be defeated (more of the war mentality), and are a completely new kind of enemy (asymmetrical warfare and asymptomatic transmission). We were told that other human coronaviruses behave in a seasonal, highly predictable manner, but not SARS-CoV-2. It was somehow different. The FBI never formally charged bin Laden; meanwhile he looked different in every fake video they released. Bin Laden seemed to have more lives than the proverbial cat but in the end we were told to just believe that they had killed him and thrown his body away at sea; there was never any proof. Several alleged Middle Eastern hijackers turned up alive elsewhere. Compare these fictitious enemies to a virus has never been isolated and purified.

12. Junk Science

For the most part, science has sadly become a tool for moneyed interests to push their agenda. He who pays the piper calls the tune. There are many intellectual prostitutes in white coats who will find any result they are paid to find. Both operations are marked by junk or fraudulent science. In the case of 9/11, there is all the chicanery around the fall of all 3 buildings in NYC including the coverup by NIST which was well exposed earlier this year in the University of Alaska Fairbanks study, A Structural Reevaluation of the Collapse of World Trade Center 7. Professional architects, engineers and pilots have all declared that the official 9/11 narrative is not scientifically sound and in defiance of the laws of physics. Likewise, the official COVID narrative has thoroughly abused science by exploiting people’s ignorance of the nature of a virus and the nature of contagion and disease. It also used hyped and falsified numbers under the rubric of science to scare people, offered financial incentives for doctors and hospitals to inflate COVID cases/deaths, not to mention used the key deception of with the virus vs. from the virus to obfuscate the real cause of death in millions of people.

13. Censorship of Dissent

Another of the 9/11 COVID similarities is that both were marked by censorship or the suppression of evidence. In the COVID op, Google-owned YouTube has been deleting channels left, right and center, with CEO Susan Wojcicki announcing at one point that she would not allow any content with information contrary to the Gates-owned WHO! In the 9/11 op, the MSM carefully selected whom they wanted to interview, and heroes like William Rodriguez were initially welcomed but brushed aside when they refused to follow the script. Compare George Bush Jr.’s “Let us never tolerate outrageous conspiracy theories concerning the attacks of September the 11th” with the current propaganda that “You’re killing Grandma” if you step outside without a mask.

14. Denunciation of Deniers

The word denier has become something of a weaponized term in the last decade, been thrown against those who refuse to believe in certain narratives (e.g. climate change denier or climate denier for those who don’t buy the manmade global warming story). At the end of WW2, Hermann Goering admitted the game plan of leaders in any country: “Why of course the people don’t want war! … Naturally the common people don’t want war: neither in Russia, nor in England, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood … [but] the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the peace makers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.” Another of the great 9/11 COVID similarities is the denunciation of deniers, the denunciation of anyone not following the governmental official narrative. In 9/11, it went something like this (“You’re unpatriotic and un-American if you don’t hate Al Qaeda and bin Laden”) while in COVID, it’s goes something like this (“You’re selfish and you’re endangering the community if you protest, don’t socially distance and don’t wear a mask”).

15. Introduction of a New Layer of Security State Bureaucracy

In both cases, a whole new layer of security state bureaucracy was introduced. In the 9/11 op, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) was created. In just a few years, this federal department quickly grew into one of the largest federal agencies, taking in tens of billions of taxpayer dollars each year ever since. The term “Homeland” hardly existed in the US before that. The DHS also spawned the infamous TSA, notorious for the 2-pronged option it gives travelers: radiation or molestation. Meanwhile, the COVID op has yet to spawn a new US federal agency, however it is undeniable that the pretext of COVID has given governments massive power to penetrate deeply into our lives.

16. Psychological and Ritualistic Trauma

The 9/11 op was very ritualistic; 2 small examples are the numerology (911 is the number to call in the US when there’s an emergency) and the echoes of Freemasonry (the WTC Twin Towers representing the Twin Pillars of Boaz and Joachim). Likewise, as I covered in the article Exposing the Occult Corona-Initiation Ritual, the entire length and breadth of Operation Coronavirus is steeped in ritual, including phases such as Lockdown and Quarantine (isolation), Rejection (hand-washing), Mask-Wearing (censorship, submission, dehumanization, reinforcing a false idea of danger, alternate persona) and Social Distancing (the New Normal). The 9/11 COVID similarities are striking, since in both cases the idea is to traumatize the public through fear, separate them from customary modes of functioning and break them down so they will accept a new way of being.

Final Thoughts on 9/11 COVID Similarities

To understand these 2 massive psychological operations is to understand the way the NWO Agenda advances in our world. There is a distinctive pattern to the darkness/unconsciousness in the way it deceives, betrays, tricks, distracts, obfuscates and manipulates. Ultimately, we know the endgame is to put people into such states of anxiety, stress and fear that they will accept any level of state security, corporatocratic surveillance, invasion of privacy and violation of their sovereign, unalienable, inherent, god-given rights. My hope is that articles such as these shine a light on the darkness and bring it to the surface to be exposed, so that the deception is no longer effective. The power of these false flag events and psy ops lies in their capacity to manipulate perception; once an awakened populace sees through it, their power evaporates.

Hat tip to Kevin Ryan.

 

Source: https://thefreedomarticles.com

September 2020 Least Deadly Month Ever in Sweden

According to the state authority Statistics Sweden (SCB) data, september 2020 was the least deadly month per capita ever in Swedish history. So far the year 2020 has been the third least deadly year per capita ever in the country, despite the [alleged] tragic and global Covid-19 pandemic. September 2020 was the least deadly month […]

Ron Paul: Is the New Covid ‘Surge’ All About the Election?

The fear and panic is being stoked heavily, once again, about surges in cases and surges in hospitalizations. Former FDA Director Scott Gottlieb (who is on the board of at least seven big pharma and medical policy companies) is calling for a “mandatory nationwide mask mandate”! Are we really returning to April levels of Covid, […]

The Dark Side of the Pilgrims

.

The Pilgrims are not who and what you think they are. Their propaganda narrative in history books, Hollywood movies, and Hallmark Thanksgiving cards is not close to who they really are. If we are to win the American Revolutionary War, and frankly, save Planet Earth, we need to know who rules the United States and what contracts were in place long before we arrived in this incarnation.

In order to win our freedom from British rule, we will need to go back to the original contracts, publically and legally recognize them, and claim our freedom from them. Until then, sorry to say, the U. S. Constitution doesn’t have standing. As Cindy Kay Currier explains in the video below, they own us from sea to sea, forever.

The good news is that there are more of us than them. we can give them one hell of a patriot ass-whipping.

.

United States is incorporated in City of London as “Virginia”

Have you educated your downline about the Pilgrims Society? Below are some articles we have prepared for you. Please study them and share with your community of truth seekers.

.

The Pilgrims Society – Enemy of Humanity

.

Pilgrims Society Ran the Obama White House

.

.

The Pilgrims Society – Threat to America

.

Pilgrims Society Started Korean War to Hide Interlocking Directorates

.

British and American Pilgrims Society archives have been kept at Allington Castle since 1998. Anne Pimlot Baker. (2002). The Pilgrims of Great Britain - A Centennial History, p. 176. Profile Books. Notably, this photo is not contained in the 2003 United States version of this book.

David Sarnoff – RCA, NBC, Pilgrims Society, Imperial British terrorist

.

.

.

.

UK-US Pilgrims Society Controls the SES – U.S. Deep State

.

.

Pilgrim..

The Pilgrims Society-Rockefeller Foundation funds Clinton Foundation / CHINA corps, proving their non-profit status is a criminal fraud

.

.

HENRY KISSINGER HAS BEEN SPYING FOR THE (BRITISH) PILGRIMS SOCIETY, LIKELY SINCE THE LATE 1940s

.

.

.

.