By James Grundvig
Nine months into the global pandemic that shut down the world, research and hindsight have invited analysis of COVID-19’s use of “predictive programming.” The psyop is the art of priming the public with extraordinary beliefs to accept planned future events.
In 2010, the Rockefeller Foundation seeded the public by publishing a report, “Scenarios for the Future of Technology and International Development,” that presented four what-if scenarios to take place in the future.
The first, called Lock Step, profiled a pandemic scenario that found, “A world with top-down government control and more authoritarian leadership, with limited innovation and growing citizen pushback.” The year for the outbreak was 2012.
Over the past few years, first, Dr. Anthony Fauci warned about a pandemic that would happen in “President Trump’s first term,” then Bill Gates parroted the coming of “Disease X” throughout 2018. Finally, the World Health Organization (WHO) sold pandemic bonds last year. The most conspicuous type of predictive programming, however, came from the WHO’s newly formed Global Preparedness Monitoring Board (GPMB). Last September, months before the first people showed up sick with the strange pneumonia in Wuhan hospitals, the GPMB published its first annual report, “A World At Risk.”
On pages 10 and 39, under the section, “Progress indicator(s) by September 2020,” the second bullet point read:
“The United Nations (including WHO) conducts at least two system-wide training and simulation exercises, including one for covering the deliberate release of a lethal respiratory pathogen.” [Emphasis mine.]
That week, dozens of mainstream media published such titillating titles as “The World Knows an Apocalyptic Pandemic is Coming” (Foreign Policy) and “A Pandemic Could Kill up to 80 Million People Across the Globe …” (WWNY 7News). These over-the-top headlines seemed out of place then, occurring one month before the Gates Foundation and World Economic Forum’s simulation of a coronavirus pandemic, called Event 201.
Programming the Future
In the lead-up to the actual coronavirus epidemic emanating out of Wuhan, China, the pandemic players worked overtime to condition the public about the near future outbreak. Another finding in the Rockefeller Foundation report pointed to people surrendering rights in exchange for public safety, even when some states enacted strict draconian measures.
Welcome to 2020.
Today, with the novel virus waning, with herd immunity established in parts of Europe, New York and California, among other places, talks of lockdowns continue to populate the news. Why? It makes little sense in light of the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) revising its data on deaths due to COVID alone, down to 6%, or roughly 10,000 deaths in the past six months. Add the much-maligned and misused PCR-test, in which 90% of the “positive cases” either picked up low viral loads that can’t be transmitted or different strains of other viruses. Death counts and cases need to be revised downward.
In effect, the pandemic is over.
Then why do Anthony Fauci, Bill Gates, the CDC and the WHO’s Director-General Tedros Adhanom continue to predict a more virulent second wave of COVID coming this fall? Dr. Fauci declared we are entering the “Pandemic Era.” In his obligatory refrain, Bill Gates warned that “millions are going to die by the end of 2021.” Meanwhile the CDC invented a new marketing term, “Twindemic,” insinuating a head-on collision will happen this fall between COVID-19 and the flu season. Not to be outdone, Dr. Tedros stated, “This is not the last pandemic,” at the WHO’s first press conference this month.
They all earn kudos for predictive programming, long after fear receded from the public at large. Still, they are saying the same thing. But what data points support their promotion that a second wave will emerge? Nothing. There is no evidence of one emerging.
If those were the only stray signals about a more virulent virus strain, we could ignore their dire warnings. But recently, Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine wrote an order that would separate “infected children” from their families to be quarantined in “non-congregating shelters,” aka FEMA camps. The New York State Assembly is currently reviewing a similar measure, A99, that would empower authorities to “remove cases” from their homes.
Then there are rumors about brucellosis poisoning the food supply from at least two different sources – with no evidence. If the brucella bacteria were used as a bioweapon, several questions are raised. How would it be deployed? Who would be the target? What would be the desired outcome the terrorists want to achieve?
If they use a bioweapon in the weeks running up to the volatile election, it would be an ideal time to launch such a stealth attack. With the news media and people’s attention glued to the riots, fires and looting, delivering a Trojan horse aimed at children and young adults – the main demographics left untouched by COVID – would create instant chaos and confusion, and a perfect smokescreen for a coup.
War-Gaming the Second Wave of COVID
In searching brucellosis on the NIH database PubMed, the first dozen results return China with the food-borne pathogen being prevalent in the mainland since Mao’s time. Next, the faulty PCR-tests are used to detect those infected with brucella bacteria. More searches show children and young people are vulnerable to brucellosis infections and illnesses. Deeper still, the brucella bacteria can make a stealthy, deadly bioweapon mimicking several of the COVID-19 symptoms.
In 2012, a police station in Lima, Peru, had a brucellosis outbreak in the cafeteria that infected 90 police officers. For many years, scientists studied the human brucellosis incident, transmission route, and the uncooked meat and dairy products where the bacteria flourished.
In a decades-old paper, “Brucella as a Biological Weapon,” Greek scientists explored the many ways the Swiss army knife bacteria could be weaponized, particularly as an aerosol. They discovered brucellosis, as ancient disease, held “vague clinical characteristics defying rapid clinical diagnosis.” Unlike coronavirus, a brucella bioweapon would need a low viral load of 10 to 100 organisms to infect scores of people. But its long, irregular incubation period, from five days to five months, makes the bacteria unpredictable to use in germ warfare. But that was based on 2006 analysis. Virus technology has advanced many fold.
Today, with CRISPR snipping technology, with Dr. Anthony Fauci offshoring gain-of-function research to the Wuhan Bioweapons Lab in China, among other Southeast Asian nations, brucellosis could be weaponized. Imagine inserting Bat-SARS strands, GP-120 spike proteins and HIV elements, while reducing the lab-modified germ’s incubation period to a few days. Aerosolized, the corona-brucella bioweapon could be exported to the United States and, in a relatively straightforward step, be sprayed onto foods in unprotected production plants before being frozen or blended with dairy products.
Consumed by children in school cafeterias around the country, the brucella weapon would take about a week for the first clusters to appear. Once children fall ill en masse, testing with PCR kits would ensue, since they are readily available and in use nationwide.
What happens next would come out of the WHO’s pandemic playbook. First, states and cities would enact new control and quarantine orders, while mainstream media broadcast that the COVID-19 second wave has arrived. Governors would then declare the cities as “hot zones,” cutting off trucking that would, in turn, trigger food shortages. By authorities removing sick children from their families, it would help keep the ruse going since laboratory blood testing of infected cases wouldn’t happen initially, delaying real diagnosis and pathology of that a food-borne bioweapon attack had launched and not the reemergence of COVID-19.
With all of the focus on vote-by-mail fraud post-election, suddenly, thousands of people who want to vote in person on Election Day are discouraged from doing so, scared away, quarantined, or caught up in the new rounds of lockdowns.
In this war game scenario, a coup to steal the election wouldn’t occur after Election Day, but many weeks prior. By using a Trojan horse to carry the food-borne attack, no one would know what hit them. At least, not until well after the election. By then, it might be too late to overturn results.
Naturally, such an event would give Fauci, Gates and Tedros ammunition to boast that they warned America about the return of a devastating second wave of COVID. Like 9/11, in the aftermath of a brucella attack more civil rights would be lost and stolen.
Thus, the first tell that a war game is on would be when clusters of children fall ill.
This fall, keep your eyes open.
James Grundvig is a published author of three books, including corruption at the CDC, and an investigative journalist publishing a broad spectrum of topics for several media outlets, including the Financial Times, FDI magazine, Huff Post, FRN, and Epoch Times.