Well this is really good news! They're going to get an interdisciplinary team together to study the risk of an engineered pandemic? And when they do they will find the risk is nearly zero. Perfect!
Sadly, they're biased from the get go, for they say, "Covid-19 showed us how vulnerable the world is to pandemics."
Covid showed nothing of the sort. Rather, it showed us how corrupt medical journals were, how gullible the public is, and how powerful the MSM is.
I never trusted governments, police, etc. I will always remember my father having a total dislike for various authorities. Looks like my father was right, I always saw the corruption.
The only Kingdom I vote for is The Almighty God's Kingdom which is not of this world, with power given to His son Jesus.
Daniel 2:44
"In the days of those kings, the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that will never be destroyed, nor will it be left to another people. It will shatter all these kingdoms and bring them to an end, but will itself stand forever."
I have read the Engineered Pandemics Risk Management Programme and it is entirely narrative compliant. No room for genuine scepticism or scientific challenge there. Sad to see a great University reduced to this - providing intellectual justification and concealment for the crimes of their masters.
Cambridge even has a professor of Misinformation - actually two of them! Probably many more.
Anyone who has followed the Ukraine proxy war between US/NATO and Russia, knows this is pure neocon propaganda and now particularly sad, as Ukraine has lost over a million people, its population has reduced by a third, and Trump is selling off their mineral assets and ports to Blackrock.
What I am wondering is whether it is possible to get the info from another side. If it is a US entity or individual, for example, there may be a different kind of trail
Emails of one kind or another could also make reference to the grant.
I was thinking tax disclosures, assuming The Worst Possible Entity™ tried to deduct the donation. Don’t know what you would do if it was a nation state.
At least they correctly refer to them as "engineered pandemics", i.e. pointing out that they have to be faked (and wasn't there even an acronym to emphasise that point?).
Wow, Thanks Rob, this is the most to the point summary of the whole "Covid" paradigm I have read.
"That's where they implemented the real virus, that people could believe that their bodies could be hijacked.
Imagine that.... The predator class wished it could be done in real life as they tried and tried.
So basically the idea of a virus only really works psychologically. An errant belief that hijacks you using yourself via the nocebo effect and being shunted into dangerous shots and antivirals."
I just came across a book, Groupthink: A Study In Self Delusion by Christopher Booker, which would point to Covid being engineered groupthink.
This from a review
I have been left wondering whether the Covid-19 pandemic is yet another example of groupthink. Booker would ask us to apply the Rules of Groupthink to the situation. Rule one is that the response is based less on scientific testing and verifiable data and more on ‘models which are speculative. Without the necessary testing and randomised trials, are we relying on ‘scientific’ opinions rather than facts (as in the case of Global Warming)? Rule two divides people who believe from the sceptics or ‘deniers’. Those who follow the groupthink have the right ‘herd mentality’, because they are acting virtuously by not spreading the virus. Only those who obey are part of the ‘in-group’. Finally, Rule three asks whether there has been room made for debate or has an action plan been instigated that has no room for doubt? I believe that all three rules of groupthink have been satisfied. Only time will tell whether this has been a prudent response or an over-reaction to a real or imaginary threat.
Yes I was very surprised when Mattias came out with comments in his last substack post such as,
"The coronavirus came from a lab in Wuhan, where, indeed, they were experimenting with coronaviruses. What is now emerging in the mainstream media is even worse than just the fact that the virus came from a lab. It is also becoming clear that (some of) those who promoted the measures always knew it came from a lab."
"Now that we agree the virus came from the Wuhan lab, the next question arises"
Seems like a very left brained response, I wonder what his friend Iaian McGilchrist thinks of that?
How absurd is this approach to "engineered pandemics"?
For the millions wasted, if GoF labs actually existed, you could simply install a bunch of new door locks and never let anyone into these labs again, closing them forever as a result.
In fact, a few removal vans would be enough to bring all the "technical equipment" back to Hollywood, where it belongs. To some other movie set.
Instead, a new stage façade is being built in front of the existing stage façade, called "preparedness". That is so pathetic.
The main thing is that the big fat lie doesn't come to light.
Now we are getting to the nub of the issue, which is essentially as I predicted when I was first struck by the permitted nature of discussion about the "lab-leak theory" nearly 3 years ago:
Extracted from this Aug 2022 article (which was originally a tweet thread hence a bit stilted linguistically) of mine on Lombardy:
"I don't think we are asking the right questions about Spring 2020 at all. Timing of "lockdown" is quite obviously a distraction from the core issue. But I also think natural vs lab origin is not the most pressing question to answer.
To me, the way "lab-leak" was initially verboten, yet now seems to be permissible to talk (and write) about has a smell of being “managed”.
If I imagine that the major part of the mortality had been caused by a variety of policy decisions I had made, the number one thing I'd want is for people to occupy themselves obsessing over the origin of the virus rather than the cause of the deaths.
Imagine that I was heavily involved in the "pandemic preparedness industry" - an industry siphoning billions out of the pockets of taxpayers into my chosen commercial interests. I wouldn’t be bothered about the origin story. Lab or natural - I can make a fortune either way.
What I would be bothered about though would be the idea that this was in fact nowhere near as harmful as the "authorities" told people it was. Because then people might question the need for my new highly profitable industry at all.
I could even tolerate people thinking it was a lab leak. If it was, people will be afraid that it could surely happen again. Because regardless of whatever controls are put in place, some rogue operators could always carelessly carry on doing GoF research.
So natural or lab-leak, as long as we keep the fear going, we surely need to be better "prepared". That's great for business. And great for justifying centralised control."
Their response to the suggestion of closure / locks (presumably agreed worldwide by International Treaty) would be:
"Yes but now anyone can do this, we need to be prepared for when some rogue actor / state cooks something up"
Thus the need for an entire apparatus of "monitoring" and "preparedness" is assured.
Everyone who has pushed - or failed to oppose - the insane notion that "covid came from a lab and spread round the world" is culpable in this deception.
Jonathan, you are doing great work in preparing for future "engineered" pandemics, by proving they only exist in peoples minds not in reality, and it is the response to an imagined pandemic that causes the illusion of one in some kind of weird positive feedback loop.
Which brings to mind two quotes,
You can avoid reality, but you cannot avoid the consequences of avoiding reality.
What is most difficult, is to love the world as it is. Loving the world means neither uncritical acceptance nor contemptuous rejection, but the unwavering facing up to and comprehension of that which is.
I think we know which side of the political spectrum this is coming from. Here’s a report in Gizmodo.
“Along with researching the most likely state and non-state actors who could be working to modify harmful pathogens (or just release one accidentally), the program will also examine strategies for dealing with such a crisis once it’s unleashed. At the onset of the covid-19 pandemic, hospitals around the world dealt with a shortage of personal protective equipment, such as N95 respirators. The experts on the panel will work on models that could help predict what products and other infrastructure may be needed should another pandemic hit, and how supply lines can be set up to ensure there are no shortfalls of supplies. That includes how to ensure there’s a sufficient supply of vaccines, should one be available.
Speaking of vaccines, the group acknowledged that mistrust of science and the spread of misinformation is bound to play a major role in an outbreak. Given that Robert F. Kennedy Jr.—a man who has spread dangerous (and potentially deadly) misinformation about vaccines—is now overseeing the public health system of the United States, strengthening pandemic preparedness seems like a wise move.”
Engineered sounds ominous, will a novel pandemic be an annual event so that pharma can have a profitable baseload of work, now that the mass medications of statins, DOACs etc are out of patent?
Sounds like a Bill Gates Foundation type of interest. They are all about Plandemics and wealth transfer. The other usual suspects will fall in line as well.
Well this is really good news! They're going to get an interdisciplinary team together to study the risk of an engineered pandemic? And when they do they will find the risk is nearly zero. Perfect!
Sadly, they're biased from the get go, for they say, "Covid-19 showed us how vulnerable the world is to pandemics."
Covid showed nothing of the sort. Rather, it showed us how corrupt medical journals were, how gullible the public is, and how powerful the MSM is.
Yeah and it showed us never to trust the government again and NHS .
I never trusted governments, police, etc. I will always remember my father having a total dislike for various authorities. Looks like my father was right, I always saw the corruption.
The only Kingdom I vote for is The Almighty God's Kingdom which is not of this world, with power given to His son Jesus.
Daniel 2:44
"In the days of those kings, the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that will never be destroyed, nor will it be left to another people. It will shatter all these kingdoms and bring them to an end, but will itself stand forever."
John 18:36 - Luke 17:20-21 and many more.
Oxford and Cambridge are thoroughly infiltrated.
I have read the Engineered Pandemics Risk Management Programme and it is entirely narrative compliant. No room for genuine scepticism or scientific challenge there. Sad to see a great University reduced to this - providing intellectual justification and concealment for the crimes of their masters.
Cambridge even has a professor of Misinformation - actually two of them! Probably many more.
https://www.sdmlab.psychol.cam.ac.uk/staff/professor-jon-roozenbeek
https://www.psychol.cam.ac.uk/people/sander-van-der-linden
They also follow the narrative. Just look at this-
https://www.cambridge.org/us/universitypress/subjects/psychology/social-psychology/propaganda-and-ideology-russianukrainian-war?format=HB&isbn=9781009244015
Anyone who has followed the Ukraine proxy war between US/NATO and Russia, knows this is pure neocon propaganda and now particularly sad, as Ukraine has lost over a million people, its population has reduced by a third, and Trump is selling off their mineral assets and ports to Blackrock.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCdeMVChrumySxV9N1w0Au-w
Haven't we just had an "engineered pandemic?" Should give them plenty to go on.
Surely the only problem is the misattribution of the origin of such "pandemics"
As scientific research is routinely neither independent nor bias-free we do need to know who is funding the desired "result."
I think that means it is fair game to assume it is the worst possible entity providing the funding.
What I am wondering is whether it is possible to get the info from another side. If it is a US entity or individual, for example, there may be a different kind of trail
Emails of one kind or another could also make reference to the grant.
Actually wouldn’t papers funded by this need to disclose funding source?
It depends.
Not sure about UK, but in the US, the tricky part is if a foundation does the granting.
Or when Indivudals A, B, C, et al give money to Foundation X, which then gives to Foundation Y, which then grants to Cambridge.
I was thinking tax disclosures, assuming The Worst Possible Entity™ tried to deduct the donation. Don’t know what you would do if it was a nation state.
Spread the word: “RNA cannot pandemic”
People need to recognize their treachery. We need to make liars out of them before they even begin their lying.
Ahhhh.. more parasites sucking on the teat.
Surprise surprise.
At least they correctly refer to them as "engineered pandemics", i.e. pointing out that they have to be faked (and wasn't there even an acronym to emphasise that point?).
These bastards get us Sick on purpose again & ITS ON!! We the people vs Whoever is responsible! No more Germ bombs you fucking cowards!
I wonder if these things are remnants of the original plan which failed. Propaganda doesn't work the way it used to.
https://robc137.substack.com/p/covid
Wow, Thanks Rob, this is the most to the point summary of the whole "Covid" paradigm I have read.
"That's where they implemented the real virus, that people could believe that their bodies could be hijacked.
Imagine that.... The predator class wished it could be done in real life as they tried and tried.
So basically the idea of a virus only really works psychologically. An errant belief that hijacks you using yourself via the nocebo effect and being shunted into dangerous shots and antivirals."
Thanks.
That's why questioning the virus itself is critical to figuring out their plan and where we are now.
It's really odd isn't it? I was expecting vaccine passports during COVID but they backed down from that.
I just came across a book, Groupthink: A Study In Self Delusion by Christopher Booker, which would point to Covid being engineered groupthink.
This from a review
I have been left wondering whether the Covid-19 pandemic is yet another example of groupthink. Booker would ask us to apply the Rules of Groupthink to the situation. Rule one is that the response is based less on scientific testing and verifiable data and more on ‘models which are speculative. Without the necessary testing and randomised trials, are we relying on ‘scientific’ opinions rather than facts (as in the case of Global Warming)? Rule two divides people who believe from the sceptics or ‘deniers’. Those who follow the groupthink have the right ‘herd mentality’, because they are acting virtuously by not spreading the virus. Only those who obey are part of the ‘in-group’. Finally, Rule three asks whether there has been room made for debate or has an action plan been instigated that has no room for doubt? I believe that all three rules of groupthink have been satisfied. Only time will tell whether this has been a prudent response or an over-reaction to a real or imaginary threat.
Paging Mattias Desmet to join the engineering fallacy as visiting scholar.
https://substack.com/profile/45328239-mattias-desmet
Yes I was very surprised when Mattias came out with comments in his last substack post such as,
"The coronavirus came from a lab in Wuhan, where, indeed, they were experimenting with coronaviruses. What is now emerging in the mainstream media is even worse than just the fact that the virus came from a lab. It is also becoming clear that (some of) those who promoted the measures always knew it came from a lab."
"Now that we agree the virus came from the Wuhan lab, the next question arises"
Seems like a very left brained response, I wonder what his friend Iaian McGilchrist thinks of that?
How absurd is this approach to "engineered pandemics"?
For the millions wasted, if GoF labs actually existed, you could simply install a bunch of new door locks and never let anyone into these labs again, closing them forever as a result.
In fact, a few removal vans would be enough to bring all the "technical equipment" back to Hollywood, where it belongs. To some other movie set.
Instead, a new stage façade is being built in front of the existing stage façade, called "preparedness". That is so pathetic.
The main thing is that the big fat lie doesn't come to light.
Thanks.
Now we are getting to the nub of the issue, which is essentially as I predicted when I was first struck by the permitted nature of discussion about the "lab-leak theory" nearly 3 years ago:
Extracted from this Aug 2022 article (which was originally a tweet thread hence a bit stilted linguistically) of mine on Lombardy:
https://pandauncut.substack.com/p/the-lombardy-analysis
"I don't think we are asking the right questions about Spring 2020 at all. Timing of "lockdown" is quite obviously a distraction from the core issue. But I also think natural vs lab origin is not the most pressing question to answer.
To me, the way "lab-leak" was initially verboten, yet now seems to be permissible to talk (and write) about has a smell of being “managed”.
If I imagine that the major part of the mortality had been caused by a variety of policy decisions I had made, the number one thing I'd want is for people to occupy themselves obsessing over the origin of the virus rather than the cause of the deaths.
Imagine that I was heavily involved in the "pandemic preparedness industry" - an industry siphoning billions out of the pockets of taxpayers into my chosen commercial interests. I wouldn’t be bothered about the origin story. Lab or natural - I can make a fortune either way.
What I would be bothered about though would be the idea that this was in fact nowhere near as harmful as the "authorities" told people it was. Because then people might question the need for my new highly profitable industry at all.
I could even tolerate people thinking it was a lab leak. If it was, people will be afraid that it could surely happen again. Because regardless of whatever controls are put in place, some rogue operators could always carelessly carry on doing GoF research.
So natural or lab-leak, as long as we keep the fear going, we surely need to be better "prepared". That's great for business. And great for justifying centralised control."
Their response to the suggestion of closure / locks (presumably agreed worldwide by International Treaty) would be:
"Yes but now anyone can do this, we need to be prepared for when some rogue actor / state cooks something up"
Thus the need for an entire apparatus of "monitoring" and "preparedness" is assured.
Everyone who has pushed - or failed to oppose - the insane notion that "covid came from a lab and spread round the world" is culpable in this deception.
Jonathan, you are doing great work in preparing for future "engineered" pandemics, by proving they only exist in peoples minds not in reality, and it is the response to an imagined pandemic that causes the illusion of one in some kind of weird positive feedback loop.
Which brings to mind two quotes,
You can avoid reality, but you cannot avoid the consequences of avoiding reality.
What is most difficult, is to love the world as it is. Loving the world means neither uncritical acceptance nor contemptuous rejection, but the unwavering facing up to and comprehension of that which is.
I think we know which side of the political spectrum this is coming from. Here’s a report in Gizmodo.
“Along with researching the most likely state and non-state actors who could be working to modify harmful pathogens (or just release one accidentally), the program will also examine strategies for dealing with such a crisis once it’s unleashed. At the onset of the covid-19 pandemic, hospitals around the world dealt with a shortage of personal protective equipment, such as N95 respirators. The experts on the panel will work on models that could help predict what products and other infrastructure may be needed should another pandemic hit, and how supply lines can be set up to ensure there are no shortfalls of supplies. That includes how to ensure there’s a sufficient supply of vaccines, should one be available.
Speaking of vaccines, the group acknowledged that mistrust of science and the spread of misinformation is bound to play a major role in an outbreak. Given that Robert F. Kennedy Jr.—a man who has spread dangerous (and potentially deadly) misinformation about vaccines—is now overseeing the public health system of the United States, strengthening pandemic preparedness seems like a wise move.”
Even the slowpokes & normies gonna catch on soon.
Looking at a co-director bio of Clare Bryant - Professor of Innate Immunity; maybe not all negative https://www.crassh.cam.ac.uk/about/people/clare-bryant/
Engineered sounds ominous, will a novel pandemic be an annual event so that pharma can have a profitable baseload of work, now that the mass medications of statins, DOACs etc are out of patent?
Sounds like a Bill Gates Foundation type of interest. They are all about Plandemics and wealth transfer. The other usual suspects will fall in line as well.
How gullible? write up.
Cv 19, was well planned, engineered. Thomas V rightly says, showed us how ….