Pseudopandemic

by Iain Davis

  There is not a scrap of evidence to support anything the CCE said. The FBI's opinion is not evidence. Claiming something could trigger idiots to act is not a valid justification for censorship. Watching BBC news reports of the Syrian conflict was enough to trigger thousands of British citizens to join ISIS. Catcher in the Rye allegedly triggered a lunatic to murder John Lennon. People can be triggered by anything because they have free will. This does not provide any basis for censoring the BBC or burning J.D. Salinger novels.

  Another motivation for the pseudopandemic was to crystallise the "dangerous disinformation" narrative in the public's imagination. Information may or may not constitute dezinformatsiya but the only way to make that judgement is to consider the evidence underpinning the reporting of it and, if it is lacking, decide if the motive was to intentionally deceive for some nefarious gain. Simply asserting that something is dezinformatsiya without examining the evidence provided, as the CCE suggest, is fallacious bilge.

  The CCE's February report doesn't provide much clarity on who the hateful conspiracy theorist extremists are. For this we need to consider their July 2020 report titled How Hateful Extremists Are Exploiting The Pandemic [18]. This is far more revealing. It states:

  "During the COVID-19 pandemic we have seen an increased visibility of conspiracy theories ranging from anti-vaccine, anti-establishment to anti-minority and antisemitic."

  We can gather from this that the CCE have attached racism and antisemitism to people advocating vaccine safety studies and asking questions of authority. Card stacking, they then have used the transfer propaganda technique. In doing so they are exploiting the Holocaust to create disinformation designed to further their political agenda. Showing a total disregard for Jewish victims is irrelevant to the CCE. All that matters is that they get what they want.

  We will not refer to the people who are the target of CCE dezinformatsiya as hateful extremists. We will refer to theme as "people." People don't have "extremist narratives" they have "legitimate opinions." The CCE continue:

  "Extremists will seek to capitalise on the socio-economic impacts of COVID-19 to cause further long term instability, fear and division in Britain. Government needs to include clear plans to counter extremism in their response to this and future crises... the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government must drive forward a COVID-19 cohesion strategy to help bring different communities together to prevent extremist narratives from having significant reach and influence."

  Here we see the CCE (State franchise) refer to their own deliberate destruction of the global economy and small to medium size businesses around the world, as the socio-economic impacts of COVID-19. This is dezinformatsiya. In addition they are using appeal to fear propaganda to exploit anxieties and concerns about social division and instability which was a key objective of the State franchise throughout the pseudopandemic. The CCE refuse to take any shared responsibility for this but instead seek to blame the people. The CCE further state:

  "Conspiracy theories have been a key tactic used by extremists to recruit and divide communities... They are difficult to challenge as their proponents commonly respond to attempts to invalidate them by claiming that they are being censored. Moreover, social media companies can serve to fuel conspiracy theories as platforms can be slow to takedown content."

  In order to invalidate an idea you need to engage with it. If an idea, or expressed opinion, is taken-down then that is censorship. That the CCE think that the taking-down content is not censorship is confusing enough, but for them then to suggest that censorship constitutes invalidating an idea borders upon idiocy.

  If someone is stood on Speaker's Corner explaining why it is the Sun and not a trace atmospheric gas, that controls the climate, sticking your fingers in your ears and shouting "la la la" is not an invalidation of their argument. It isn't clear that the CCE understand this.

  To challenge scientific and medical evidence, to reinterpret statistical data or debate an opinion, you cannot simply censor it. Some form of dialectic is required. A takedown of content is the antithesis of dialectical reasoning. It is inimical to our culture. It is modern day version of book burning. The CCE add:

  "A study from the University of Oxford found that people who held coronavirus conspiracy beliefs were less likely to comply with social distancing guidelines or take up future vaccines. They tested conspiracy theories which claimed that... Bill Gates created the virus to reduce the world population."

  The argument here appears to be that anyone and everyone who does not fully comply with the diktats of the biosecurity Technate has been infected with wrong-think. It is impossible that they genuinely disagree with pseudopandemic policy or don't want the vaccine. No matter what, regardless of the evidence, the people must not think that Bill Gates is a eugenicist. Clearly this matters to the GPPP.

  Building upon this idea, the CCE wrote:

  "The scale of online extremist content and engagement with such material is deeply concerning. Research by the Institute for Strategic Dialogue (ISD) found hundreds of thousands of Far Right posts around COVID-19 and millions of engagements with known disinformation... about ‘elites’ such as Bill Gates, George Soros, the Rothchilds and Jeff Bezos and false information about their role in the creation of the virus."

  To paraphrase: To question the GPPP, the parasite class the core conspirators, their informed influencers and the pseudopandemic is far right hateful extremism. The democratic principle of questioning power is now an act of extreme hate. The millions of people who think this is an important democratic principle are all far right hateful extremists.

  The GPPP need the people to stop asking why the richest and most powerful people in the world just happen to be the only people in the world who benefit from a global pandemic. The people must shut up about the evidence and stop sharing scientific papers, statistical data, medical testimonies, official documents, news reports and expert opinion that question their rightful leaders.

  The CCE have more clarity to offer:

  "Extremists promote hostile and supremacist beliefs towards a group of people who are perceived as a threat to the wellbeing, survival or success of a defined ‘in-group’. Who is seen as the ‘out-group’ depends on the ideological worldview of extremists, but it often includes people with a protected characteristic.

  Popular videos claimed that ‘the Rothchilds’ are key players in a global plot to use the disease as a pretence to impose a totalitarian world government. This video was viewed over 5.9 million times... the scale and reach of .. antisemitic conspiracy theories remains extremely concerning."

  It appears with this statement we are getting close the nub of the CCE's totalitarian labelling system. Among those who are the only people on Earth to benefit from the global pandemic, a minority happen to be Jewish. The CCE recognise that they can exploit this and label people who asks uncomfortable questions as antisemites. They can then officially call all of these people far right hateful extremists and use this deceit to censor them and, more importantly, the evidence they share.

  Finally we get to the CCE's (State franchise') primary concern. The CCE round off their description of far right hateful extremism with the following:

  "Research indicates that a ‘lack of trust in the system is generally higher amongst those who are most prone to believing conspiracy theories’... A reduction of trust in the Government and state institutions can be exploited by extremists to spread their hateful and divisive narratives.”

  Bluntly, if you do not unquestioningly trust the GPPP's State franchise, if you question anything they decree and if you do not comply with your orders, you are not just a conspiracy theorist, you are a hateful far right extremist. A terrorist in other words.

  This is the culmination of Cameron's non-violent extremist idea. It has been a many years in the making and he was by no means the first to propose it but, via the pseudopandemic, the GPPP are ready to present the world with their ultimate global terrorist: anyone who does not
obey.

  Ofcom will be empowered by the UK's proposed Online Safety Act. They will have the authority to order social media platforms to "take down content or to restrict access to it." Ofcom will demand that internet services take down whatever the GPPP decree to be disinformation or misinformation. This will be based upon Ofcom's judgment regarding the "harm" caused by information. The CCE's definition of hateful extremism will undoubtedly inform that determination.

  As expected there is no definition of "harm" in the Online Safety Bill [19] (the proposed Act.) Harm is a vague, malleable concept that can be adapted to suit. We get a clue regarding how Ofcom's will interpret it from the CCE's July 2020 report. It suggests six categories for official harm which the CCE apply to the whole of society:

  Censorship and restriction of freedom

  Crime, violence and harassment

  Mental health and wellbeing

  Social division and intolerance

  Economic harms

  Delegitimising authority/undermining democracy

  If this, or anything like this definition is used by the Internet regulator Ofcom then freedom of speech and expression online will be a thing of the past. It suggests "harm" will include anything which upsets someone (wellbeing.) If you question civil society you will be causing social division and therefore "harm." If you strongly disagree you will be harmfully intolerant.

  Most importantly harm will be anything which jeopardises the commercial interests of the GPPP (economic harm) or questions their puppet selection process (undermining democracy.) You will never, under any circumstances, delegitimise their authority.

  People advocating proper evaluation of drug safety were hateful extremists according to the CCE. The scientific papers, medical opinions and evidence supplied by professional bodies like the DFCE and HART was the false health advice Moy referred to. The CCE and Moy are among those who advocate the omniscience of Hotez and others who claim that a scientific consensus exists.

  Their globalist message is that you should not think for yourself. Trust them and live in fear because they say you should.

  The UK State franchise response to the infodemic problem was the Online Safety Bill. Once enacted it will compel social media platforms and search engines to "take down" the wrong science and inconvenient statistics. This will ensure social media only permits the sharing of reports from the Trusted News cartel and removes the news media's ability to question power.

  This proposed new normal censorship grid will enable the GPPP to operate its Rapid Response Mechanism without challenge. The supporting narrative, justifying this global censorship grid, will be provided by the Trusted News cartel based upon the spurious claims of bodies like the CCE. They will exploit the baseless definition of hateful extremism to situate the citizenry within the approved choice environment.

  Those who express doubt about the necessity for public health biosecurity, who resists the imposition of the Technate, who refuse to comply, exercise the democratic right of protest or question the authority claimed by our self appointed rulers will be demonised by the politicians, the remaining media, the fearful and the self righteous.

  "A nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market is a nation that is afraid of its people."

  [John. F. Kennedy - 35th president of the United States]

  Sources:

  [1] - https://web.archive.org/web/20210513140322/https://arxiv.org/pdf/2101.07993.pdf

  [2] - https://archive.is/A85Eb

  [3] - https://archive.is/KTqRP

  [4] - https://archive.is/5K2nn

  [5] - https://archive.is/CghqY

  [6] - https://archive.is/xujln

  [7] - https://archive.is/YkJhE

  [8] - https://archive.is/IkZCN

  [9] - https://archive.is/J3kN6

  [10] - https://www.lexico.com/definition/trust

  [11] - https://archive.is/ZehDq

  [12] - https://archive.is/EHrFH

  [13] - https://archive.is/59BGj

  [14] - https://web.archive.org/web/20210504053632/https://doctors4covidethics.medium.com/covid-vaccines-necessity-efficacy-and-safety-b1d8bfbc9d2

  [15] - https://archive.is/NqQ2C

  [16] - https://archive.is/V4bcx

  [17] - https://web.archive.org/web/20210227050059/https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/963156/CCE_Operating_with_Impunity_Accessible.pdf

  [18] - https://web.archive.org/web/20201101060128/https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/906724/CCE_Briefing_Note_001.pdf

  [19] - https://web.archive.org/web/20210512151609/https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/985033/Draft_Online_Safety_Bill_Bookmarked.pdf

  Chapter 23 - The Biosecurity State

  The UK State franchise has repeatedly tried to introduce various forms of national identity cards [1] which have consistently been rejected by the population. Thanks to pseudopandemic behaviour change that resistance appears to have collapsed. It has been replaced with fear driven automatic behaviour in the new choice environment. We are being conditioned to trust [2] our new digital identities. In February 2021 the UK State franchise announced:

  "The government has today published its draft rules of the road for governing the future use of digital identities. It is part of plans to make it quicker and easier for people to verify themselves using modern technology... Digital identity products allow people to prove who they are... The new ‘trust framework’ lays out the draft rules... The framework, once finalised, is expected to be brought into law.... Establishing trust online is absolutely essential."

  Reading this you would imagine that the electorate wanted biometric ID's or felt the need to verify themselves. It may be quicker and easier to register your biometric ID, but seeing as this wasn't something anyone previously needed to do, the claimed time cost benefit is questionable.

  Being able to inventory every citizen using biometric ID has been the GPPP's ambition for many years. At the U.N ID2020 summit [3] in 2016 the gathered thought leaders discussed how they could achieve Sustainable Development Goal 16.9. This objective alleges that being able to prove your identity is a human right. The GPPP decided that State franchises should:

  “Provide legal identity to all, including birth registration, by 2030”

  The BMGF, WHO, UNICEF, World Bank and Rockefeller Foundation ID2020 partnership agreed how vital it was to enforce "legal identity" on everyone by 2030. Like finance restructuring and carbon bond markets, it contributes nothing towards saving the planet. The GPPP don't care what the real issues are but, once again, the pseudopandemic created the perfect opportunity for them to achieve their ID2020 SDG 16.9 aspirations.

  The global ID2020 partnership's claim that proof of identity is a right is laughable. It is an inalienable right to say who you are but you only need to prove it when someone else demands that you do. It remains up to you to decide whether or not you do, in fact, need to prove it. That decision will be based upon how much you want whatever they are offering in exchange for your proof.

  This new human right is not a right at all. It is a dictatorial decree that you present your biometric ID (papers) when commanded to do so by the authorities. For example, it will be required to access State franchise services and benefits.

  In the new world order of carbon neutral austerity, net zero unemployment will give us plenty of time to work in civil society community projects. We will be rewarded for our commitment to SDG's and public health. Our Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) will be issued to us as Universal Basic Income (UBI) or some variation of it.

  We will discuss why this is a practical certainty shortly, but for now let's just consider how this system will work. In the UK, the Trusted News cartel are already creating our choice environment [4]. They are busy promoting UBI as the solution to our problem of increasing poverty and economic inequality.


  The furlough job retention scheme appears to have been a trial for UBI. Yet another GPPP objective advanced by the pseudopandemic. The argument the Trusted News Cartel forward is that furlough was such an amazing success that it has "taken the brakes" off the discussion about UBI. It was described as:

  "A tax-free, unconditional, non-contributory flat amount given to everyone in the country including children, though at a reduced rate and paid to parents."

  UBI will probably have universal appeal. What is there not to like about free money? Seeing as this central bank / State franchise money will supposedly be free, why limit UBI? Why not give everyone a $1 billion CBDC yuan, or whatever the next CBDC reserve currency will be, then we will all be billionaires?

  In 2018 The Royal Institute of International Affairs (Chatham House) invited Facebook co-founder Chris Hughes to explain to them [5] how UBI "might work in practice." In 2017 the World Economic Forum (WEF) made their argument as to Why We Should All Have A Basic Income [6] and it was a key topic for debate at Davos the same year. Others, such as philanthropists [7] Mark Zuckerberg, Elon Musk and Richard Branson, have all expressed their enthusiasm for UBI.

  Why would the people who have profited most from the hoarding of capital now think giving free money to everyone is a good idea? If we look at the India's Aadhaar biometric ID program [8] perhaps we can figure it out.

  In 2009 Indian information technology billionaire Nandan Nilekani [9] was behind the Aadhaar program to provide 1.2 billion Indians with biometric ID. This biometric ID network enables Indian people to access State franchise money. The Unique Identification Authority of India explained how the system works [10]: