Did Cash Crunch Help Spark the Fraud?

Neville Hodgkinson follows up on this aspect in today’s Conservative Woman, or read here:

German journalist and author Paul Schreyer has produced an hour-long video in which he shows how a ‘war on bioterror’ was taking shape long before the emergence of Covid-19, foreshadowing and perhaps in many ways dictating the international response to the pandemic. The ‘war’ gathered pace during the 1990s and early 2000s with a series of high-level pandemic simulation exercises conducted among the most influential industrial nations of the West, as described here yesterday.

THE pandemic concerns went briefly into abeyance during the financial crisis of 2007-08, but emerged with greater intensity during the ‘swine flu’ panic of 2009. The outbreak prompted the prominent French economic and social theorist and visionary networker Jacques Attali to make a statement that Schreyer regards as crucial in helping us understand some of the ideas and forces that lie behind the current ‘global psychosis’, as I have described it, surrounding SARS-CoV-2. Governments worldwide have implemented hugely damaging lockdowns and mass experimental vaccinations after the escape of this genetically engineered virus rightly created alarm, but to which the response has been lethally disproportionate.  

Attali has served as a special adviser in French politics for several decades, counselling presidents including Francois Mitterand, Nicolas Sarkozy and Emmanuel Macron. He predicted the subprime mortgage crisis that started in the US in 2007, and in 2009 was acclaimed as one of the world’s top 100 ‘global thinkers’ by the American news journal Foreign Policy. He is the head of an international consultancy on strategy, corporate finance and venture capital.

When swine flu struck in 2009, he wrote: ‘History teaches us that humanity advances in great strides if it is frightened. The pandemic now setting in might trigger one of those fears that cause structural changes. Then we will be able to lay the foundation for a world government, something to accomplish much faster than would have been possible by economic reasons alone.’   

A year later, in 2010, a study with similar globalist concerns was published in the US, called ‘Scenarios for the Future of Technology and International Development’. It was financed by the Rockefeller Foundation, one of the oldest, wealthiest and most powerful private foundations in the world.  

It included a section called ‘Lock Step’, in which 20 per cent of the global population were infected with a new virus and in seven months, eight million people were killed. The scenario was described as follows:

‘A deadly flu pandemic is spreading globally and leads to panic. China, with its restrictive approach, is seen as the paragon of effective crisis management and is widely emulated. Mask-wearing becomes mandatory everywhere. Authoritarian control of citizens is imposed and remains in place even after the pandemic is over. Citizens willingly give up their sovereignty and liberties. It is only after around ten years of top-down rule that people start rebelling.’ 

The study’s underlying objective, Schreyer says, was to ‘seed a new strategic conversation among the key public-private and philanthropic stakeholders’ to ‘achieve impact more effectively’ for a preferred future.  

The anthropologist and writer Karen Harradine has documented in these pages the role of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (GF) in helping to fulfil that aim, leading to its becoming the self-appointed leader of the global response to Covid-19. The GF is a co-founder and funder of CEPI (Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations), which invests in vaccines and is also funded by the Indian and Norwegian governments, the British-based Wellcome Trust and the World Economic Forum. Sir Jeremy Farrar, director of the Wellcome Trust and member of Sage, sits on the CEPI board.

In 2017 Gates said that the world was unprepared for pandemics and that CEPI’s investments in ‘DNA/RNA vaccines’ would mitigate that. 

According to Harradine, the Gates Foundation has morphed into a global juggernaut with unaccountable power. ‘Vast amounts of money are being channelled according to the thoughts, passions and prejudices of one man with questionable judgment,’ she writes. Gates’s ‘megalomaniac drive to vaccinate the world, whether the world wants this or not’ follows a familiar pattern, she says, established when Gates persuaded US public health officials to shift much-needed resources from their own country to the developing world. 

In February 2017, Gates addressed the Munich Security Conference, the world’s leading forum for debating international security policy, warning that ‘we ignore the link between health security and international security at our own peril’. It was only a question of time, he said, before a dangerous pathogen would spread, be it ‘by a quirk of nature or at the hand of a terrorist . . . The world needs to prepare for epidemics the way the military prepares for war’.

That May, for the first time, the health ministers of the G20 intergovernmental forum, representing the wealthiest and most powerful industrial nations of the world, met in Berlin. Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, Republic of Korea, Mexico, Russia, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, Turkey, the United Kingdom, the United States and the European Union were all represented. China participated in a scenario exercise aimed at achieving a co-ordinated response to the threat of a future pandemic. Instead of SARS (Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome) the dangerous virus was called MARS (Mountain Associated Respiratory Syndrome), said to have come from a mountain area.

In his video, Schreyer shows us the real-life health secretaries and ministers watching intently as the fictitious pandemic scenario unfolds on a screen. ‘When we look at that picture,’ he says, ‘we might comprehend a bit better why in today’s crisis all or at least most of the countries are proceeding in a very co-ordinated way, and why in every country more or less the same is acted out . . . They were given the same general recipes and procedural instructions that are now being realised in a synchronised way. At least, this is how it seems to be.’

Later that year, in August 2017, with Germany assigned the role of leading the way in developing a global health policy, another high-level meeting took place in that country, this time with Health Minister Hermann Gröhe inaugurating an international advisory board. Christian Drosten, the virologist well-known for introducing the world’s first (and highly contested) diagnostic test for Covid-19 was there, as were two senior World Health Organisation figures.  

Two others present at this meeting ‘play in a different league altogether’, Schreyer says.   

 One was Sir Jeremy Farrar, of Britain’s Wellcome Trust, the fourth wealthiest charitable foundation in the world: it has a financial base of £29billion, managed by a highly successful investment team that includes Farrar. The trust’s declared aim is ‘to support science to solve the urgent health challenges facing everyone’. It has built a huge network for developing global health governance. The other was Dr Christopher Elias, president for global development with the Gates Foundation, which with assets of roughly $50billion (£36billion) may be even more influential.

The next bioterrorism exercise, once more hosted by the Johns Hopkins Centre for Health Security, took place in Washington, DC, on May 15, 2018. Called CLADE X, it focused on the imagined response of the US National Security Council to a global viral pandemic let loose from a biolab in Zurich by an elitist cult to reduce the global population. Two well-known US TV hosts took part. The stated purpose was ‘to illustrate high-level strategic decisions and policies that the United States and the world will need to pursue in order to prevent a pandemic or diminish its consequences should prevention fail’.

Finally, a simulation exercise called Event 201 was held in October 2019 at the Hotel Pierre, opposite Central Park in New York. Schreyer notes that the luxurious hotel was opened in 1930 by Wall Street bankers during the Great Depression.  

Delegates included the current directors of both the Chinese and American centres for disease control, and a former deputy director of the CIA. Dr Elias of the Gates Foundation was present, along with the vice president for global public health of Johnson & Johnson, the largest pharmaceutical company in the world, and the global chief operating officer of Edelman, the world’s largest public relations and communications firm.   

The scenario postulated the arrival of a deadly coronavirus, and this time the simulation focused on public relations. The script said: ‘Governments will need to partner with traditional and social media companies to research and develop nimble approaches to countering misinformation. This will require developing the ability to flood media with fast, accurate and consistent information. For their part, media companies should commit to ensuring that authoritative messages are prioritised and that false messages are suppressed, including through the use of technology.’

Charts, maps and tables were presented showing which countries were impacted and to what degree as case numbers grew, and with projections of how the death rate would develop over forthcoming months.  

‘This is basically just what is happening at this very moment,’ Schreyer comments. ‘This is exactly the same kind of infographics that we are now getting from the Johns Hopkins University. It is the information we are being fed by all mainstream media outlets. And the present censorship by social media giants like YouTube and Google has been expressly advised in that Event 201, just a few months before today’s corona crisis. What had been planned then is now reality.’

Who was planning what? Schreyer says all this information, taken together, provides a crucial backdrop for us to form our own opinion about what is happening.  

He gives a clue as to his own view by citing an almost unnoticed financial crisis that took place just before the emergence of Covid-19. ‘Many people, me included, didn’t realise that in mid-September 2019 stock markets were in panic,’ he says. ‘It was a liquidity crisis called the “cash crunch of September 2019”.’

A news report in the German weekly Zeit Online of October 2 was headed: ‘Blackout in the financial system: The Fed [US central bank] tries to prevent a breakdown of the cash market by injecting billions of dollars into the financial system. How alarming is the situation?’

The report continued: ‘The crisis came overnight. Banks were running short of cash. The Fed was intervening with massive amounts of dollars to prevent the worst. This sounds like the climax of the global financial crisis 11 years ago [in 2008] but in fact it only describes the Monday of the week before last, when an important part of the global financial system was on the verge of collapse and the general public noticed practically nothing.’

Schreyer checked the Fed’s balance sheet and found that in the 2008 crisis, when banks stopped lending to one another, its assets doubled in the space of a few weeks from about a trillion dollars ($1,000 billion) to two trillion as it pumped money into the system by buying treasury and corporate bonds. This is the process, which in effect creates money, known euphemistically as quantitative easing.  

Subsequent cash injections took the total to four trillion dollars by the end of 2017. ‘When you look at that from today’s perspective you realise that the bubble was gigantic, and it became clear that this practice couldn’t be kept up,’ Schreyer says. ‘You either had to deflate it, or it would burst.’

The Fed tried to deflate it over the next two years, gently taking money out of the system. But the fresh crisis of confidence in mid-September 2019 caused it to revert to ever-increasing cash injections.  

These continued after the arrival of the new coronavirus, with the pandemic now the excuse. But what lay behind the previous interventions?

Schreyer cites a report by Norbert Häring, a German economics journalist, on January 16, 2020: ‘The Fed explained its interventions with the less than convincing reason of temporary miscalculations, saying it was out of the question that the banks didn’t trust each other.

‘The alleged miscalculations seem to be rather persistent. Four months later the Fed’s emergency lending is still perpetuated in unrestrained amounts. An end is not in sight . . . It might be that the financial boom fuelled by central banks is in its final phase before collapsing.’   

Exactly how the financial crisis, Covid-19 and the ‘The Great Reset’ famously anticipated by the World Economic Forum (WEF) are connected remains to be seen, but it doesn’t take a conspiracy theorist to see that they are all linked.       

Klaus Schwab, who heads the WEF, the annual summit attended by some of the world’s wealthiest and most powerful people, has said that the pandemic represents ‘a rare but narrow window of opportunity to reflect, reimagine, and reset our world to create a healthier, more equitable, and more prosperous future’.  

But if – in our real-life scenario – part of the role of Covid-19 has been to stave off an impending financial collapse, further enriching a few while impoverishing many, we can expect a rocky ride yet to come. 

Blue Tara by Joss Wynne Evans