There was much excitement among the Covid-Reset Dissenter community this past week as the Great Barrington Declaration (GBD) against lockdowns circulated. For many, it was a relief to have epidemiologists from prestigious universities like Harvard, Stanford, and Oxford finally speaking out. People are exhausted after months of increasingly stringent measures, and any glimmer of hope is cherished.
Some view Ivy League participation as a plus in terms of bringing new people on board; that such expert voices are needed to add legitimacy to the struggle. There are those who feel any move away from existing draconian policies, even if it involves setting aside one’s principles or beliefs about this event, is worth it to get a toe in the door. There’s a level of desperation in the air. Given how artificial intelligence tracks and predicts behavior, I suspect the elite have taken that sentiment analysis into account with regard to timing.
To my way of thinking, if the elite let you get a toe in the door, you might want to think twice about going through it. The institutions paying the salaries of the three primary signers are not good faith actors. Harvard, Stanford, and Oxford have played central roles in the creation of the social impact human capital bond markets that will roll out post-Covid lock step with Klaus Schwab’s planned Fourth Industrial Revolution.
While I’ve been focused on techno-fascism and the rise of the biosecurity state, friends have delved into the minutiae of this virus and are admittedly much more knowledgeable about the specifics of this particular outbreak than I am. My perspective is that what we are living through is a devastating economic event meant to catalyze Davos’s Fourth Industrial Revolution rather than a biological one. In my opinion, at this stage of the game, we should be focusing less on Covid, because there WILL be another one – see Goldman Sachs’s Effective Lockdown Index and The Commons Project for proof we’ve only just begun – and more on the systems of control being put in place in its wake. These include test and trace, blockchain medical records, DNA data harvest, electronic carceral systems, and biometric identity.
If you haven’t read the declaration yet, I encourage you to stop and do that now. It’s just a bit over 500 words.
I realize Kulldorff, Bhattacharya, and Gupta have been giving interviews for months. For the purposes of this piece, however, I’m asking folks to humor me and set aside things they have heard or read from the primary signers on issues relating to lockdowns, testing, masks, etc. Please concentrate on what is actually laid out in these 518 words. They were carefully chosen, and that’s what they’ve asked people to sign on to.
Here’s the link.
If you were to sign, these items are among the things you’d be agreeing to:
- We did in fact experience a legitimate global health emergency.
- Using PCR as a diagnostic test for Covid is valid.
- We should seek to constrain targeted groups of healthy people – focused protection.
- It is acceptable to socially isolate elders, including from family members.
- Advancing the current childhood vaccination program is a priority.
These are crucial topics I think should have been discussed, but were left out.
- Tech-based contract tracing undermines civil liberties.
- Biometric health passports used to control population mobility and access to work and education are repressive.
- Vaccine mandates should be opposed.
- Population level bioengineering using mRNA vaccine platforms and biosensors should be opposed.
- Investigations should be made into corrupt public health contracts.
- Mask wearing by healthy individuals damages health and mental health.
- Asymptomatic transmission is rare.
- The Covid Reset shift to telemedicine has been harmful.
I also have reservations about the term “focused protection,” which feels strangely vague and specific. When I looked into the use of that term in a medical context, several references came up around childhood pneumonia vaccines. Focused protection could mean anyone, and it feels likely a future health event will target children. What would isolation from family members, which was advanced by Gupta for elders for up to three months, look like if “focused protection” targets were children?
Could future “focused protection” include specific racial groups? People with comorbidities? With the rise in genomic analysis, such an idea combined with so-called precision medicine and bioweapons would make adoption of “focused protection” very concerning, especially if it is against the will of those targeted. These public health officials have chosen their words carefully, so why is no clearer definition given? In a follow up article responding to critics, AIER noted the intent was for communities to make up their own “focused protection” plans, and that participation from non-profits would be central to such efforts. That to me smacks of impact investing opportunities, immediately sending up red flags.
Given my understanding of the Great Barrington Declaration as written, I choose not to lend my support. I feel it demands dissenters make compromises that would limit our ability to effectively advocate for bodily sovereignty in the future. This is especially true in light of the UK Covid Common Pass being launched the same week the declaration was issued. Their silence on how the biosecurity state is being integrated into public health surveillance is extremely concerning to me. Lockdown is a piece of a much larger puzzle. Public health has been used to justify the gutting of the world economy in order to pave the way for Davos’s Globalization 4.0. The economic devastation thus created can now provide attractive returns on investment for future pandemic preparedness bonds, discussed by the Global Preparedness Monitoring Board in their recent report, A World In Disorder. It is dishonest to talk about the lockdown as if it were a one-off event. Those in power have made it very clear that is it not.
Some call for “baby steps,” just do a little at a time, but for me the biosecurity state is the central issue. If we choose not to face it, but defer for convenience or to have a more broadly appealing message, we’ve stepped off on entirely the wrong foot. What we’re experiencing is a brutal social engineering program masquerading as a public health crisis. We play along with that premise at our peril. Short terms gains are simply not worth that compromise in my opinion.
It is far better to educate our peers about the ACTUAL nature of the threat. I believe in the capacity of the people to wake up to the truth. I believe in the power of REGULAR people to educate others about the Covid Reset – gasp, even people without medical degrees or Ivy League credentials. I believe we don’t have time to waste on half-truths and half measures. It is time to get to work. Each one, teach one. We have allowed Schwab, Gates, and Bloomberg’s media circus to control the conversation long enough. Online clicks and signatures are false progress. We need to be in the streets in numbers too large to ignore. We are, in fact, the heroes we’ve been waiting for.
If you need an example check out the speech Sandi Adams gave to tens of thousands of people on September 26, 2020. A mom and grandmother who cares enough to put in hours upon hours to understand Agenda 21 and how it is entangled with the Covid Fourth Industrial Revolution Reset. She was there naming names in Trafalgar Square in London, the center of blockchain development. She was calling out the social impact profiteers like Sir Ronald Cohen who aim to reduce our lives to ones and zeros, health data for hedge fund gambling. This is how it’s done my friends. No need to wait for suits holding degrees from the very institutions that set up these systems of oppression. We don’t need them. We really don’t. We’re already doing it.
It was a bit of a head-scratcher for me that folks who’d been up in arms about a century’s worth of technocratic efforts coming together in Agenda 21 were so quick to pivot and cheer on – well, technocrats. In my opinion, a select group meeting behind closed doors at The American Institute of Economic Research, a free-market think tank located on a Berkshire estate, for several days before presenting a 500-word declaration is absolutely not the kind of liberation movement we need.
This is Martin Kulldorff’s education. He is highly educated, but he is also not a healer. This is the training of a technocrat – an appointed policy expert – source.
Free-market principles will not bring about a more just society or restore small businesses or local control. Instead it will further concentrate wealth in the hands of the Davos crowd and bring a new era of digital chattel slavery. The whole system is rotten, and the libertarian angle plays right into the hands of the Peter Thiels of the world; billionaires waiting in the wings to scoop up undervalued human capital assets packaged with privatized welfare “pay for success” deals. You can glimpse this mindset with its blockchain behavioral scrip in a whitepaper put out by the Idaho Freedom Foundation, Blockchain & Government: Using An Emerging Technology To Reduce Government’s Interference In Your Life. Page 15 features a straightforward yet chilling diagram of peer-to-peer “charity” managed through biometric digital wallets and “money” tied to programmable smart contracts, equal parts efficient and inhumane.
The premise of the “peoplenaire” was advanced in the Global Education Futures Forum timeline – a foresight document – source.
When we have true peoples’ movements demanding freedom in the streets of Quebec and London and Berlin, the inclination to advance epidemiologists as arbiters of lockdown liberation seems a misstep, since everything indicates the biosecurity state will be placing more and more power over our lives into the hands of the medical establishment moving forward. Does it make sense to shore up the legitimacy of a profession that carries out the bidding of big pharma, biotech, and philanthro-capitalists? Especially when we know the endgame of the finance-military industrial complex is synthetic biology, transhumanist hive minds, and the Internet of Bodies?
I tend to look at issues that arise through the lens of power dynamics. I examine people’s positions within social systems. I recognize we’re all navigating the machine of biocapitalism – some of us are in it deeper than others. These three in the photo have considerable access, and the staging of this image conveys a sense of authority and exclusivity. When I expressed my reservations, some pushed back assuming I had a personal beef with these people as individuals, putting words in my mouth like “controlled opposition” or “corrupt.” They wanted me to show them a “smoking gun.”
I have nothing against Kulldorff, Bhattacharya, and Gupta as people. I’m sure they’re very enjoyable to be around with friends and neighbors on weekends, however the positions they occupy mean they’re de facto agents of hegemony. You don’t get to be a professor at Harvard, Stanford, and Oxford without having a clear understanding of the power and influence that comes with those positions and the complex and problematic legacies of those institutions.
None of them resigned their positions seeking to disrupt the status quo of the medical profession. Rather, their actions seek to blunt the harm that has been done while keeping the power, influence, and legitimacy of the public health establishment intact. If the Great Barrington Declaration actually undermined the long term Davos program, these three would have been summarily dismissed or harshly reprimanded as Mark Crispin Miller has been over his critique of masking policies at NYU.
Instead, within the week we’ve now seen the World Health Organization backtracking on lockdowns. Almost as if by magic! Time to prepare the next round of pandemic preparedness bonds. This time the cost-offset is going to be enormous. For more information on how economic costs play into setting return on investments see my post, Mind The Gap: the Violence of Pandemic Bond Dashboards, which I wrote in mid-April. Of course that is on condition of continued rigorous testing, tracing, and isolation protocols, all of which serve the social control human capital market agenda tied to biometric digital identity.
As with all social impact markets, they run on poverty, misery and trauma. The more of it, the greater the profit margin is, which incentivizes the implementation of ever more brutal policies. It would be wonderful if those in Kulldorff, Bhattacharya, and Gupta’s professional circles would familiarize themselves with the political economy of weaponized public health, but there is no real incentive for them to do so. In such a broken age, knowing the truth leaves you with the choice of retreating into fabricated realities or risking everything to fight for justice. Given two pretty bleak choices, most simply prefer not to know.
Susan Erikson’s paper “Faking Global Health” on pandemic bonds and fudging data to profit financiers is an excellent place to start if you’re interested in learning more. See link below.
Let me ask this. If this declaration were a real threat to the end game, would media outlets around the world have picked it up? Probably not. As has happened so many times before, a truly revolutionary effort would have been silenced. Such is the sick logic of a media landscape held in very few hands, that any story with legs does in fact serve the interests of the elite. Negative coverage or positive coverage, the clicks sell the circus and make the profits. Stories with the potential to actually destroy systems of power will never surface in sanctioned media spaces, mainstream or alternative. Davos owns it all.
So the hubbub is telling. If you look at it through this lens, the fact that GBD made such a big splash, in the Wall Street Journal no less, may simply be an indication that the elite were ready for us to be let out of lockdown. That way they can move on to the next phase of the bio-terror program. They can’t normalize health passports under lockdown; they need for us to acclimate to their “new normal.” Plus, they’d love us to believe we’d “won” that round. If you think about it that way, this bit of theater makes a lot more sense. Public health officials are still steering the ship. They want us to have faith in health authorities. They need for us to believe the public health profession has insiders who will look out for “the people.” We are in an ongoing war for control of our bodies. During lockdown this has meant masks and social distancing. In post-lockdown it will be vaccine and wellness programs that incorporate Internet of Things and wearable technologies, electronic health records, and blockchain behavior tokens. It will run through Medicare and Medicaid and CHIP and food assistance programs all linked to “evidence-based” solutions and “value-based payments,” the medical equivalent of pay for success.
Wellcoin, a health “currency” has ties to Brigham Women’s Hospital (Glen Laffel and Martin Kulldorff) in Boston, and the Rockefeller Foundation-funded The Comomons Project that just launched a Covid travel pass in the UK.
We will be tasked with managing our health for the next “pandemic.” They may even come up with “focused protection” protocols to go along with continuum of care personalized health pathways. It will be micro-management by technocrats from the cellular level (DARPA’s vaccine biosensors) to the community level – who is allowed to go where and when.
This entire program rests on the manufactured poverty created by the Covid crisis, that is sucking the masses into integrated government benefit systems and denying them economic independence. Whether they are willing to face it or not, the primary signers of this declaration are all affiliated with universities that have been in the vanguard of setting this apparatus up in the wake of the last global financial crash. A lot of people glance at the photo below and see three well-intentioned professionals who’ve taken a principled stance against continued lock downs. What I see is the vast network rolling out behind them ready to trap the poor and mine them for data. Public health “surveillance,” welcome to their new normal, a world where data, human data, is the new oil and people are commodities. Listen to us. We’re in control. We’re the experts. We will monitor things and keep you informed.
Like it or not we’re living through revolutionary times. It’s clear Schwab, Gates, Bloomberg, Omidyar, the “wrong kind of green” crowd, and “poverty dashboard managers” intend to upend our lives to make way for robots and artificial intelligence. The plan is to steal our livelihoods, our culture, and our leisure and reduce us to welfare dependents upon whom hedge funds can gamble. The threat of pandemic is a key tool in their tool kit, and we should be wary about how we engage medical and public health professionals in our fight. It is a marathon, not a sprint. It pays to be guarded.
It is my belief that we need a spirit-full, broad-based people’s movement, a striving for bodily autonomy and communal care that comes from the heart-space, not the mind-space. Many think this battle can be won with facts and figures and credentials and graphs, but in reality all of those things have been used for months as weapons to confuse the issues and obscure the truth. There is a feeling that we have to win the battle of the media, even though we know the media is owned by the ones who are pushing the Great Reset agenda. In a twisted logic, if we get our wish to have this declaration come to prominence in media circles, that essentially means it is advancing the interests of the status quo, no?
What we most need is leaders who inspire a will to rise up and assert our sovereignty against the predatory public health establishment that has in fact been bankrolled by Rockefeller since its inception – to better manage human capital. The Great Barrington Declaration falls short in that regard, and might even suck air out the sails of the existing movement. It speaks to America’s continued meritocratic leanings, that we so crave validation from credentialed experts, even when aligning with them means we must conform to the terms of engagement they set, which may ultimately be to our disadvantage.
Beware beginnings I say. Once you start down a road, you might not be able to turn back if you don’t like where it’s headed. Agreeing to play your opponent’s game is never to your advantage. If you’re giving up ground before you’ve even gone the first round, maybe better to hold your own position on your own terms. I’ll be the first to admit my opinion is definitely an outlier at present. That’s ok. I’m in it for the long haul. The target of my resistance goes beyond lockdown to the disruption of the larger program of techno-fascist stakeholder capitalism. I’m not everyone’s cup of tea, but it’s what I feel called to do and so that is the road I’m walking. I welcome fellow travelers, and realize they may be few and far between.
I took some hits this week over my position. Even though they were digital hits from virtual acquaintances, there was a weight that came along with that level of harsh engagement. I headed out to the garden for a bit of temple keeping – more time with the Franklinia trees, pushing back the meadow, pulling the tangled runners of Bermuda grass. The day was unexpectedly warm and putting my hands in the soil connected me with the good energy of the earth, helping restore balance. And the lesson I took from that round of tending was that we need radical solutions – radical meaning “at the root.” Bermuda grass has vast networks of underground runners.
The green bits you see above the soil are just a fraction of the mass of the plant, and we had to clear it out because Franklinia are temperamental, and their roots sit at the surface. We’re short-staffed, and it took almost two hours to clear the base of a single tree – using the shovel, then the soil knife, sifting through all the soil – a few times pulling out the weed wrench for the vines. It takes time to do a job right and you have to have the right tools. You can rush, throw down some mulch, and it may look good for a few weeks. But you’ve just made your future work harder, because chopping up the runners without pulling them all out and adding much will only bring more weeds down the line. I was thinking about this as my colleague strolled by asking me how I was doing. When I said I was learning a lot from the Bermuda grass, he enthusiastically concurred telling me he in fact had developed three lesson plans for his youth leadership program based on it. Once again, I am grateful for the land and my cherished colleagues. The garden is a refuge when digital people are just a bit too much.
My assessment is that the Great Barrington Declaration is a reformist olive branch extended to an increasingly organized and militant, therefore threatening, Covid Reset Dissent community. It obfuscates the central threat of the bio-security state under the pretext of offering a diluted message “we can all rally around.” We are being offered reform in the midst of a revolution that threatens to subject all of life on earth to blockchain techno-fascism. This declaration is not the right tool. We must commit ourselves to exposing all the tentacles, the truth of what is happening. It is only in that truth that we will tap into the strength of spirit needed to go up against this global militarized financial apparatus and its public health minions. The clock is ticking. No half measures.
In closing, this letter prepared by the World Doctor’s Alliance seems much better suited to the task. I have no affiliation with this group, but a comparison of their approach versus the Great Barrington Declaration is warranted, and I encourage you to give it a look over here.
I will leave you with this giant map that I have made lest folks think I have made an uninformed analysis. I have spent several days examining the work histories of the signers, the initiatives of the institutions with which they are affiliated, as well as the American Institute of Economic Research. I am not here to tell you what to think. I have done the courtesy of pulling a lot of information together so you can poke around and see if it is helpful for you. Any circle or line you click on opens a database record with source URLs on the right. Click HERE for interactive version.
There’s a lot in there, much of it related to the development of telemedicine, integrated Medicaid/Medicare benefits, electronic health records, and value based payments (the medical term for outcomes-based contracting / pay for success). I will be writing more on this soon in relation to food assistance and industrial food system management being pushed by the Rockefeller Foundation.
I ask you to look at Dr. Gupta’s career in the vaccine industry, especially her recent work in the universal flu vaccine space with Blue Water Vaccines and the media frenzy over the Twindemic. Also note other work being done at Oxford, including by her ex-husband Adrian Hill who is leading their Covid vaccine program with AstraZeneca. Check out her ties to the United Nations and backing of the World Bank’s One Health effort, which I believe will be the linchpin used to control people and nature, all under the pretense of “protection.” The Oxford Martin School, where she is a fellow and has pursued vaccine work, is home to the Institute for New Economic Thinking, Soros’s poverty management program. Oxford is out in the lead on quantum computing and AI and social impact finance through the Said Business School. It is also the parent of the Government Outcomes Lab that has been developing social impact bonds in partnership with the UK Department of Digital, Culture, Media and Sport. Perhaps it is unfair to expect Gupta would realize where she fits into this grand puzzle. And yet that doesn’t let clear-eyed dissenters off the hook. It’s imperative now more than ever that we carry out due diligence and examine the Great Barrington Declaration within this larger context.
Interactive version here.
A few more items of interest.
Position on lockdowns and vaccines in the Hindustan Times from The Hindu BusinessLine on July 2, 2020- source.
Gupta’s position on the role of asymptomatic transmission and testing in an interview with the American Institute of Economic Research from August 26, 2020 – source.
She signed this letter directed to Tedros Ghebreyesus about Covid and the importance of implementing One Health measures to limit zoonotic illness – source.
And she is clearly aligned with the United Nations around the Sustainable Development Goals, which are the mechanism through which social impact capital will be channeled – source.
For Dr. Kulldorff I would ask you look at the activities of Brigham and Women’s and Beth Israel Deaconess Hospitals (affiliated with Harvard Medical School) where he works in biostatistics and as a professor. Both hospitals were innovators over the past decade in the adoption of electronic health records, which are about to be put on blockchain and linked to wellness “coin” programs. It is notable that Ezekiel Emmanuel, architect of the Affordable Care Act that prominently featured adoption of electronic health records (EHR), is a Harvard Medical School alumnus. Beth Israel has been pursuing cutting edge digital therapies and was among the first hospitals in the nation with 5G and is a partner in the Johnson and Johnson / BARDA Covid trial.
Covid has opened the field for telemedicine waivers in preparation for the Fourth Industrial shift to telepresence labor where medical services can be farmed out across the globe via blockchain credentialing and impact tokens. All of this ties into the Value Based Payment approach refined by Michael Porter at Harvard Business School and used at Beth Israel Deaconess and Brigham and Women’s hospitals where Kulldorff works. The concept was hatched within the business school’s Institute for Strategy and Competitiveness – very “free market,” eh? No surprise that John Halamka, former Harvard Medical School Professor and pioneer of EHR was Milton Friedman’s research assistant. Also important to recognize the role Harvard Kennedy School has played in setting up data-driven, “smart” city government policies with the support of Michael Bloomberg and incubating social impact bonds here in the United States.
Again, not saying Kulldorff has all of this on his radar. These professionals are paid to stay in their lane and not zoom out for the bigger picture. There isn’t any reward for putting these pieces together outside of perhaps saving humanity from sociopathic billionaires and the AI that intend to colonize our bodies under the pretext of “public health.” Would I love for these doctors to grasp this bigger picture and write a follow up declaration that incorporates all the missing bits? I totally would! Not holding my breath though.
Interactive version of map here.
Brigham and Women’s Hospital where Kulldorff is a biostatistician is a leader in technology-enabled value-based health care delivery – source.
There is also a researcher now at Brigham and Women’s Hospital investigating the use of blockchain and Covid health passports – source.
Lastly, for Bhattacharya it is useful to recognize that his entire career has been spent in the Bay Area conducting research linking data analytics to the provision of public services. Stanford Medical School embraces the big data approach to healthcare delivery, and Bhattacharya himself promotes the value based payment model. The school receives considerable funding from Chan Zuckerberg as a BioHub, and in 2017 published a paper Harnessing the Power of Data in Health advancing tele-health, wearables, behavioral analytics, and electronic health records. The medical school is a partner in Google’s Project Baseline Covid screening effort.
Bhattacharya has had a long career at RAND. It’s notable that RAND Europe recently carried out an analysis of social prescribing linked to social impact bond finance in the UK for the Policy Innovation and Evaluation Research Institute. This relates to his work for Acumen LLC, which carries out, in collaboration with its affiliate the Sphere Institute, government consulting work around social welfare systems, data, and outcomes. He’s also a fellow at the Hoover Institute, which may account for the signers’ White House visit, which Scott Atlas, the president’s advisor on Covid and another Hoover fellow, hosted. Atlas is a former professor of medicine at Stanford and served as a health advisor to the Giuliani and Romney campaigns.
When I was doing ed-tech research I found myself wondering if Ivy League graduate programs in education were actually set up to develop markets for their business school counterparts. I feel the same way now about medical schools as we shift to tele-health data mining for impact. Just as with Oxford and Harvard, the activities of Stanford’s Business School cannot be overlooked. Paired with the university’s Center on Philanthropy and Civil Society, its business school unites programs on Social Innovation, Behavioral Labs, Supply Chain Value Innovation, and Real Time Data Investment Analysis into a pretty toxic combo once you realize the monsters behind this global coup intend for us to carry on as behavioral batteries, plugging into fin-tech’s digital matrix as our real lives are stolen from us.
Interactive version of map here.
Acumen LLC and The Sphere Institute focused on data-driven social policy – source.
There’s a lot more in the lower left portion of the map linking together digital medial infrastructure with Medicaid, Medicare, and the planned weaponization of social determinants of health via Opportunity Zones and Fourth Sector machinations via entities like Alphabet’s Sidewalk Labs and CityBlock urban health care “solutions.” Many folks at this point are probably shaking their heads wondering – for goodness sake how did we end up HERE when all I wanted to be talking about was lockdown and the Great Barrington Declaration?
I feel you, really I do. Imagine what it’s like to live with this in my brain 24/7. I have written this piece to extend a warning. A friend I respect very much told me early on that I was a Jeremiah. I didn’t ask for this job, but it’s mine to do, so I plug away as best I can. The threat we face is MUCH bigger than lockdown. What we really need to be fighting is the biosecurity state and medical tyranny.
In my opinion medical doctors cannot LEAD that fight. They can inform it. They can be members, but in my heart they are not the ones to bring us to a place of healing. We each have to work to heal our own spirits and continue to join together in a non-hierarchical ways. If you’re still leaning into the idea of meritocracy, it could be you have more internal work to do. Please know I am not hopeless – far from it. People are attaining clarity each and every day. “We the people” are already doing the work and have been doing the work for the past seven months. We don’t need their declaration tool. Bermuda grass, like the tentacles of Klaus Schwab’s stakeholder capitalism, is tenacious, but with care we WILL root it out. No half measures. Everyone start weeding and cultivating where you are, and we will get there. But tell the truth – the whole truth. That is where our strength lies.
PS: If I’m not your cup of tea that’s ok, too. Just click over to a new tab. There are lots of voices out there. Good luck on your journey! And trust your gut!
Excerpt from Elana Freeland’s Sub Rosa America series The Future Arrives By Stealth.