Jump to content

Coronavirus Mega-Thread.


Recommended Posts

I notice some of you bickering over whether it's wildly exaggerated or fake. 


Look at the root premise of the argument: Covid is a credible threat, therefore xyz. 


1. If the government claims are wildly exaggerated, then covid isn't a credible threat. Therefore, extreme measures are unnecessary.


2. If the government claims are fake, then covid isn't a credible threat. Therefore, extreme measures are unnecessary.


Either way the conclusion is pretty much the same. Extreme shutting down of society is unnecessary. This is what we need to prove. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Morpheus said:

🤣 it amuses me that half of the DI forum are attempting to convince 1 person that something isn't right here. You couldn't make it up. 


I’m out of likes, but imo you are bang on the money; bloody incredible!!!



If no one replied, it - truegroup ad nauseum - would go away; instead it’s cluttering up the thread going round and round.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Morpheus said:

I don't do ignoring because it means you concede defeat. At the end of the day, neither of us have been unpleasant to each other and we are conversing to what appears to be equal terms. 


Oh shit; after replying and agreeing to one of your previous posts, here you are doing the same thing 🙄🙄🙄

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Dear Members of Parliament,

I am writing to you to express my grave concerns regarding the Government’s policies in respect of coronavirus. I am an airline pilot with a major UK operator. As such I am used to processing information and analysing it logically and am not prone to hysteria. Before I was an airline pilot I qualified with a PhD in Applied Mathematics and Statistics. I spent nearly a decade as a researcher and lecturer in The Division of Epidemiology and Biostatistics at The University of Leeds and have published numerous papers in internationally refereed journals on these subjects. Much of this letter is based upon my experience in this field, in which I am qualified to hold an opinion, and the remainder I present as an extremely concerned citizen. The analyses I present in the appendices to this letter are either my own or from trusted academic sources. 

The most important message to convey is that I strongly believe the Government’s response has been, and continues to be, disproportionate to the true threat posed by this virus. While this was, perhaps, understandable in March when less was known, the policies that are still in place, which are both economically and societally ruinous, are now much less credible. The Government appears to be locked into the single objective of dealing with this one virus at the expense of a myriad public health issues, many of which are exacerbated by the current COVID-centric policy choices. 

The first recorded outbreak of the virus in the spring teaches us that the health impact of the virus was, in terms of clinical impact, akin to a severe influenza season. Indeed Dr Anthony Fauci said in the New England Journal of Medicine in February that the “clinical consequences of Covid-19 may ultimately be more akin to those of a severe seasonal influenza”. The data both in the UK and worldwide have borne this out. The mortality burden of COVID-19 in the UK has been similar to the relatively severe 2018/19, 1998/1999 and 1999/2000 influenza seasons, and significantly lower than the 1968 H3N2 influenza pandemic which killed approximately 80,000 people in the UK. These outbreaks were as severe, if not more so, than the current COVID epidemic and yet the country was not closed down risking economic ruin and serious long-term public health consequences. 

Appendix A deals with the statistics of the present epidemic and its associated mortality burden. It demonstrates that the mortality burden is felt substantially by the over 70s and even then the majority of those individuals (over 90%) have one or more co-morbidities so that recovery from any respiratory illness is likely to be compromised. This defines a clear vulnerable group who may need to take some extra precautions during the epidemic. It is not the function of the state to force them to do so however: they are old enough and wise enough to make their own decisions if provided with an objective assessment of the true risks they face. In this regard the Government has completely failed in its duty to its citizens by instilling fear rather than providing rational and proportionate public health messaging. 

SAGE minutes from March 22nd on ways to increase adherence to social distancing contains the following: “[t]he perceived level of personal threat needs to be increased among those who are complacent, using hard-hitting emotional messaging. The proposed means of achieving this include advice such as “use media to increase sense of personal threat” and “consider use of social disapproval for failure to comply”. Since the spring the media been keen to maintain the hard-hitting emotive narrative of a deadly virus that is dangerous to everyone, which is simply not supported the data. Rather than providing simple, effective and proportionate public health education the Government and media opted for a policy of “psychological warfare” against our citizens.

In terms of the wider public health effects, during the lockdown there was a 50% reduction in A&E presentations for heart attacks according to the British Medical Journal's Open Heart. A similar figure applies to strokes. Both of these conditions have poor outcomes unless treated in a clinical setting. The lack of A&E presentations is thus a serious concern because it points to significant excess mortality for those conditions. 

Cancer diagnosis and treatments were, and continue to be, severely disrupted with Cancer Research UK estimating that on average 2,500 cancers were going undiagnosed each week during the lockdown. A study conducted by DATA-CAN, the Health Care Research Hub (HDR UK) for Cancer, estimates that the number of excess cancer deaths attributable to the disruption of cancer care could be as many as 35,000. The additional mortality burden from just these three conditions is likely to be broadly similar to that of COVID-19 and those additional deaths are attributable to the Government’s policies which have clearly dissuaded, and continue to dissuade, contact with the NHS. Recently released SAGE minutes estimated that the indirect mortality burden caused by the coronavirus measures could be as high as 75,000. 

All of this is without considering the long-term damage done to children’s education, widespread mental health issues from loneliness and reduced social interactions, failed businesses and rapidly-increasing unemployment despite the Treasury’s Furlough and Job Retention Schemes, which are merely delaying the problem because the markets supporting those jobs are collapsing. 

The origin of the first of many U-turns from a policy of “herd immunity” to more stringent measures seems to be Imperial College’s Report 9 based on the modelling of Neil Fergusson. Appendix B deals with some aspects of the credibility of this model and its assumptions. Although framed as a “reasonable worst case scenario”, it was evident to other eminent scientists that the scenario therein was most unlikely to be a credible one. Professor Johan Giesecke (former Swedish State Epidemiologist and current member of the World Health Organisation’s Strategic and Technical Advisory Group for Infectious Hazards) was one such doubter as he made clear in a media interview with Freddie Sayers on 17th April. Professor Michael Levitt, a Nobel Prize winner, also predicted that Imperial’s modelling would over-predict deaths by at least a factor of ten. Professor Sunetra Gupta of Oxford University doubted the Imperial model and its high death toll was credible. Last month John Ioannidis, Stanford professor and the most referenced scientist in the world, released a preprint paper demonstrating that lockdowns in Europe had little to no effect and that the Imperial modelling is not robust and built on faulty assumptions. 

These people are not crackpots and their predictions of a sharp rise of cases for a month, followed by a long tail of two or three months, have been correct from the outset because they predicted SARS CoV-2 would behave like every other respiratory disease in the northern hemisphere. This has happened irrespective of the severity of lockdown with Sweden being the oft-quoted comparator. I would encourage you to seek out their various interviews, both video and written, because their narrative is different and, importantly, they have been correct in their predictions.

From the beginning the Government claimed to be “following the science”, giving the impression of a definitive path, when in fact the science was far from a settled matter and there were alternative viewpoints which should have been considered and debated. Aside from the occasional disquiet among members of SAGE, there are no signs that the Government seriously sought any alternative viewpoints, and understanding why they did not will be a key matter for the inevitable Public Inquiry. 

More recently, a letter to the UK Government from a panel of experts led by Professors Carl Heneghan, Sunetra Gupta and Karol Sikora, and another signed by 66 General Practitioners led by Dr Ellie Cannon, highlighted the additional public health effects of the Government’s continued COIVD-centric approach, including physical and mental health effects. Abroad a similar letter from Belgian GPs to their Government and The Great Barrington Declaration and Petition are examples demonstrating that scientists and doctors with “dissenting views” are, rightly, becoming more vocal and insisting on a meaningful scientific debate. 

Turning to the matter of a vaccine it should be noted that there hasn’t been a successful vaccine for a coronavirus in humans or animals. The flu vaccine, for example, has failed to reach 50% efficacy in seven of the last ten years. There have been recent murmurings of the possibility of compelling, either by mandate or “social coercion”, the population to take this vaccine once it is available. It is extremely important to be aware that forced or coerced vaccination would contravene the Nuremberg Code, which the UK was instrumental in creating, protecting any person from medical interventions without informed consent. There will be many people who are well-informed of the true risks of this disease who will exercise their right to deny consent for an expedited, essentially experimental, vaccine, the longer-term health effects of which are by definition unknown. As an example the Swine Flu vaccine was found to cause narcolepsy in some individuals.

It does seem that the Government’s policy endpoint is presently mass-vaccination supplemented by mass-testing until the vaccine is available. While I am not implying the pharmaceutical industry is behind a conspiracy it is nevertheless an industry which has a history of exploiting public health scares for its own profits. Following the 2009/2010 H1N1 pandemic the European Council launched an investigation into the influence of the pharmaceutical industry on the WHO and the global swine flu campaign. This was seen as a step towards improving transparency of what it called “the Golden Triangle of corruption” between the WHO, the pharmaceutical industry and academic scientists. The Parliamentary Assembly of the European Council adopted Resolution 1749 (2010) calling for more transparency and changes to the handling of future pandemics. A selection of the salient points, which are instantly recognisable and applicable to the present COVID “pandemic”, are reproduced in Appendix C. Regrettably little appears to have been learnt in the decade since this resolution was adopted.

Prior to a potential vaccine the Government appears to be relying on mass-testing as a means to identify viral outbreaks; the so-called “Operation Moonshot”. This is also a poorly-thought-out policy with a questionable scientific basis. Firstly there are doubts about the diagnostic ability of the PCR technique: PCR tests were never intended for diagnosis, and in particular for SARS-Cov2 there exists no “gold standard” against which to assess their diagnostic capability. Appendix D deals with the significant issue of false positives, which is a substantial flaw of mass-testing schemes. Briefly, throughout the summer the virus prevalence was low according to The Office for National Statistics. In these circumstances the testing produces mostly false positive results (around 90% of positive tests are false positives), even at the apparently-low 0.8% false positive rate quoted by the Health Secretary. Belgium, for example, terminated its community testing programme in September in part due to these issues. 

Through the summer months the COVID mortality rate of hospitalised patients fell to the normal background hospital mortality rate of around 1.7% and the strong correlation between hospitalised cases and deaths, which was present in the spring, completely decoupled. This is suggestive of the majority of summer positive results being false positives. This is bad news for two reasons: first uninfected individuals have been labelled as “cases” on the basis of a false positive test and second, the high proportion of false positives obscures any real increase in the viral prevalence should it occur. Essentially the Government was “working in the dark” and basing its summer and autumn policies on flawed tests and data. 

Surveillance data from NHS Triage, The ONS population sampling campaign and the UCL Zoe App all show a plateau or even a reduction in the number of actual symptomatic cases in the last fortnight. The official testing data however, still shows a significant rise. As one of several examples of data-illiteracy in Public Health England, every positive test is reported—even repeated positives—but individuals with negative results are only reported once even if they test negative multiple times. This failure to accurately capture repeated testing is artificially inflating the proportion of positive tests. 

You may also recall that PHE were recording deaths of persons who tested positive at any time previously. An individual with a positive test who made a full recovery, but subsequently died months later of an unrelated cause, was considered a COVID death. Fortunately this bizarre practice was highlighted and stopped, but it seriously calls into question the veracity of the Government statistics and official data, which have consistently appeared to inflate the magnitude of the COVID issue. These are not isolated examples, but are, perhaps, the most well known. 

Appendix E deals with the present trajectory of the so-called “second wave”. On the basis of the available data it is not appropriate to call the trajectory a second wave, and I believe it was irresponsible of the Prime Minister to declare to the media that we “are in the second wave”. I also believe it was highly questionable that the Chief Scientific Advisor presented to the public essentially a guess as to case numbers at various time points which, although he claimed was “not a prediction”, nevertheless has the capacity to reinforce fear in members of the public who are less well informed or rely on the Government and mainstream media for their information. 

The data are once again misrepresenting the true situation because they are reported on the basis of absolute numbers rather than per 1,000 tests or a similar standardising measure. The increases in tests performed, coupled to the false positive issue and incorrect reporting of multiple testing mentioned earlier, can account for much of the apparent-rise in “cases”. Appendix E shows some of these data presented in a correctly standardised format based on work by Professor Norman Fenton, Professor of Risk and Probability, at Queen Mary University London. 

Much of the “second wave theory” is built on the Spanish Flu pandemic which was over a century ago. It is also widely believed that the apparently-larger second wave of Spanish flu was in fact a completely different pathogen and so the comparison is probably flawed. The most likely outcome for SARS-CoV2 is a seasonal endemic respiratory virus; the same as most of the pandemic-causing viruses of the past, including the 1968 H3N2 virus, which remains endemic and in circulation today.

I have concerns over the way that the Government imposes it’s ad-hoc policies through the Public Health Act (1984). This act gives Ministers the same powers as Magistrates and allows the confinement of infected individuals for the prevention of infection or contamination. I, and many other people more schooled in the law than me, believe the Government is overstepping its authority under this act. Retired Supreme Court Justice Lord Jonathan Sumption has been vocal on this issue and the Government’s avoidance of scrutiny through the use of this act. The act of parliament that does confer the rights to take some of the steps the Government has is the Civil Contingencies Act, but measures taken under this act are for a very limited duration and subject to significant parliamentary scrutiny. This is a Government that seems to prefer to avoid scrutiny and debate, for example the attempted prorogation of parliament in the final act of the Brexit debate. I believe at this stage wider scrutiny of all the Government’s policies and scientific data would be appropriate. Some progress was made in this regard by the recent actions of Sir Graham Brady, but I still feel that the concessions made by the Government did not go far enough.

Much has been made of the “Swedish model” for handling the virus and I have always believed their approach was significantly more sensible. Appendix F looks at the Swedish epidemic which should teach us, among other things, that lockdowns do almost nothing to prevent the spread of disease epidemics. Swedish education has been significantly less disrupted, the Swedish economy is less impacted and importantly their policies have the substantial benefit of being sustainable over a longer period of time. Video from Sweden at the height of the epidemic showed life continuing largely as normal: people were shopping, visiting restaurants and bars and were not wearing masks. Sweden’s state epidemiologist Anders Tegnell realised at an early stage that it might be necessary for society to live with this virus, as we have many before, over an extended period of time while natural immunity was established. Fortunately natural immunity may not be as far away as first believed—see Appendix F. This will of course negate the need for widespread vaccination outside the most vulnerable and any kind of digital tracing or “health passes”. Doubtless the pharmaceutical and biotech companies won’t agree with this and will lobby for their adoption, but I am certain we have progressed to a stage of this epidemic where these measures are unnecessary and can be written off as the hideous apparatus of a police state: the total antithesis of a civilised and free western society. 

I believe this is the most important single issue for our country in our lifetime. If you are accepting the Government’s narrative at face value I would ask that you use the information in this letter and the appendices to consider an alternative view which has over recent weeks and months gathered momentum among the scientific community and public alike. The Government’s ad-hoc policies have been confusing, largely inconsistent and have prevented businesses and individuals from forming coherent plans. The quarantine of those arriving from abroad, for example, is based on a completely arbitrary unscientific threshold of 20 “cases” per 100,000 and is destroying the travel industry, a vital economic engine, en masse. The Government is undeniably “fiddling while Rome burns”.

Holding the British public and British businesses in the current state of purgatory is not a viable long-term strategy because it inflicts incredible economic and social damage. I am determined that the the post-Brexit dream of “Global Britain” does not die in this economic and socially-destructive nightmare before it begins. As the divisions in Parliament become more apparent in the coming days I would ask that you use the information I have provided to assist in deciding where to place your support. The stakes are extremely high: what happens in the next few weeks and months will determine our country’s path and prosperity for decades. 


Yours faithfully


Brian Cattle. 



It is a simple matter to verify which age groups are most affected by mortality from COVID. By plotting the UK mortality data up to and including the week ending 18th September (week 38) reveals that:

  • excess deaths are occurring in all age-groups over 45
  • A substantial proportion of excess deaths due to COVID and non-COVID causes are in the over 70s.

Note that over 90% of COVID deaths are to those with a pre-existing medical condition, most notably heart disease and diabetes 


  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Golden Retriever said:

Film clips from the 2013 Channel Four "Utopia" series. Notice the masonic signs on the ceiling.

Predictive programming?

Operation Warp Speed Contamination Vaccination Extermination



Freaky coincidence. When Bill Gates opens that thermos.

Now watch this clip from Utopia.

Also 35.55 in.



Edited by oddsnsods
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Morpheus said:

To be fair, Bamboo has presented the ultimate argument in controlled narrative by the MSM. That story has been surpressed by Facebook and Twatter. Whilst you have your position, you have to acknowledge that story has been doubled down on by the msm. I mean FFS, they're calling Guiliani a drunk and that guy took down the Mafia for crying out loud. Also trying to say he is in cahoots with the Russians! 🤦🏻‍♂️


So I think we can safely say that the media lies and it's obvious. 



Can you post a link to what you are referring to...which story has been suppressed. Sorry if its been posted already.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Jack said:



Deputy pm no more after Saturday’s elections; gone, and retiring from politics.


He used to be not too bad, but for the last couple of years or so, he’s been spouting the elite/party line; probably got a nice payout from the psychos for his retirement.


Though what he was saying there is the majority mindset in NZ; truly the land of plentiful sheep.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is the benchmark.


If you ban all travel, into or out of a region and put "suspects" in "isolation hubs" you will have zero cases.




Covid-19 cases are rising in many parts of Canada, but one region - Nunavut, a northern territory - is a rare place in North America that can say it's free of coronavirus in its communities.


Last March, as borders around the world were slamming shut as coronavirus infections rose, officials in Nunavut decided they too would take no risks.


They brought in some of the strictest travel regulations in Canada, barring entry to almost all non-residents.


Residents returning home from the south would first have to spend two weeks, at the Nunavut government's expense, in "isolation hubs" - hotels in the cities of Winnipeg, Yellowknife, Ottawa or Edmonton.


Security guards are stationed throughout the hotels, and nurses check in on the health of those isolating. To date, just over 7,000 Nunavummiut have spent time in these hubs as a stopover on their return home.


It's not been without challenges. People have been caught breaking isolation and have had stays extended, which has in part contributed to occasional waiting times to enter the some of the hubs. There have been complaints about the food available to those confined there.


But, as coronavirus infections spread throughout Canada, and with the number of cases on the rise again, the official case count in Nunavut remains zero.


Natural isolation is likely to be part of the reason for the lack of cases - those communities can only be reached year-round by plane.


Inuit student is in favour of the social distancing measures, limits on gatherings, and the mask rules that are in place across the territory despite the lack of cases.


Edited by Velma
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That female Ginger haired GP Dr Sarah Jarvis MBE who is always on ITV and Channel 5 daytime television along with that other cunt Dr Hillary MBE, says the lockdowns and restrictions will continue till 2023 until unless we a get a Vaccine, I wonder how much they are getting paid and who is paying them? Both of them are evil Doctors.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, jonesthepost said:


Oh shit; after replying and agreeing to one of your previous posts, here you are doing the same thing 🙄🙄🙄

Well, my intention with my response was not egotistical, it was one of tolerance and considering there was context behind my post it's a shame you interpreted in that manner. 


My intention of not placing people on the ignore list because that does concede defeat, not on an ego level, but on a tolerance level and a humane level. Do we just cast people aside because they don't agree with us? Do we therefore not become what we seek to replace? 


If we are to evolve as a species, then to ignore people, castigate and subjugate them for having an opinion different from us then we truly are fucked. We are not in a position to ignore other people in the current climate due to having a different opinion than ourselves, because we need every single person to be in this together. 


This is why we are in the position we are in because they are dividing and conquering us. Now comedy is entitled to his opinion as much as the next person but because it differs from mine I am not prepared to just give up as a result. It may well be that he cannot be reasoned with, which if that is the case then fine, he's entitled to his position, he's entitled to be who he wants to be and that's fine with me. 


Again, if we are truly going to ascend as a species then dismissal of people is not how we are going to get there. It's about tolerance, it's about understanding, compassion and acceptance. If we are intelligent and devine beings then such courses of action are not displays of such qualities. I repeat again, we need everyone to be together, not separated and divided. We are there for the taking in that regard. 


I don't come here for the likes, the emojis or anything like that, I couldn't care less whether people agree or disagree with what I say. I say what I say because its how I feel at that time and I mean it, it's not superficial. 


I come here because I am surrounded by people who don't think the world is fucked and we are being enslaved as we speak. I come here to keep sane and discuss the madness with like minded people. I'm not here for a popularity contest, I couldn't care less about any of that. I appreciate everyone's comments, I might not agree with all, but I still appreciate the sentiment because it's well intentioned, if not slightly misguided at times. I'm certainly not claiming to be the oracle either, but we all as a collective on here understand that we are under siege and this mentality of fighting with each other helps no one. 


Now if you are disappointed that I refuse to ignore comedy then that's your problem, not mine. Again, if you want to cast aspersions against someone you don't know in me, then again that's your problem. 


However, what matters is what we are all currently confronted with, not my ego, yours or anyone else's. We've no time for that. We need to unite behind the parapet not argue and bicker over who's right and who's wrong. 


Now maybe next time you should consider the context in which something was written or maybe clarify it before you take a particular position on someone's comments. So in conclusion, I forgive you. As you were and good day to you. 👍🏻

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry if this has already been posted.



Canadian politician leaks new COVID lockdown plan and ‘Great Reset’ dictatorship – Australia is part of it

Oct 16

Posted by Editor, cairnsnews

POWER-mad state premiers, governors and prime ministers across Australia, the US, the UK, Canada and New Zealand may try to push another Dan Andrews-style second wave virus attack, as part of the Gates-Rockefeller-World Economic Forum push for global vaccination and the Agenda 21 “new normal/new economy”.

Canadian politicians in the loop of “COVID planning” have been told to their horror of a plan for a totalitarian response to an international economic collapse, involving a federal government offer to eliminate all personal debts (mortgages, loans, credit cards, etc) funded by the IMF under “the World Debt Reset program”.

In exchange the individual would forfeit ownership of any and all property and assets forever, and partake in the COVID-19 and COVID-21 vaccination schedule, which would (allegedly) allow individuals unrestricted travel and living, even under a full lock down, through the use of photo ID referred to as Canada’s HealthPass.

The horrific scenario comes from a Liberal Party of Canada (LPC) whistleblower from the party’s Strategic Planning Committee, which is under the control of Canada’s Office of the Prime Minister (PMO).
He says the second wave will be hyped up with testing around the end of November.

The whistleblower warns of a “complete and total secondary lock down much stricter than the first and second rolling phase restrictions”, which is expected to run to the end of December 2020 and early January 2021.

While pressure is mounting in Australia through the courts, at protests and from some media for lockdowns to end, the “deadly virus is stalking you” narrative is being held firmly by Labor, Green, Coalition and LNP parties, the public health bureaucracy and most media in the same ‘Five Eyes’ nations.

This narrative presents the SARS-Cov2 virus or “COVID-19” as something that must be avoided and contained at all cost, despite the widespread immunity and medical studies showing it is lethal for less than 1% (0.06%) of those who are infected.

The Canadian whistleblower’s email has been published by Canadian alt media site The Canadian Report. The deliberate leak of the information is remarkable because it is the equivalent of senior Coalition members doing the same. Canada’s Liberal Party and Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau is the equivalent of Greens-Labor and a large segment of green-left feminist Liberal Party MPs.

The Canadian PMO mirrors the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet in Canberra, which is run by high-powered bureaucrats and “advised” on COVID-19 by the Prime Minister’s National Covid-19 Advisory Commission, which Scott Morrison announced on March 25, just two months into the plandemic.

We might ask why was it necessary for the PM to announce such a high powered commission so early in the piece? Clearly it was part of the process as outlined by the Event 201 players who included commission member Jane Halton, head of the Gates-funded CEPI, to steer the plandemic in their desired direction i.e. the globalist “Great Reset” plan as outlined by the World Economic Forum.

The green-left Guardian reported back on August 11 that Neville Power, the head of Commission, had been approached by “business leaders wanting the government to use the recovery from the pandemic to lock in low-emissions energy”.

According to Power, his organisation was not recommending “a green recovery per se” but had asked the government to underwrite new investment in gas pipelines as part of recommendations from a manufacturing taskforce. But as previously reported by Cairns News, this commission, has been strangely silent on Dan Andrews’ wrecking of the Victorian small business sector.

The whistleblower said he was “not happy doing this but I have to, as a Canadian and more importantly as a parent who wants a better future not only for my children but for other children as well.

“The other reason I am doing this is because roughly 30% of the committee members are not pleased with the direction this will take Canada, but our opinions have been ignored and they plan on moving forward toward their goals. They have also made it very clear that nothing will stop the planned outcomes.”

The road map and aim was set out by the PMO and is as follows (note similarities to Victoria):

– Phase in secondary lock down restrictions on a rolling basis, starting with major metropolitan areas first and expanding outward. Expected by November 2020.

– Rush the acquisition of (or construction of) isolation facilities across every province and territory. Expected by December 2020.

– Daily new cases of COVID-19 will surge beyond capacity of testing, including increases in COVID related deaths following the same growth curves. Expected by end of November 2020.

– Complete and total secondary lock down (much stricter than the first and second rolling phase restrictions). Expected by end of December 2020 – early January 2021.

– Reform and expansion of the unemployment program to be transitioned into the universal basic income program. Expected by Q1 2021.

– Projected COVID-19 mutation and/or co-infection with secondary virus (referred to as COVID-21) leading to a third wave with much higher mortality rate and higher rate of infection. Expected by February 2021.

– Daily new cases of COVID-21 hospitalizations and COVID-19 and COVID-21 related deaths will exceed medical care facilities capacity. Expected Q1–Q2 2021.

– Enhanced lock down restrictions (referred to as Third Lock Down) will be implemented. Full travel restrictions will be imposed (including inter-province and inter-city). Expected Q2 2021.

– Transitioning of individuals into the universal basic income program. Expected mid Q2 2021.

– Projected supply chain break downs, inventory shortages, large economic instability. Expected late Q2 2021.

– Deployment of military personnel into major metropolitan areas as well as all major roadways to establish travel checkpoints. Restrict travel and movement. Provide logistical support to the area. Expected by Q3 2021.

The whistleblower said committee members asked who would become the owner of the forfeited property and assets in that scenario and what would happen to lenders or financial institutions. “We were simply told “the World Debt Reset program will handle all of the details.

“Several committee members also questioned what would happen to individuals if they refused to participate in the World Debt Reset program, or the HealthPass, or the vaccination schedule, and the answer we got was very troubling.

“Essentially we were told it was our duty to make sure we came up with a plan to ensure that would never happen. We were told it was in the individual’s best interest to participate.

“When several committee members pushed relentlessly to get an answer, we were told that those who refused would first live under the lock down restrictions indefinitely. And that over a short period of time as more Canadians transitioned into the debt forgiveness program, the ones who refused to participate would be deemed a public safety risk and would be relocated into isolation facilities.

“Once in those facilities they would be given two options, participate in the debt forgiveness program and be released, or stay indefinitely in the isolation facility under the classification of a serious public health risk and have all their assets seized.”

The whistleblower said the heated discussion “escalated beyond anything I’ve ever witnessed before”.

“In the end it was implied by the PMO that the whole agenda will move forward no matter who agrees with it or not, that it won’t just be Canada but in fact all nations will have similar roadmaps and agendas, that we need to take advantage of the situations before us to promote change on a grander scale for the betterment of everyone.

“The members who were opposed and ones who brought up key issues that would arise from such a thing were completely ignored. Our opinions and concerns were ignored. We were simply told to just do it. All I know is that I don’t like it and I think it’s going to place Canadians into a dark future.”


  • Like 5
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, suzredfern said:

...federal government offer to eliminate all personal debts (mortgages, loans, credit cards, etc) funded by the IMF under “the World Debt Reset program”.

In exchange the individual would forfeit ownership of any and all property and assets forever,


Ha ... that's just what I suggested they might be planning ... I put it in a post a week ago ... That's what reset means , all bank accounts go to zero .... I didn't think they would pinch everybody's property too though !! ... 


The commies will love it , the poor will love it ... only the middleclass lose out , and they don't riot !! 


So borrow all the money you can , max out the credit cards  , all that dept. could be forgiven next year  ...


Oh ... but you do have to take the vaccines , so you wont live long to enjoy the new utopia , where nobody owns property and all are equal and have Zero balance because accounts in credit will also be reset.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Morpheus said:

@oz93666 do you think it would be useless to empty your bank account? I wonder if this will mean the 1 world currency comes with the reset and that any left over currency is nil and void.... What do you think?


I would get money out of banks quick ... For sure they will take that soon ... But the big unexpected twist is they seem to be going to forgive all dept ... 


Borrow all you can and only have absolute minimum in bank accounts , turn the cash into storable food and other essentials .... any left over buy Gold or Silver 


Basically this is pure communism , no ownership of property , everybody starting over, all equal  with nothing  

Edited by oz93666
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Create New...