Cuenca High Life logo

Opinions

How the U.S. sales job of the Covid-19 crisis follows the Iraq war propaganda playbook

By Jeff Deist

In the period leading up to the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003, the Bush administration and its media accomplices waged a relentless propaganda campaign to win political support for what turned out to be one of the most disastrous foreign policy mistakes in American history.

Nearly two decades later, with perhaps a million dead Iraqis and thousands of dead American soldiers, we are still paying for that mistake.

Vice President Dick Cheney, Attorney General John Ashcroft, Assistant Attorney General John Yoo, and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, were key players behind the propaganda—which we can define as purposeful use of information and misinformation to manipulate public opinion in favor of state action. Iraq and its president Saddam Hussein were the ostensible focus, but their greater goal was to make the case for a broader and open-ended “War on Terror.”  ​

So they created a narrative using a mélange of half-truths, faintly plausible fabrications, and outright lies:

  • Iraq and the nefarious Saddam Hussein were “behind,” i.e., backing, the Saudi
    An Iraq war press conference in 2002.

    terrorists responsible for 9-11 attacks on the US;

  • Hussein and his government were stockpiling yellowcake uranium in an effort to develop nuclear capability;
  • Hussein was connected with al-Qaeda
  • Iran was lurking in the background as a state sponsor of terrorism, coordinating and facilitating attacks against the US in coordination with Hamas;
  • Hezbollah, al-Qaeda, and other terror groups were working against the US across the Middle East in some kind of murky but coordinated effort;
  • We have to “fight them over there so we don’t have to fight them over here”;
  • The Iraqis would welcome our troops as liberators.

And so forth.

But the propaganda “worked” in the most meaningful sense: Congress voted nearly 3–1 in favor of military action against Iraq, and Gallup showed 72 percent of Americans supporting the invasion as it commenced in 2003. Media outlets across the spectrum such as the Washington Post cheered the war. National Review dutifully did its part, labeling Pat Buchanan, Ron Paul, Justin Raimondo, Lew Rockwell, and other outspoken opponents of the invasion as “unpatriotic conservatives.”

Tragically, the American people never placed the burden of proof squarely with the war cheerleaders to justify their absolutely crazed effort to remake the Middle East. In hindsight, this is obvious, but at the time propaganda did its job. Disinformation is part and parcel of the fog of war.

What will hindsight make clear about our reaction to Covid-19 propaganda? Will we regret shutting down the economy as much as we ought to regret invading Iraq?

A White House Covid-19 press conference in May.

The cast of characters is different, of course: Trump, desperately seeking “wartime president” status; Dr. Anthony Fauci; epidemiologist Neil Ferguson; state governors such as Cuomo, Whitmer, and Newsom; and a host of media acolytes just itching to force a new normal down our throats. Like the Iraq War architects, they use Covid-19 as justification to advance a preexisting agenda, namely, greater state control over our lives and our economy. Yet because too many Americans remain stubbornly attached to the old normal, a propaganda campaign is required.

So we are faced with a blizzard of new “facts” almost every day, most of which turn out to be only mildly true, extremely dubious, or plainly false:

  • The virus aerosolizes and floats around, so we all need to be six feet apart (But why not twenty feet? Why not one mile?);
  • The virus lives on surfaces everywhere, for days;
  • Asymptomatic people can spread it unknowingly;
  • Antibodies may or may not develop naturally;
  • People may become infected more than once;
  • Young healthy people are at great risk not only themselves, but also pose a risk to their elderly family members;
  • Thin, permeable paper masks somehow prevent microscopic viral spores from being inhaled or exhaled toward others;
  • People are safer inside;
  • The rate of new infected “cases” in the first few weeks of the virus reaching America would continue or even grow exponentially;
  • Social distancing and quarantines do indeed “save” lives;
  • Testing is key (But what if an individual visits a crowded grocery an hour after testing negative?);
  • A second wave of infections is nigh; and
  • Our personal and work lives cannot continue without a vaccine, which, by the way, may be two years away.

Again, much of this is not true and not even intended to be true—but rather to influence public behavior and opinions. And again, the overwhelming burden of proof should lie squarely with those advocating a lockdown of society, who would risk a modern Great Depression in response to a simple virus.

How much damage will the lockdown cause? Economics aside, the sheer toll of this self-inflicted wound will be a matter for historians to document. That toll includes all the things Americans would have done without the shutdown in their personal and professional lives, representing a diminution of life itself. Can that be measured, or distilled into numerical terms? Probably not, but this group of researchers and academics argues that we have already suffered more than one million “lost years of life” due to the ravages of unemployment, missed healthcare, and general malaise.

By the same token, how do we measure the blood and treasure lost in Iraq? How much PTSD will soldiers suffer? How many billions of dollars in future VA medical care will be required? How many children will grow up without fathers? And how many millions of lives are forever shattered in that cobbled-together political artifice in the Middle East?

Propaganda kills, but it also works. Politicians of all stripes will benefit from the coronavirus; the American people will suffer. Perversely, one of the worst COVID propagandists — the aforementioned  Governor Andrew Cuomo of New York — Thursday rang the bell as the New York Stock Exchange reopened to floor trading. He now admits that the models were wrong and that his lockdown did nothing to prevent the Empire State from suffering the highest per capita deaths from COVID. Like the architects of the Iraq War, he belongs on a criminal docket. But thanks to propaganda, he is hailed as presidential.
_____________________

Jeff Deist is president of the Mises Institute, a tax attorney, and a former staffer for Ron Paul.

Credit: Lew Rockwell Newsletter  

62 thoughts on “How the U.S. sales job of the Covid-19 crisis follows the Iraq war propaganda playbook

  1. This author is spot on. Could not have said it better.
    Frankly, those who live in fear of this virus every day, and those who champion more-or-less eternal lockdown, ridiculous ‘safety’ measures and snitching on their family, friends and neighbors with ‘contact tracing’ do not deserve to be free.
    Crisis doesn’t change people; it reveals them – Eric Walters

    1. Let me understand this correctly.
      You feel that during a pandemic that “safety” to save lives is ridiculous.
      And to top it off am I to understand that you are in disagreement with contact tracing.
      Geez I must be real stupid to value my life that much and must be real crazy because I want to see people live through this pandemic.

      1. I would hope that we all want to see everyone live full, healthy, productive, happy lives. Maybe you didn’t see or fully comprehend this paragraph in the article:

        How much damage will the lockdown cause? Economics aside, the sheer toll of this self-inflicted wound will be a matter for historians to document. That toll includes all the things Americans would have done without the shutdown in their personal and professional lives, representing a diminution of life itself. Can that be measured, or distilled into numerical terms? Probably not, but this group of researchers and academics argues that we have already suffered more than one million “lost years of life” due to the ravages of unemployment, missed healthcare, and general malaise.

        Life is full of risk/reward choices every day, Esmeralda.

        Everything you do carries an inherent risk that by doing it you will be injured or die. No one is forcing you to leave your home or telling you that you can’t walk around all day in a Level A hazmat suit if that’s what you want to do.

        But if you’re truly still that afraid of this virus in spite of all we know, maybe you really should hide under your bed all day, every day because every time you get in a car; every time you cross the street; heck, every time you *eat*, your chances of dying by doing those things are orders of magnitude greater than dying from Covid-19.

        Maybe you should read up about Howard Hughes’s final years and take some notes.

        Regarding your own intelligence and sanity self-appraisal, I think this may be the first time I’ve agreed with you about anything.

      2. E – First off, let me state that I realize there is little or no change likely in you or your attitude. Probably it is the same for me. You don’t seem to want to deeply contemplate what I say. Superficial reflexive replies from you are all that I see. For me, talking with someone like you is merely an opportunity to try refine my POV and articulate it better. I have no illusion that you actually hear anything I say. Perhaps what I write may trigger a deeper reflection in someone else here.

        Safety measures during a pandemic are fine, and optional. AFAIAC, you can ‘safe-tify’ yourself as much or as little as you want. I will do the same for me. The word ‘mandatory’ does not apply to me regarding safety measures. I will determine what I will do. You, nor any health expert or govt/military drone will determine this for me, or mandate it for me. I cede no authority to them, or anyone else on this decision of mine. Should I be uninformed, I will listen carefully to your and their suggestions and reasoning. But you will not decide for me. I hold my personal freedom and liberty to choose above any such assertion of your authority. That said, I will most certainly apply due and necessary consideration for myself and for all others I will contact, paying attention to their health and well-being as much as my own. I may choose to apply extraordinary safety measures to myself in consideration of others… or I may not.

        This is not a matter of selfishness. Sometimes difficult choices must be made, and I will side with personal liberty, sovereignty and rights, for everyone, every time. Firmly knowing and deeply understanding the gravity of the outcome should personal rights be lost, for myself and for others, I will never compromise them.

        On balance, contact tracing as proposed is a non-workable concept. Even if it were to potentially make a small bit of positive difference in mitigating contagion, the technology itself and its HUGELY corrupting influence on human interaction will most certainly be FAR WORSE than any temporary positive effect it may have. The surveillance, anti-privacy and control ramifications are deeply foreboding to anyone willing to look at it. In the name of personal rights and liberty, I wholeheartedly reject it without any further consideration.

        As far as caring for and valuing your own life and the lives of others… so do I. It is simply that my priorities are different than yours. I value liberty and freedom – yours, mine and all future generations – above any momentary consideration of expediency, convenience, security or even my own death. In my final analysis, I understand personal sovereignty, freedom and liberty as eternal principles, not fleeting, changeable values.

        1. Glad to hear that you said the following…
          ” may choose to apply extraordinary safety measures to myself in consideration of others.” I understood something different from your post.

          I will also not compromise my personal rights but I will choose to take the safe route (usually).
          As far as tracing is concerned, its easy to turn off the location on the phone. Besides most of the apps we load are already tracking us.
          I like the idea of locating one of my old phone and using it for contact tracing and once the pandemic is over that little baby can be turned off and stored in a drawer or shut off whenever I feel like it and meanwhile my current phone will be free of anyone controlling it.

          I still feel that taking safety measures is NOT ridiculous, and helping prevent others from getting sick is NOT ridiculous. I also do not feel that contact tracing to prevent a pandemic from increasing is snitching. I would like to know if someone in my immediate vicinity has or had the virus

          1. E – The point is, are you OK with someone else forcing you to have a phone/tattoo/microchip, and tracking you at all times?
            It’s a basic question of your liberty, Amigo.

            1. Nope, not going to happen. I will not be forced to have a tattoo or microscope however I will feel comfortable with contact tracing to save the lives of others PROVIDING that the tracing mechanism is NOT PERMANENT and NOT permanently attached to my movements. When the pandemic is over then the tracing needs to stop.

                1. FUE – Wow. I watch that video and I’m just shaking my head. Wow again. These contact tracing people are actually that freaking serious about this insane idea. Perpetually revolving enforced 10-day isolations and 14-day quarantines for anyone and everyone who’s under any suspicion whatsoever… all driven by snitches with their mobile phone apps, based on tests that are, at best 50% accurate (flip a coin).
                  And they are serious about imprisoning people for non-compliance, topped off with $2000 fines.
                  They are all out of their GD minds.
                  It seems they sincerely believe that all of this will go quite smoothly… no resistance, no hiccups… and everyone is just going to gleefully help everyone else with their daily needs… one giant happy nursing home nation.
                  How naïve can they possibly be? Surely there must be some kind of limit to naïveté…?
                  It’s hard for me to actually believe I watched that and I am writing this. It’s even harder for me to believe that scores of otherwise sane, lucid scientific people sat down, devised this whole scheme, wrote it all down and, with glum seriousness, presented it with a straight face to people like Nancy Pelosi. This whole thing is a comedy skit, right? Has some kind of evil spell been cast across the nation? Some weird hypnotic trance? Surely it’s all a C-19 fever dream, yes?
                  Can’t you just imagine the meetings at Johns Hopkins where these freaks conjured up all of this? There had to be at least one mid-level management guy in the back of the room who raised his hand and timidly uttered, “Uh, Boss… I don’t think this is going to work…?”

        1. 600 nurses have died as of today so no matter how much the media feeds us, and the right or the left, the opinionators or naysayers spin it, this is a sign that Covid-19 is more serious than the regular flu. Now that is real crazy that so many nurses die in such a short time. That is a lot to swallow.

          1. Excerpt from German Official Leaks Report Denouncing Corona As “A Global False Alarm” at [https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2020/05/29/german-official-leaks-report-denouncing-corona-as-global-false-alarm/ ]

            Worldwide, within a quarter of a year, there has been no more than
            250,000 deaths from Covid-19, compared to 1.5 million deaths [25,100 in Germany] during the influenza wave 2017/18.

            Ed. Note: Updated total worldwide “with Covid-19” deaths as of 3 Jun = 383,842 (compared to 1.5MM worldwide flu deaths 2017/18 flu season)

            Total “with Covid-19” deaths in Germany 8,677 (compared to 25,100 flu deaths in Germany during the 2017/18 flu season)

            Swallow harder, Esmeralda.

            1. LOL I am amazed how you turn every stone to find naysayers that are of your same opinion and at the same time turn a blind eye to the ones concerned about their lives.

              1. You may find humor in it. I certainly don’t.

                You unwittingly framed the problem perfectly when you say that I “turn a blind eye to the ones concerned about THEIR (OWN) lives.”

                It’s not difficult to see the truth if you remove your blinders and unselfishly try to see the whole picture — including the fates of the multitudes whose lives were ruined or taken from them and those who will continue to suffer and die in the future because of foolish public policy; foolish public policy that you continue to embrace.

    2. P.C. , well said . But, do not hold back and sugarcoat your opinion. Do you like the silly mask and lockup , or not ?

      1. PT – Have a look at my reply to Esmeralda above. I am as clear as I can be.

        Re: my original post, at this moment I see 5 upvotes to 10 downvotes. Fascinating!
        If this ratio were applicable to the general population, for every person who deeply understands and cherishes the principles of freedom and liberty, and would fight for them, there are two people who would fight against him… killing him if necessary.

        As long as the false propaganda called ‘majority democracy’ holds sway in the minds of this 2:1 pro-slavery reality, it does not bode well for our future.

  2. The Lew Rockwell Newsletter promotes propaganda, conspiracy theories and pseudoscience.

    1. I presume you only read and watch CNN, MSNBC, Yahoo, etc? Bastions of truth, all of them. From what I can tell, CNN, MSNBC, Yahoo, etc promote blatant propaganda, conspiracies and cherry-picked non-science all day long.
      You know AYFR, hardly anyone buys that line of accusation any more. Your talking points are quite dated and out-of-step. Don’t you people realize that every time you say things like that you lose far more people than you gain? The more you say it, the more hollow and ignored you become. It’s kind of pathetic and pitiful, actually. You are stepping on your own foot and you don’t even realize it.

  3. If the politicians, billionaires and bankers win and the people lose, how can it be a mistake???? Of course its intentional.

  4. This random tax attorney is not a scientist and clearly doesn’t understand how peer reviewed science works. He is not a peer and is not qualified to dispute scientific consensus.

    1. Ah yes, the worship of expert authority raises its head again.
      So Richard, is this ‘random tax attorney’ qualified to state his own opinion?
      Is this ‘random tax attorney’ qualified to make his own choices?
      Or does ‘scientific consensus’ (of which there is none in this covid-19 matter, BTW) make decisions for all of us, random tax attorneys included?
      Do you know what a technocracy is?
      Do you understand its drawbacks?
      And you are OK with those drawbacks?
      You had better bone up on it pronto, amigo… because that is what you will soon be living under if you remain passive about it.

      1. Spin it anyway you want to PC. This has nothing to do with worshipping authority because if you truly knew me I happen to be one of the first to question authority and just go about doing what is GODs law.

        The importance for me is that I do NOT want to contract COVID-19 and gasp for breath, get heart complications and/or get kidney failure and I dont want to DIE. I would much rather listen to the hospitals staff warning us of the complications and I would rather listen to the mortuaries that say that they can not keep up MUCH SOONER than this random tax attorney who is NOT a scientist who fishes and fishes until he finds statistics that are the same as his one track mind and who is not wiling to listen to the real scientists.

        1. E – You are going to die.
          Everybody is going to die.
          That is God’s law.
          Take a stand; make a stand… for Something.
          You figure God wants you to ‘be afraid; be very afraid’ and go down like a frightened child?

    2. To which scientific “consensus” of the many are you referring?

      How do you know that the writer is not citing qualified peers who have rendered judgement on these contentious items and who have presented their consensus?

      Is the writer required to footnote everything he says? Funny, I don’t recall footnotes adorning op-ed pieces in the NYT, WSJ or WaPo, do you?

      Just be honest and admit you object to his premise rather than playing silly games with the basis of that premise. Whether he’s a tax attorney or a horse farrier should make no difference to an open-minded person who is unafraid to listen to opinions that differ from his own. For that type of person, it’s the quality of the ideas and the underlying thought that matters, not the CV of the author. However, YMMV.

    1. By all means, close off your mind to any idea or argument that doesn’t fit your ideology. This article should piss off conservatives as well as liberals, so there must be something to it.

      1. Dan – Yes indeed, there is a lot to this article, which is exactly why it pisses off so many people.

        You know, the responses on this board are probably mostly coming from seniors who have lived a full life. One would think that, ideally, these are mature, seasoned people who would have gained a significant amount of wisdom about life and human nature over their years.

        It really is amazing, fascinating and disheartening how shallow and naive so many responses are to an article like this.
        The spirit, fortitude and wisdom that established the original American culture is, quite clearly and literally, dead and gone.

        1. Everything in your post makes me double down on the bet I proposed above. Sadly, I have only one life to put up, but I imagine your CV is threadbare.

      2. Perhaps this will interest you:

        One of America’s most prominent conservative columnists wants Republicans to lose in 2020

        Updated 1540 GMT (2340 HKT) June 2, 2020

        (CNN)For the better part of the last four decades, George F. Will has been at the intellectual center of American conservatism. Now he is calling for a full-blown rout of the Republican Party at the ballot box in November.

        While Will has harsh words for Trump — “this low-rent Lear raging on his Twitter-heath has proven that the phrase malignant buffoon is not an oxymoron” — he saves his true condemnation for the members of Congress who have enabled the President.

        Writes Will:
        “In life’s unforgiving arithmetic, we are the sum of our choices. Congressional Republicans have made theirs for more than 1,200 days. We cannot know all the measures necessary to restore the nation’s domestic health and international standing, but we know the first step: Senate Republicans must be routed, as condign punishment for their Vichyite collaboration, leaving the Republican remnant to wonder: Was it sensible to sacrifice dignity, such as it ever was, and to shed principles, if convictions so easily jettisoned could be dignified as principles, for … what? Praying people should pray, and all others should hope: May I never crave anything as much as these people crave membership in the world’s most risible deliberative body.”
        That is an absolutely stunning paragraph from anyone. That it is from one of the longtime leading minds of the conservative movement is all the more devastating.
        Yes, Will has long made clear his distaste for Trump and the ways in which the party has capitulated to him. (Will left the Republican Party officially in the summer of 2016, after it became clear Trump would be the nominee.)
        But to call for not just Trump’s defeat but also the loss of Republicans’ Senate majority is a striking move on Will’s part. As a longtime advocate for the conservative overhaul of the judiciary, Will knows better than most what a Democratic president and Democrat-controlled Senate would mean.
        It would mean, in short, federal court vacancies being filled by judges far more liberal than Will — and with far more expansive definitions of how the Constitution should be interpreted. And with lifetime appointments to their jobs.
        (If you doubt how important controlling the Senate — and, therefore, the judicial nominating process — is, just look back at the last three-plus years, where Trump and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell have effectively overhauled the bench in their image.)

        What Will is advocating is nothing short of an electoral destruction of the party that he called home for decades.

        His thinking is reflective of the view Ra’s al Ghul took of Gotham in “Batman Begins”:

        “Gotham’s time has come. Like Constantinople or Rome before it the city has become a breeding ground for suffering and injustice. It is beyond saving and must be allowed to die. This is the most important function of the League of Shadows. It is one we’ve performed for centuries. Gotham… must be destroyed.”
        Will’s view is, effectively, that the Trump version of the GOP is so corrupted, so broken, so beyond repair that the only solution is to raze it — and start from the ground up again.

        As he writes:

        “The measures necessary for restoration of national equilibrium are many and will be protracted far beyond his removal. One such measure must be the removal of those in Congress who, unlike the sycophantic mediocrities who cosset him in the White House, will not disappear “magically,” as Eric Trump said the coronavirus would. Voters must dispatch his congressional enablers, especially the senators who still gambol around his ankles with a canine hunger for petting.”

        As if to prove Will’s point, Senate Republicans raced to defend Trump’s “law and order” speech on Monday night and his decision to clear out protesters from in front of the White House so that he could stroll across H Street to hold up a Bible in front of St. John’s Church.

        “You can characterize it the way you want, but obviously the President is free to go where he wants and to hold up a Bible if he wants,” Texas Sen. John Cornyn, the second-ranking Republican in the chamber, told CNN’s Manu Raju Tuesday morning.

        Dismiss Will as a disaffected old-timer if you will. But remember too that he is someone who was a conservative long before the age of Donald Trump.

        The failure to condemn an activity is indeed, an offer of tacit approval.
        All it takes for evil to flourish is for good men to do nothing – Edmund Burke

    2. Wrong, Leslie. Ron Paul is the only member of the Paul family with a whit of integrity and common sense. Have you actually read any of his writing?

  5. Wrong! This article uses propaganda to explain propaganda. Yes, invading Iraq was incredibly stupid. It only took the US 30 years to forget the disaster of fighting in Vietnam before entering another similar type war. We already had a road map to follow and we ignored it.
    We don’t have a road map for Covid-19. We are learning defensive strategies on the fly. We know that the infection rate is cumulative. Social distancing practices seem to be the way to slow the spread, and this strategy has worked. It’s only been three months since the outbreak and we are already beginning to reopen. I don’t need a politician to tell me that opening carefully and staying vigilant to a second wave makes sense.

    1. I agree… up to a point. Covid aside… we learned nothing about waste and endless wars from Vietnam… and chose to go to Iraq (thank you Bush #2). But please recall that after “the surge”, when things were reportedly brought under control, our CIC Obama decided to take us to “where the war really was”: Afghanistan, where we remain today. It appears that Trump is trying to extract us, but the Military Complex and Deep State will hear none of it.

      1. Come on, the deep state? Really? And you think that well organized bunch of anarchists (sarcasm) could really deter trump from removing us from Afghanistan if he had that famous trump resolve and integrity? (more sarcasm)

    1. Figures lie and liars figure. Or if you prefer, quoting Disraeli, “There are three kinds of lies; lies, damned lies and statistics.”

  6. 72% of Americans and 75% of congress were duped….Luckily there are a few “super thinkers” like yourself to bail out the rest of us hillbillies…..You even lump Cuomo, Whitmer and Newsome with Trump. That made me laugh out loud. Imagine the progressive media and several left wing Governors working in lockstep with DONALD TRUMP to force a new normal down our throats…I have a fairly active imagination….but even I cannot imagine what it is you write.

  7. You say “perhaps a million dead Iraqis” in the last two decades…that number is absurd…..Now if you were talking a million dead Iraqis at the hands of Hussein…That would be much closer to the truth.

      1. Finally, you have served a purpose. I’m stunned that Ayn Rand didn’t know this.

        1. No refutation of the message. Just the typical unfounded, biased attack-the-messenger retort employed when one can’t disprove the premise.

          Definitely more the modus operandi of Wesley Mouch, not John Galt.

          You really should adopt a different, more fitting handle, Wes.

            1. Your link is broken but the page to which you were attempting to direct (and the number of dead it cites) makes it clear that that tally is strictly violent deaths and not what we so piously call “collateral damage.” Just as a single easy-to-comprehend example, do you not recall Leslie Stahl’s infamous interview of Madeleine Albright, or do I need to refresh your memory? [https://medium.com/@bmd329/is-the-price-worth-it-the-crippling-effects-of-u-n-sanctions-in-iraq-481d4a89bdd2 ]

              We’re doing the same thing in Yemen right now and we did it for years in Syria with the aid of our good friends, Saudi Arabia, Israel and a few Gulf States.

              Regardless of how you try to spin it, Wes, the US is directly and indisputably responsible for the death of millions upon millions of innocent people across the globe and for the unfathomable human misery, permanent injury, dislocation, disease and economic deprivation we have wrought.

              Are you proud of all that, Wes?

  8. Can you give the source for this quote, He now admits that the models were wrong and that his lockdown did nothing to prevent the Empire State from suffering the highest per capita deaths from COVID. Like the architects of the Iraq War, he belongs on a criminal docket.

  9. https://www.voltairenet.org/article210000.html
    https://www.rockefellerfoundation.org/national-covid-19-testing-action-plan/
    https://www.rockefellerfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/TheRockefellerFoundation_ExecSummary_Covid19_4_22_2020.pdf

    There you have it. Straight from the horse’s mouth.
    Of course, this Plan was already in the ‘Done’ folder long before the virus was created/became an issue. But you already knew that.

    It should now be fairly easy for you to predict future ‘chessboard moves’ by these benevolent folks once a new vax brew is made available.

    As well, you can begin to predict in what direction(s) society will move, coupled with recurring restrictions that will become the ‘new normal’ in daily life.

  10. Jeff Deist, do you actually live here, in Cuenca? you are a threat by promoting such conspiracy theory about Covid19. Is it more that one hundred thousand people death in your country not enough to spread such malicious discourse?

    1. CHL reprints articles originally published from locations all over the world. Just because the author doesn’t live in Cuenca doesn’t mean it lacks relevance. For the record, Mr. Deist doesn’t live here; he lives in Alabama.

      The number of deaths attributed to “with Covid-19” is no reason not to discuss US government and mass media propaganda in numerous areas of public policy and foreign policy. If anything, the number of deaths just amplifies the importance of the subject.

Comments are closed.