“The pathogen and the disease it causes are modeled largely on SARS, but it is more transmissible in the community setting by people with mild symptoms.”
Instead of CNN, Event 201 came up with a fake news channel called GNN which supplemented the reality of its war game.
Go to 1’17” in video.
Correlation does not necessarily imply causation, but consider the following:
A. The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation helps put on the Event 201 coronavirus simulation on October 10, 2019
B. Bill Gates leaves the boards of directors of Berkshire Hathaway [Warren Buffett] and Microsoft on March 13, 2020
C. 94 of the 154 coronavirus deaths in the U.S. as of March 20, 2020 were in Washington State [specifically in the King County (Seattle) area]: Bill Gates’ home
Bill Gates’ father was the former head of Planned Parenthood.
The Gates Foundation gave $82 million to Planned Parenthood organizations over the years 2009-2015.
Also among its board members is Queen Rania of Jordan.
If you look at the Twitter account of John Podesta (Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign chairman), you will find that the first person he followed on Twitter was Queen Rania.
Why?
Also on the World Economic Forum board is David M. Rubenstein of the Carlyle Group.
The Carlyle Group has a close connection to the Bush family.
On the morning of 9/11/01, the Carlyle Group was meeting in Washington, D.C.
Who was at that meeting?
Dig!
“Event 201 was supported by funding from the Open Philanthropy Project.”
This amazingly prescient Event 201 which had a scenario (see above link) that mirrors the present coronavirus outbreak almost exactly (transmission of a coronavirus from bats to humans…misunderstanding of community spread dynamics owing to mistaken comparison to SARS) was headed and funded almost entirely by left-wing, globalist people who support the Democratic Party in the United States. The only “foil” might be the Carlyle Group presence on WEF’s board (a connection to the equally-globalist, anti-Trump Bush family).
The Clintons and the Bushes. Lots of money. Unequivocally anti-Trump. And they just happen to run a coronavirus simulation a few months BEFORE the current outbreak even began in China.
Cui bono?
Bill Gates has plenty of money.
He can withstand the shock to his personal bank account.
The Democrats (and Marxist globalists) were unable to impeach Trump. Before that, they were unable to have Robert Mueller (former FBI Director) bring down Trump for “colluding” with Russia in the 2016 election.
So what did they have left in their effort to unseat the populist Trump?
Were they backed into a corner?
Was their collective corruption about to come to light?
Perhaps they played their last card: attempt to destroy the U.S. economy with a pandemic PSYOP.
An average of 25,000 American die every year from the flu, but we don’t close the whole country down.
In 2017-2018, the CDC estimates that 61,000 Americans died from the flu.
Finally, how did a Johns Hopkins website become the end-all/be-all source for global and American coronavirus statistics? Why was Johns Hopkins working with the Gates Foundation for the 10/19/19 bat coronavirus simulation Event 201 in NYC? Has the simulation now become “real”?
Which brings us back to Gauguin…and Godard.
And part two of the greatest film ever made (in my opinion).
Histoire(s) du cinéma.
Godard contends in this 42 minute segment that cinema (the movie industry) is really a part of the cosmetics industry.
Everything is masked (and anonymous).
All is façade.
Godard further excoriates Hollywood by calling it a minor branch of the industry of lies.
Quite a humorous and pithy insult.
And self-deprecating.
It is true that Godard was an avowed Marxist.
A Leninist.
And even a Maoist.
And so it’s no surprise that he references Bertolt Brecht.
But Godard was, at this point in his career, becoming less of a radical (politically) and more of a humanist.
He was mellowing as a political firebrand.
But he was hitting his apex of creative experimentation.
I must admit.
This section is not the strongest of his eight-part masterpiece.
Section one Toutes les histoires is a tour de force.
But section two, Une Histoire seule, is a bit of a sophomore slump.
Or a lull.
A composer cannot maintain a fever-pitch indefinitely.
The great auteur got our attention in the first section.
And then he eases up.
He played the “head” (as in jazz).
And now he is beginning to improvise.
At first, he loosely pounds out the melody à la Thelonious Monk.
It sounds like more of the same.
And it is.
But it’s subtle.
It is a creator pondering his own creation.
“What have I just created?”
He turns it over and surveys it.
He feels its dimensions.
He tosses it and catches it like a baseball.
He estimates its weight.
The greatest movie ever made, Histoire(s) du cinéma, is not a movie in the strictest sense of the word.
It is not a narrative film per se.
There is very little NEW footage within.
Just like James Joyce’s magnum opus Finnegans Wake, it is not a novel.
When last I left Raymond Bernard’s three-part masterpiece, I was comparing Donald Trump to Jean Valjean.
But one thing is for sure: the world from which the Donald comes is that of the Thénardiers.
Trickery.
Fakery.
Deception.
Violence.
Anything for a buck.
To extend my past diatribe, every time Ted Cruz opens his mouth he merely helps the prospects of Mr. Trump.
I am convinced that Mr. Cruz made it through Harvard Law School by requesting his course materials be in coloring book format.
An intellectual debate between Cruz and George W. Bush would be a toss-up.
Cruz and W. are two of the most dense personages ever to have matriculated from Ivy League institutions.
But that is only part of the story.
Ted Cruz is a walking lie.
Ted Cruz is Edward Bernays’ 1928 book Propaganda with feet.
All of this is to say that there is something very wrong with the enemies which Donald Trump has made in his “wrecking-ball candidacy” (to borrow a phrase from the esteemed Dr. Webster Tarpley).
Fox News has created Donald Trump (the candidate) by badmouthing him for so long.
As Fox News has zero (ze-ro) credibility, this criticism has given credibility to Trump.
All of the major media outlets are bad, but none are as Twilight Zone, Orwell vicious as Fox News.
But we still have to examine these pesky Thénardiers.
For dramatic purposes (in the novel of Victor Hugo), they are “the arch conspirator[s]” (to borrow another phrase from another esteemed fellow, Mr. Len Bracken).
The Donald tells us [and I paraphrase], “Vote for me and you’ll find out who really knocked down the towers [WTC].” He tells us we might find it’s the Saudis…
That’s a brilliant maneuver.
Trump sunk Jeb Bush’s candidacy with fear.
Jeb’s got stuff to hide.
The family business might finally fall afoul of the law (officially) for the first time since Prescott.
Whatever the case may be, Bush got out.
Sure, his numbers were horrible, but I think Dr. Steve Pieczenik nailed it in a particular interview on the Alex Jones radio show. You can find a video of that [for the time being] under my “links” tab.
So getting back to these pesky Thénardiers, they would seem to be the vicious thugs who pulled off 9/11 (if we are to superimpose a humanist novel onto modern geopolitics).
A massive ad campaign (grassroots, of course) sounded the bell for the longest time that “9/11 was an inside job”.
While that may be true in many respects, it has all the hallmarks of a marketing tagline. Which is to say, what appeared to be an organic movement (9/11 Truth) may have been steered by the real culprits away from the bona fide jugular.
It certainly seems that the Thénardiers in question had many high-level moles (to borrow a line of reasoning from Tarpley) of the George W. Bush administration in thrall to their machinations.
But then another ad hoc deflection recently resurfaced. The “28 pages” chorus.
Alex Jones, who used to so vehemently pronounce that 9/11 was an inside job, recently became more concerned with the “28 pages”.
The “28 pages” seems to essentially be an attempt to blame Saudi Arabia for 9/11.
Therefore, Trump’s bombshell statement can either be taken at face value (to paraphrase, “You might come to find out that it was the Saudis…”) or as coded language.
If it is coded language, then it is brilliant.
But the question is this:
is Donald Trump a). Jean Valjean or b.) Thénardier?
Donald has done hard time in the free-range world of corporate stratagems.
The real question remains: does he have a heart?
Jean Valjean had a heart.
Thénardier had none.
As Cosette asks about the convicts, “Are they still human?”
Valjean answers “Sometimes.”
Did Donald make it through the gauntlet to finally bring the RIGHT perps to justice for 9/11?
paulydeathwish 