![\"\"](\"http:\/\/stateofthenation.co\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/03\/Living-in-Lockstep-featured-image-.jpg\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
regensordo<\/p>\n
In 2010, in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis, the Rockefeller Foundation, one of Our major \u201cphilanthropic\u201d organs, convened what is called a \u201cscenario planning exercise\u201d where future events that we may or may not be planning are \u201cgamed\u201d. Ostensibly, future and scenario planning is simply prudent, especially as regards public health, so it was not seen as any threat by the masses at large. Nevertheless, Our corollary organs did everything possible to keep this information from them, including high levels of increasing and creeping censorship, especially where health information is concerned.<\/p>\n
The exercise was conducted in association with a group called the\u00a0Global Business Network<\/a>\u00a0(GBN), a now-defunct group of very sophisticated and connected Silicon Valley influence peddlers described by Wikipedia as a \u201cglobal strategy firm that specialized in helping organizations [including businesses, NGOs and governments] to adapt and grow in an increasingly uncertain and volatile world.\u201d These included \u201cfuturist\u201d\u00a0Peter Schwartz<\/a>,\u00a0Stewart Brand<\/a>, both former members of Students for a Democratic Society, and\u00a0Jay Ogilvy<\/a>, an Esalen Institute\u2013associated Statfor board member who has no Wikipedia page but whose family name is the same as one of the biggest names in advertising. (It is unclear if there is a connection.) All are connected to SRI International, formerly Stanford Research International, and Royal Dutch\/Shell. Stanford University\u2019s science departments are well known to be connected with DARPA and US intelligence, and are creators of so-called \u201cartificial intelligence\u201d.<\/p>\n The \u201cLock Step\u201d scenario is the first of four narratives presented in the Rockefeller Foundation\u2019s summary document, \u201cScenarios for the Future of Technology and International Development<\/a>\u201d. It deals with a zoonotic viral pandemic that wipes out millions across the globe. It\u2019s not that long of a read, so let\u2019s just take a quick walk through it, because it is indeed very eye-opening. The details are worth knowing.<\/p>\n \u201cA new influenza strain \u2014 originating from wild geese \u2014 was extremely virulent and deadly. Even the most pandemic-prepared nations were quickly overwhelmed when the virus streaked around the world, infecting nearly 20 percent of the global population and killing 8 million in just seven months, the majority of them healthy young adults. The pandemic also had a deadly effect on economies: international mobility of both people and goods screeched to a halt, debilitating industries like tourism and breaking global supply chains. Even locally, normally bustling shops and office buildings sat empty for months, devoid of both employees and customers.<\/p>\n The pandemic blanketed the planet \u2014 though disproportionate numbers died in Africa, Southeast Asia, and Central America, where the virus spread like wildfire in the absence of official containment protocols. But even in developed countries, containment was a challenge. The United States\u2019s initial policy of \u201cstrongly discouraging\u201d citizens from flying proved deadly in its leniency, accelerating the spread of the virus not just within the U.S. but across borders. However, a few countries did fare better \u2014 China in particular. The Chinese government\u2019s quick imposition and enforcement of mandatory quarantine for all citizens, as well as its instant and near-hermetic sealing off of all borders, saved millions of lives, stopping the spread of the virus far earlier than in other countries and enabling a swifter post-pandemic recovery.<\/p>\n China\u2019s government was not the only one that took extreme measures to protect its citizens from risk and exposure. During the pandemic, national leaders around the world flexed their authority and imposed airtight rules and restrictions, from the mandatory wearing of face masks to body-temperature checks at the entries to communal spaces like train stations and supermarkets. Even after the pandemic faded, this more authoritarian control and oversight of citizens and their activities stuck and even intensified. In order to protect themselves from the spread of increasingly global problems \u2014 from pandemics and transnational terrorism to environmental crises and rising poverty \u2014 leaders around the world took a firmer grip on power.<\/p>\n At first, the notion of a more controlled world gained wide acceptance and approval. Citizens willingly gave up some of their sovereignty \u2014 and their privacy \u2014 to more paternalistic states in exchange for greater safety and stability. Citizens were more tolerant, and even eager, for top-down direction and oversight, and national leaders had more latitude to impose order in the ways they saw fit. In developed countries, this heightened oversight took many forms: biometric IDs for all citizens, for example, and tighter regulation of key industries whose stability was deemed vital to national interests. In many developed countries, enforced cooperation with a suite of new regulations and agreements slowly but steadily restored both order and, importantly, economic growth.<\/p>\n Across the developing world, however, the story was different \u2014 and much more variable. Top-down authority took different forms in different countries, hinging largely on the capacity, caliber, and intentions of their leaders. In countries with strong and thoughtful leaders, citizens\u2019 overall economic status and quality of life increased. In India, for example, air quality drastically improved after 2016, when the government outlawed high-emitting vehicles. In Ghana, the introduction of ambitious government programs to improve basic infrastructure and ensure the availability of clean water for all her people led to a sharp decline in water-borne diseases. But more authoritarian leadership worked less well \u2014 and in some cases tragically \u2014 in countries run by irresponsible elites who used their increased power to pursue their own interests at the expense of their citizens.<\/p>\n There were other downsides, as the rise of virulent nationalism created new hazards: spectators at the 2018 World Cup, for example, wore bulletproof vests that sported a patch of their national flag. Strong technology regulations stifled innovation, kept costs high, and curbed adoption. In the developing world, access to \u201capproved\u201d technologies increased but beyond that remained limited: the locus of technology innovation was largely in the developed world, leaving many developing countries on the receiving end of technologies that others consider \u201cbest\u201d for them. Some governments found this patronizing and refused to distribute computers and other technologies that they scoffed at as \u201csecond hand.\u201d Meanwhile, developing countries with more resources and better capacity began to innovate internally to fill these gaps on their own.<\/p>\n Meanwhile, in the developed world, the presence of so many top-down rules and norms greatly inhibited entrepreneurial activity. Scientists and innovators were often told by governments what research lines to pursue and were guided mostly toward projects that would make money (e.g., market-driven product development) or were \u201csure bets\u201d (e.g., fundamental research), leaving more risky or innovative research areas largely untapped. Well-off countries and monopolistic companies with big research and development budgets still made significant advances, but the IP behind their breakthroughs remained locked behind strict national or corporate protection. Russia and India imposed stringent domestic standards for supervising and certifying encryption-related products and their suppliers \u2014 a category that in reality meant all IT innovations. The U.S. and EU struck back with retaliatory national standards, throwing a wrench in the development and diffusion of technology globally.<\/p>\n Especially in the developing world, acting in one\u2019s national self-interest often meant seeking practical alliances that fit with those interests \u2014 whether it was gaining access to needed resources or banding together in order to achieve economic growth. In South America and Africa, regional and sub-regional alliances became more structured. Kenya doubled its trade with southern and eastern Africa, as new partnerships grew within the continent. China\u2019s investment in Africa expanded as the bargain of new jobs and infrastructure in exchange for access to key minerals or food exports proved agreeable to many governments. Cross-border ties proliferated in the form of official security aid. While the deployment of foreign security teams was welcomed in some of the most dire failed states, one-size-fits-all solutions yielded few positive results.<\/p>\n By 2025, people seemed to be growing weary of so much top-down control and letting leaders and authorities make choices for them.<\/p>\n Wherever national interests clashed with individual interests, there was conflict. Sporadic pushback became increasingly organized and coordinated, as disaffected youth and people who had seen their status and opportunities slip away \u2014 largely in developing countries \u2014 incited civil unrest. In 2026, protestors in Nigeria brought down the government, fed up with the entrenched cronyism and corruption. Even those who liked the greater stability and predictability of this world began to grow uncomfortable and constrained by so many tight rules and by the strictness of national boundaries. The feeling lingered that sooner or later, something would inevitably upset the neat order that the world\u2019s governments had worked so hard to establish.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Here are our key take-aways from the \u201cLock Step\u201d scenario, including a comparison to the coronavirus (COVID-19) event:<\/p>\n Did the Rockefeller Foundation and Silicon Valley agents really predict the current pandemic? Are antisocial behavior\u2013sensing functional MRI scanners \u2013 which would likely be carcinogenic, mandatory health screenings (DNA collection?) and home imprisonment in our future? And is the dream of a World Wide Web of communication and consciousness doomed?<\/p>\n These questions are why determining whether the virus is real or not is important. It is not immaterial that the virus itself may be immaterial.\u00a0<\/em>There are a myriad of questions to be addressed with regard to how viruses have been scientifically assumed to exist and by whom. There is no doubt that the killer virus, the killer microbe, has ruling class strategic efficacy. Hollywood has been telegraphing this scenario for years in movies like 2011\u2019s\u00a0Contagion<\/em>. (Check out the\u00a0trailer<\/a>\u00a0if you have a moment. It\u2019s unbelievably star-studded.) The movie\u2019s star, Gwenyth Paltrow, has been seen wearing a mask to a farmer\u2019s market.<\/p>\n It is further worth noting that Trump-in-law and close Bibi Netanyahu associate Jared Kushner stand to profit from COVID testing mania. As reported by\u00a0Mint Press News<\/a>, Kushner\u2019s brother is \u201cco-founder of Oscar Health, a huge medical company that this week launched a test center locator for COVID-19, where users input their data and are directed to one of many locations where they can receive a test.\u201d Oscar Health has been criticized for selling nearly $16,000 Obamacare deductibles. And Bill Gates\u2019s Microsoft will be putting machines in all schools to help with tele-schooling, according to his recent must-read\u00a0Reddit AMA.<\/a><\/p>\n Appearing to follow the Rockefeller \u201cnarrative\u201d or script, US corporate media, specifically MSNBC, has called for China-like \u201cmitigation\u201d measures for this alleged COVID-19 illness, which is mild and yet responsible for so many unverified deaths, because they were declared cases before testing was available. MSNBC host Rachel Maddow acknowledges the \u201ctesting fiasco,\u201d which she then apologizes for, instead making a point of focus on \u201cmitigation.\u201d She suggests avoiding crowds, not flying (you can\u2019t anyway) and \u201cself-quarantining,\u201d questioning whether there \u2018needs to be\u2019 \u201cclear federal standards\u201d on self-quarantining.<\/p>\n New York Times<\/em>\u00a0science and health writer Don McNiel<\/a>\u00a0ups the authoritarian ante, arguing for separation from families, which he claims was necessary in China due to 75% to 80% of infections being \u201cin families\u201d. McNiel also calls for \u201ctesting testing testing testing.\u201d But he\u2019s not just talking about going to a designated health clinic. He\u2019s talking about Chinese measures such as body temperature checks:<\/p>\n \u201cIf you go into any building, your temperature is taken. I came into this building. Nobody took my temperature. They asked me some silly questions I could have lied about. [McNiel appears to have a senior moment as he tries to remember his script.] Your, your fever taken. You get into a bus, your temperature is taken. You walk into the train station, your temperature is taken. You walk into a building, you walk back to your apartment building, your temperature is taken.\u201d [Note the repetition.]<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Of course the real-life Chinese measures, particularly isolation, have resulted in a\u00a0rise in post-traumatic stress<\/a>\u00a0disorder caused by enforced isolation, loss of livelihood and what We might call\u00a0\u201c<\/strong>viru-noia\u201d<\/strong>. And since, as veteran investigative journalist Jon Rappoport has reported at nomorefakenews.com, China is well known to have a pneumonia epidemic and a sickening level of air pollution, about which its\u00a0Wuhan residents have protested<\/a>\u00a0despite bans on protest in China, one must be suspicious about the number of deaths and causes of deaths in China. Is it not inconceivable those alleged corona isolations and deaths may have included undesirable types.<\/p>\n What we have is Our most prodigious and unheard-of conditioning of the herd yet, to a closed, controlled society, which in the name of public health protection exercises\u00a0\u201c<\/strong>medical martial law<\/a>\u201d and performs \u201csyndromic surveillance<\/a>,\u201d\u00a0<\/em>a term you will hear much more of because it is a nearly-20-year official CDC program.<\/p>\n The origins of these developments in \u201csyndromic surveillance\u201d goes much further back, to the early post-911 days, which arguably ushered in Our ill-considered coup on Western democracy.<\/p>\n Notably, the Rockefeller Lock Step scenario does not mention the word \u201cvaccination\u201d. It appears a strange omission, as\u00a0anti-vaccine censorship<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0mandatory vaccine legislation<\/a>\u00a0also preceded this unprecedented alleged pandemic event. In fact, Rep. Adam Schiff of Russiagate fame\u00a0has been recently sued<\/a>\u00a0by the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons for \u201cbullying tech companies into censoring information about vaccines.\u201d Specifically, their complaint \u201cpoints to letters Schiff sent to Google, Facebook, and Amazon in February and March of 2019 urging those companies to discredit or deplatform any content that suggests vaccines may be harmful.\u201d Of course Amazon, Google and other Big Tech company have begun\u00a0\u201cdisrupting healthcare\u201d<\/a>\u00a0already.<\/p>\n Now the people are being told vaccines will shortly provide them with the immunity they apparently lack. This is an even greater threat, as the Moderna vaccines that may be used, as reported by the great Mint Press News, now Unlimited Hangout reporter Whitney Webb, are DNA tamperers. We like to call them GMO vaccines. The ruling class attack is thus genetic and species-genocidal.<\/p>\n Despite this omission, the Rockefeller \u201cLock Step\u201d scenario is nonetheless a ruling class dream come true (but epically dire for the masses): the end of the sovereign individual in a cradle-to-grave system of behavioral, medical, digital surveillance and control. One wonders if the world\u2019s leaders, celebrities and politicians who disproportionately seem to be afflicted with \u201cnovel corona\u201d will be lining up for their biometric IDs. Also notable is the threat level attributed to encryption, which is blamed for the end of the global Internet and the free flow of information \u2013 and thus technological and economic innovation \u2013 among the world\u2019s peoples. Consider this in the context of the\u00a0EARN IT Act<\/a>\u00a0that has been heavily pushed by Attorney General Bill Barr, which calls for government backdoors ostensibly to fight online child abuse.<\/p>\n These \u201csteps\u201d constitute an evisceration of constitutional democracy, the sovereignty of the individual and the advent of neofeudal conditions, where the corporate state is lord and master over one\u2019s person. We call this \u201cChinafication.\u201d Investigative journalist Harry Vox, who broke this document back in 2014, calls it \u201cauthoritarian capitalism\u201d.<\/p>\n Vox first warned the world about the Rockefeller pandemic \u201cLock Down\u201d scenario on October 21, 2014 from New York City. His prescient and timely warning is highly suggested viewing.<\/p>\nThe Narrative: \u201cLock Step\u201d<\/h3>\n
\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/therulingclassobserver.files.wordpress.com\/2020\/03\/cover-rockefeller-scenarios-2.png?w=901\")
<\/a>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/therulingclassobserver.files.wordpress.com\/2020\/03\/lock-step-chart.png?w=1024\")
<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/therulingclassobserver.files.wordpress.com\/2020\/03\/rockefeller-scenario-outcomes-chart.png?w=1024\")
<\/figure>\n<\/div>\nMainstream Media Follows The Script<\/h3>\n
Preparing for Pandemic<\/h4>\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n