The Plan itself requires understanding in order to do this properly.
The Plan is organized and operated primarily by Big Tech, Big Pharma, and Big Money (TPM, “they”, “them”) that is comparable to the Trump Administration's COVID-19 Task Force.
The TPM exploits an organizational and closed-loop system of data collection, processing that compartmentalizes the information to create false data for gain. This is done by collecting it from a pool of comorbidity pathogens and illnesses that mostly occur on an annual and seasonal basis: flu/ pneumonia, diabetes, heart disease and obesity.
Comorbidity data from a seasonal pool of flu/ and influenza-like illnesses (ILI) such as pneumonia occurs by two primary methods: PCR testing/high cycle thresholds and a series of diagnostic memos issued by the National Vital Statistics System. Both are data drivers functioning as redundant control systems inside this closed-loop system.
These serve to manufacture “new cases” by exploiting known vulnerabilities with PCR testing calibrated with high cycle threshold values, which creates the very specific net effect of generating false positive test results in abundance. Maneuvering the diagnosis to COVID by the language issued in the NVSS memos that also financially incentivized the diagnoses. The language of the memos basically places all of the flu season in the COVID column.
The design of this plan situates the seasonal data comorbidity collection such that they are only available for collecting during the times when those pathogens naturally occur. That mostly coincides with peak flu season, which makes it seasonal, and therefore it places firm boundaries on the The Plan while also making the TPM predictable in ways that can be confirmed with empirical and other data points.
To capitalize on this data, the TPM is required to introduce a new pathogen for two purposes. The first purpose was to introduce a new pathogen that mirrored the symptoms of the primary comorbidities being collected. From this standpoint and the requirement for a “like-for-like” pathogen, SARS-CoV-2 was the ideal candidate. The second purpose was to permit the TPM to meet the legal demands and requirements that are necessary to make both a pandemic declaration and the resulting declaration for a national emergency.
Per the Stafford Act: a national emergency declaration is required to trigger the usurpation of the President’s Title II Executive emergency authority by drawing it into conflict with the legal concept of “presidential competence,” which compels the President to defer to field experts if the emergency exists outside the scope of his knowledge and expertise. A viral pandemic meets this demand perfectly because a President is generally neither a virologist or epidemiologist, etc.
The enforcement mechanism for this “presidential competence” is the 25th Amendment. This existed before Trump took office in 2017. Had Trump defied “his” experts (the TPM) they would have leveraged the 25th Amendment to remove him. The 2020 election eventually accomplished this objective.
The CDC defines peak flu as beginning every December 1st and runs for two months. The definition of “COVID season” applies to this annual and seasonal period of peak flu and the data pool provided by it. Impacting the “COVID season” is the annual and seasonal die-off period for the primary comorbidities being accumulated.. This occurs primarily in the spring into summer and again, it provides firm boundaries on the The Plan and lends towards its predictability.
This requires The Plan to have a bridge that serves to drive the pandemic and the seasonal die-off and bridge from the current flu season to the next flu season. This design is perpetual.
There are four basic identifiable COVID seasons, understanding that it is open ended after the third. They are: 1) late 2019 after the first outbreak and until the seasonal die-off in spring/summer 2020; 2) peak flu 2020-2021; 3) the coming peak flu 2021-2022 and 4) open-ended from the projected peak flu 2022-2023 onward. To be determined by the existence and availability of 40,000 identifiable SARS-CoV-2 variants (to be discussed in another post).
In 2020, the bridge linking the pandemic from the 2019-2020 peak flu season to the 2020-2021 peak flu season occurred when the TPM moved the benchmark pandemic measurement from mortality data, which was in decline at the time, to infection data or “new cases.” This new measurement of “new cases” was made from thin air and was driven by a political storyline beginning in early 2020 and calling for an exponential increase in COVID testing (PCR/CT) that delivered a major spike in data in mid-April 2020.
PCR/CT and NVSS memos being the data drivers that The Plan requires present as redundant control systems allowing the TPM to shape the pandemic and determine how, when and where it occurs. It is to maneuver diagnoses and all COVID data to COVID over other causes. In addition to determining the parameters for data input, output and within an organizational and closed loop system, the TPM also financially incentivized the diagnoses with federal dollars.
This 2021 bridge is the leveraging of the “variant” and it can be seen currently dominating legacy media headlines and CDC advice. This is occurring exactly how, when, where and why predicted. Need an election to win? The public to have more fear? Etc.
The Plan was troubled by a problematic data point from the CDC. 2020 was only the 12th deadliest year. This tripwire evidences the means, motive, opportunity and intent in moving the benchmark pandemic measurement from mortality to “new cases” in mid-April 2020. Simply stated, the mortality data stood entirely antithetical to the narrative; so they moved the measurement to circumvent the impediment.
This spiraled into additional problems that unfold in the historical analysis that follows including two bulk revisions in August of 2020 and May of 2021. The CDC revised away 94% and 95% of sole cause COVID mortality data. That was the same data used to predicate the declaration of a national emergency and the declaration of the now perpetual state of emergency. Everything resulting from the pandemic occurs under and within the parameters needed to authorize it.
Understanding that the TPM has only issued recommendations for mitigations and guidelines, federalism has been used against the American people as The Plan’s enforcement mechanism. The Plan provides the authority for the governors to serve as enforcers and from there, The Plan gets infused into every single granular aspect of American life dependent upon the governor.
Therefore, the fraudulent data and the authority derived from it permits governors to literally shape how the pandemic occurs in their states. This stands entirely antithetical to the notion of the pandemic, as caused by the disease, occurring naturally and according to geographic areas as determined by population density and other important factors; and not political considerations and gubernatorial discretion.
Viruses are apolitical.
Will edit and post Part 2, 3, 4 later on.
It has been posted about the devolution.
Very good theory.
What is Trump called Patriots to Washington DC to create the 'insurrection' need to get the plan in motion?
What about Trump and the Red folder the day of the 'insurrection'?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1sASsNG5pP4
Patel's Summation of Devolution
https://www.mdpi.com/2076-393X/9/7/693 https://www.churchmilitant.com/news/article/study-jabs-kill-two-while-saving-three
BASEL, Switzerland (ChurchMilitant.com) - "For three deaths prevented by vaccination we have to accept two inflicted by vaccination," a trailblazing study is warning.
Scientists who conducted the study are begging governments "to rethink their vaccination policy" because of "this lack of clear benefit."
The report, published Thursday in the peer-reviewed journal Vaccines, notes that "COVID-19 vaccines have had expedited reviews without sufficient safety data" and "many of the new vaccines use completely new technologies that have never been used in humans before."
The publication comes a day after the pro-vaccine Wall Street Journal (WSJ) published an op-ed by two leading professors of medicine and epidemiology warning that "the large clustering of certain adverse events immediately after vaccination is concerning."
"The silence around these potential signals of harm reflects the politics surrounding COVID-19 vaccines," WSJ opined, noting that "authorities are making a mistake" and "risking the public's trust" by not being truthful about the harmful vaccine side effects.
'High Rates' of Side Effects, Fatalities Scientists in the Vaccines study — from Germany, Poland and the Netherlands — used an Israeli field study involving approximately one million persons in addition to the most prominent trial data from regulatory phase 3 trials.
Simply put: As we prevent three deaths by vaccinating, we incur two deaths.
The study also checked the Adverse Drug Reaction (ADR) database of the European Medicines Agency and data from the Dutch national register to gauge the number of severe and fatal side effects per 100,000 vaccinations.
While concluding that the experimental vaccines are "immunologically effective" and can "prevent infections, morbidity and mortality" associated with COVID-19, the researchers documented "comparatively high rates of side effects and fatalities" plus economic costs.
The research shows four fatalities and 16 serious side effects per 100,000 vaccinations in order to save the lives of 2–11 individuals per 100,000 vaccinations, with risks and benefits placed on the same order of magnitude.
"Simply put: As we prevent three deaths by vaccinating, we incur two deaths," the study concludes, asking health regulators to "dampen the enthusiasm by sober facts" and instigate safety reviews into COVID-19 jabs.
Pro-Vax Paper Admits Concern Meanwhile, the WSJ is predicting that a "reversal in thinking may be imminent" on the jabs. Stigmatizing safety concerns is "bad for scientific integrity and could harm patients," write UCLA professor of medicine Dr. Joseph Ladapo and Professor Harvey Risch, a Yale epidemiologist.
Financial conflicts of interest with vaccine manufacturers and the "politics of vaccination" have relegated safety "concerns to the outskirts of scientific thinking," the WSJ admits.
Not a single published study has demonstrated that patients with a prior infection benefit from COVID-19 vaccination.
Ladapo and Risch document four serious adverse events, using data from the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS): "low platelets (thrombocytopenia); noninfectious myocarditis, or heart inflammation, especially for those under 30; deep-vein thrombosis; and death."
The researchers acknowledge how "only a fraction of adverse events is reported" to VAERS, "so the true number of cases is almost certainly higher."
CDC, FDA 'Surely Aware' Both U.S. government health agencies — the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and Food and Drug Administration (FDA) are "surely aware of these data patterns, yet neither agency has acknowledged the trend," the experts lament.
Ladapo and Risch elaborate:
And while you would never know it from listening to public health officials, not a single published study has demonstrated that patients with a prior infection benefit from COVID-19 vaccination. That this isn't readily acknowledged by the CDC or Anthony Fauci is an indication of how deeply entangled pandemic politics is in science.
But these authors were not the first to sound an alarm.
Scientists' Petition: Delay 'Full Approval' Earlier in June, clinicians, scientists and patient advocates lodged a formal "Citizen Petition" with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), asking the agency to delay consideration of a "full approval" of any COVID-19 vaccine.
The petitioners state their case in the prestigious British Medical Journal (BMJ), "outlining the many remaining unknowns about safety and effectiveness" and demand that trials by vaccine manufacturers "should be completed before they are evaluated for full approval."
The silence around these potential signals of harm reflects the politics surrounding COVID-19 vaccines.
The petition asks the FDA "to require a more thorough assessment of spike proteins produced in situ by the body following vaccination — including studies on their full biodistribution, pharmacokinetics and tissue-specific toxicities."
The scientists call for a "thorough investigation of all serious adverse events reported to pharmacovigilance systems" to be carried out by "independent, impartial individuals and for safety data from individuals receiving more than two vaccine doses, in consideration of plans for future booster shots."
"Given the nature of the novel vaccine platforms, our petition asks for experts in gene therapy to be included among the external committee advising the FDA" write the 27 petitioners, stressing: "Staying silent is not the responsible option."
I have been trying to find the Q post about cancer cures. I must not be using the proper search terms.
I have to share this in case someone you love has cancer and it can assist them
The dewormer Fenbendozole has successfully treated small cell lung, non small lung, gliobastoma, colon cancer.
The most important blog you will read is from Joe Tippens Joe story and the Joe Tippens Protocol
Joe Tippens story
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QLRO853vAtw
Following Joe Tippen Protocol Another man's story https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6a82Ra4c04Q
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19049251/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28078780/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21764822/ http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a545657.pdf
**"UK Government killed God" says scientist. **
An investigative journalist has published a chilling post-mortem of Britain's weaponization of behavioral psychology and totalitarian propaganda techniques, reducing it to "one of the **most frightened **countries in the world" during the COVID-19 crisis.
Laura Dodsworth's A State of Fear: How the UK Government Weaponized Fear During the COVID-19 Pandemic, notes how even churches closed their doors at the behest of modelers and behavioral scientists "with scarcely a murmur of resistance."
"The government killed God. It's as simple as that. To put protecting yourself from death above everything is killing God," writes Dodsworth in her book, which sold out on the day of its release last Monday, publisher Pinter & Martin told Church Militant.
"I am not a Christian, but I know what is right and wrong and I trust my faith," the filmmaker notes, slamming Britain for "mimicking totalitarian China's response to the virus" with China's use of stadiums as mass isolation areas "chillingly reminiscent of concentration camps."
The State even conscripted the Church to push vaccines by evoking "a modern biosecurity incarnation of transubstantiation — especially when [the jabs were] delivered in cathedrals with organ music playing, in an intersection of the old religion and the new religion."
But it was Prime Minister Boris Johnson's behavioral scientists who played the most sinister part, asking the government to raise "the perceived level of personal threat" by "using hard-hitting emotional messaging" because "a substantial number of people still do not feel sufficiently personally threatened" by COVID-19.
Church Militant was one of the *first to report how the Scientific Pandemic Insights Group on Behaviors (SPI-B) provided the government with psychological techniques on how to compel obedience to draconian lockdowns, writing "the manifesto of a campaign of fear." *
Full-On Psychological Attack Dodsworth interviews a number of SPI-B scientists who confirm the use of propaganda, including censorship and the use of "nudge theory" deliberately "designed to keep the fear going."
Dodsworth explains how masks were used for fearmongering, with media hyping "low-quality evidence in favor of masks," but barely reporting studies showing a "statistically insignificant difference in infection between mask-wearers and non-mask wearers."
Censorship was not merely a British response, but a global clampdown. GabTweet With "masks literally keeping the fear in our face, we've become afraid of each other. Humans are now vectors of transmission, agents of disease," she writes, citing hyperbolic descriptions accusing "maskless individuals" of setting off "epidemiological time bombs" and a study claiming that "non-mask wearers were more likely to be psychopaths."
Religious people who refused to comply were scapegoated, Dodsworth notes, citing the left-wing newspaper Israeli Haaretz calling non-compliant ultra-Orthodox Jews "COVID insurgents" and "terrorists" in "starkly obvious biopolitical language."
Educational psychologist Dr. Gavin Morgan, a member of SPI-B, told Dodsworth that even though he thought "masks dehumanize people," some of the government's task group favor masks because they convey a message of "solidarity" and "increase a sense of collectivism."
"Masks aren't even questioned anymore; it's like a seatbelt in a car," Morgan said, lamenting: "We've seen how much people are willing to give up their freedom since March."
Careful psychological messaging and emotive advertising created a blitzkrieg of daily fear bombs.
"People like being scared. Think about rollercoasters and horror films. They are enjoyable because we know they are safe but provide a vicarious sensation of fear. We don't have to go out hunting anymore. We're not scared of being attacked anymore," Morgan added.
Fear 'In Your Face'
Dodsworth notes that the Royal Society issued a report urging the adoption of masks, "although it concentrated on behavioral psychology and messaging rather than hard evidence," and was forced to acknowledge that "uptake had been depressed by a lack of evidence-based medicine in favor of masks."
Scientists recommended masks to secure conformity "Behavioral scientists pushed for masks because they create a 'signal,' when in fact not a single randomized controlled trial can demonstrate the value of mask-wearing outside clinical settings," she observes, elaborating:
Masked faces prime you to think of danger. We become walking billboards for disease and danger. They keep fear in our faces — literally. They also distinguish the compliant from the rebels, although of course there are many valid reasons, and non-exhaustive legal exemptions, for not wearing a mask.
Speaking to Church Militant, mental health ethicist Niall McCrae commended Dodsworth's exposé as "an important book by a respected author" with the government "abusing its power to induce terror in the British people by claiming that COVID-19 is 'the biggest threat this country has faced in peacetime history.'"
Globalist Agenda
Dr. McCrae, however, noted that Dodsworth's limited perspective ignored the role played by the World Economic Forum in using the crisis to promote the "Great Reset and Event 201, the World Economic Forum's planning exercise that prioritized state control of media."
"Censorship was not merely a British response, but a global clampdown. Dodsworth rightly criticizes, but I would go much further: journalists and commentators are guilty of an inexcusable dereliction of duty (particularly the BBC)," McCrae maintains.
The dystopian fear, McCrae explains, is now being used against people who don't want the experimental vaccine, but Dodsworth "does not consider that the vaccines and indeed the virus are mere vehicles for a digital surveillance system."
We've seen how much people are willing to give up their freedom since March.GabTweet Dodsworth's interview with Dr. Daisy Fancourt, associate professor in Behavioral Science and Health at University College London who fed information to SPI-B, revealed that the government was using behavioral science to coerce people into taking the experimental jab.
'Emotionally Manipulative'
Dodsworth's book explores the dystopian fear tactic of substantially overestimating the dangers and figures without supplying context, even though by March 2021 just 689 people under 60 with no co-morbidities had died from COVID in England and Wales.
"The government, public health bodies and the media used alarmist language throughout the epidemic. Big numbers, steep red lines on graphs, the use of selective information, careful psychological messaging and emotive advertising created a blitzkrieg of daily fear bombs," writes the filmmaker.
** Ads were designed to trigger dystopian fear** Prime Minister Boris Johnson's speeches — "littered with threats" — used emotionally manipulative wartime language and steamrolled any potential conscientious objectors by painting the picture of "an apocalyptic pandemic that would bring society to its knees."
Dodsworth also probes the left-wing bias of the scientists, with the dominant presence of communist Susan Michie on SPI-B and another member of SPI-B telling her "they believed the more right-wing and populist governments had not managed the epidemic as well."
Church Militant earlier reported our findings that SPI-B — consisting of 48 academics from various disciplines in the humanities — is dominated by left-wing activists, lockdown fanatics and vaccine zealots, including Marxist campaigner Professor Susan Michie, who has been a member of the Communist Party of Britain (CPB) for over 40 years.
https://www.churchmilitant.com/news/article/scientists-confess-to-weaponising-covid-phobia
https://www.amazon.co.uk/State-Fear-government-weaponised-Covid-19/dp/1780667205****
https://factba.se/biden/calendar/
He already is nighty-nighty. ZZZZzzzzzzz
"Biden is said to typically return to his residency in the White House — manila folders in hand — by 7 p.m., according to a CNN report."
https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/15/politics/joe-biden-presidential-routine/index.html
In the early ‘60s , John D. Rockefeller III approached Fr. Theodore Hesburgh who was then president of Notre Dame and asked about the possibility of Notre Dame hosting a Population Council meeting at the university.
In 1965 Fr. Hesburgh invited Rockefeller-funded Planned Parenthood to hold a number of so called “secret conferences” at Notre Dame through the intervention of Fr. John O’Brien head of the theology department.
Former Notre Dame professor, and editor of the website culturewarnotes.com, E. Michael Jones observes the university’s wholesale betrayal of the Catholic Faith, as part of a self-absorbed trading of souls for foundation funding.
"The Rockefeller interest was the want/need for Catholics to use birth control. [Traitor] Catholics such as Hesburg wants funding from Rockefeller, Ford etc foundations. These 'secret conferences' were only advertised to the 'most friendly' of potential guests. John D. Rockefeller III need a Catholic in their camp-so to speak. He found a willing one in Fr. T. Hesburg. Fr. Hesburg sold out Catholic education for a share of Rockefellers millions. And the 'worldly respect'. There was plenty of that-
For starters, Fr. Theodore Hesburgh actually served on the board of the Rockefeller Foundation as well as held other important positions over the course of 20 years within the organization. The same organization that is a leading proponent of the Culture of Death.
But that wasn’t all the worldly acclaim Fr. Hesburgh amassed. He became the director of Chase Manhattan Bank, was given 150 honorary degrees from various universities as of 2004, the most by any person in history and was awarded the medal of freedom from Pres. Nixon, and the congressional gold medal by Bill Clinton.
How is it possible that a Roman Catholic priest sat ON THE BOARD and WAS THE DIRECTOR of an organization that supports birth control and abortion???
It’s a question whose answer reveals all.
Once Notre Dame … the leading Catholic university in the nation sold out, practically every other Catholic university followed suit.
With population control money pouring into the coffers of Catholic universities, the plan could proceed to advance contraception and abortion as tools in population control (recall this is simply eugenics).
And Catholic universities played an impressive role in warping the minds of young Catholics and steering them away from the truth.
That’s why, today we live in a nation in which 98% of Catholics not Protestants or atheists but CATHOLICS use contraception.
It was this relationship between Hesburgh and the population control Rockefeller Foundation that, perhaps more than any other single alliance in recent Church history which began the meltdown of the past nearly 50 years.
And with these secret conferences on population control going on during the summers of the early 1960’s at Notre Dame, it soon became clear that a more definitive break with the Catholic Church and her teaching would have to be initiated.
In 1967, the year before the Papal encyclical Humanae Vitae which restated Catholic teaching condemning contraception was released. Notre Dame administrators under the direction of Fr. Theodore Hesburgh, released what was known as the Land O’Lakes Statement. Which they distanced themselves from Catholic teaching. The statement was named after the retreat center of the Holy Cross Fathers, the order that founded Notre Dame.
The retreat center is a luxurious hideaway in Land O’ Lakes, Wisconsin.
While at this quiet summer conference in July of 1967, Fr. Hesburgh and others prepared for the overthrow of the Catholic Faith at Notre Dame.
But Hesburgh’s initiative would not stop at the confines of his South Bend, Indiana campus. It spread like a blazing inferno to virtually every other Catholic college looking to unshackle itself from Rome.
In releasing the Land O’ Lakes statement, Hesburgh’s Notre Dame aligned itself with forces bent on the destruction of Catholicism, such as, the Rockefeller Foundation -with whom Father Theodore Hesburgh plotted to reduce the Catholic voice in society, by indoctrinating the Faithful with the world’s creed.
The Land O’Lakes Statement is important because of the atmosphere it created making the rejection of Christ's authority, His teachings - just to sound sophisticated, intelligent, up to date and thoroughly fashionable.
It laid the groundwork for widespread and wholesale academic dissent which would explode a year later at Catholic University of America with specific regard to the Birth Control issue and Pope Paul VI’s encyclical.
Hesburgh’s Land O’Lakes Statement and the explosion of dissent against Humanae Vitae went hand in glove. It was perceived by the public as it was intended to be that if a larger than life Catholic icon could challenge Rome, then everything was up for grabs.
It has proved to be an attitude throughout the Church in the West that has not dissipated in the following 40 plus years and still often emanates from our pulpits and chanceries today.
And its important to bear in mind, that these wheels were set in motion by the designs of the Rockefellers and the cooperation of Fr. Ted Hesburgh and his Notre Dame.
With the Catholic academic world now unhitching itself from the authority of the Church. The Catholic world was now readied for wholesale rejection of sexual ethics.
When you’ve got more money than you know what to do with, what’s left to achieve? How about world domination?! Some believe that’s exactly what the Rockefeller dynasty wants. We can certainly judge by their actions and statements that they, along with an elite group of politicians, aristocrats and billionaires desire a world united under some form of global governance.
Here’s an excerpt from current family patriarch David Rockefeller’s Memoirs:
“For more than a century ideological extremists at either end of the political spectrum have seized upon well-publicized incidents such as my encounter with Castro to attack the Rockefeller family for the inordinate influence they claim we wield over American political and economic institutions. Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as 'internationalists' and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure--one world, if you will. If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.” .
As you can see Mr. Rockefeller had no concern for his own country’s best interest. He proudly admits that some kind of “one world government” would be ideal. If David Rockefeller was working against America, the most prosperous country in the history of mankind one must ask the question, WHY? While this country has its flaws, it is also the same country that provided Mr. Rockefeller & his family the opportunity to make their fortune.
What kind of government would he replaced democracy with? Would he done away with capitalism?
We do know that Mr. Rockefeller is appreciative a type of governance that is diametrically opposed to constitutional republic. He speaks candidly in a 1973 New York Times article about China and the success of communism: "Whatever the price of the Chinese Revolution, it has obviously succeeded not only in producing more efficient and dedicated administration, but also in fostering high morale and community of purpose. The social experiment in China under Chairman Mao's leadership is one of the most important and successful in human history."
Keep in mind that Mr. Rockefeller is speaking favorably about a system that is responsible for the deaths of 40,000,000 people in China alone.
In contrast, the Catholic Church has words of condemnation for Communism: "This all to imminent danger, Venerable Brethren, as you have already surmised, is bolshevistic and athetistic Communism, which aims at upsetting the social order and at undermining the very foundations of Christian society." Pope Pius XI March 19, 1937 DIVINI REDEMPTORIS Encyclical on Atheistic Communism
We’ve looked at what the Rockefellers have said about world government , now let’s take at look at what they’ve done. Their publicized involvement with organizations like, the Bilderberg Group, The Council on Foreign Relations, The United Nations and The Trilateral Commission establishes them as key players on the global economic and government scenes.
What is less known, is their involvement with groups aimed at creating one world religion. This Rockefeller initiative nearly a century in the making is an attempt to bring together different faiths into one.
With all things the Rockefellers are involved with one must question their motivation. Was it to bring about peace and harmony or to shoot down any religions/beliefs that stand in the way of their global governance goal?
In 1919, John D. Rockefeller Jr. funded a new ecumenical organization, the Interchurch World Movement or IWM. Its stated purpose was to foster peace after a bloody World War I. It sought to achieve this by consolidating the various denominations into one religion. While this particular organization only lasted a short time,it began the idea of consolidating religions, and the watering down of their dogmas into one.
It’s interesting to note, that Professor Charles Harvey, who wrote a history of the IWM, said that the roots of the modern day social justice gospel can be traced back to Rockefeller’s Interchurch World Movement.
The current understanding of social justice is that we must completely focus on solving all worldly needs while sacrificing our eternal needs.
The torch and the Rockefeller funding was passed on to the Federal Council of Churches. Today, the World Council of Churches carries on that same mission with the help of the United Nations.
And consistent with the Rockefellers past support of this movement they funded the World Council of Churches gorgeous Ecumenical Institute in Switzerland. Not only do they support combining all religions into one, but you’ll find in, what can be called their “mission statement” that they support one world government.
Climate Change is another issue in which the will of the Rockefellers is exercised wholesale through their various organizations including the Foundation.
Politicians within the family ranks have helped to form and promote legislation to reduce or even eliminate "dirty" practices that supposedly contribute to climate change.
Steven Rockefeller, a fourth generation family member, played a major role in writing the UN Earth Charter in the late 1990’s which points to overpopulation as a major detriment to our ecology, not to mention our social and economic systems.
The Rockefeller Foundation makes the following statements "Human actions have degraded ecosystems in the last 50 years than in all of human history. And we, the Rockefeller Foundation, are promoting awareness and guiding funders and policymakers to support broader action on climate change resiliance, nationally and internationally, to help poor and vulnerable people around the world. Specifically, the Foundation partners with government, other foundations [Ford], donors, NGOs and groups from the private sector."
The Rockefellers, individually, have also been involved with climate change and subsequent legislation involving the reduction of greenhouse gases. Phil Rockefeller, a state senator in Washington states: "I worry a lot about climate change, I think it is the single most important enviromental issue we face." Jay Rockefeller: "Greenhouse gases are not healthy for the Earth, or for people and we must take significant action to reduce them."
Summarizing the Rockefeller philosophy perfectly was David Rockefeller while addressing the UN Ambassadors dinner in the 1990s. As shared earlier, The Rockefeller Foundation is heavily involved in the contraception movement. Remember they started this as a EUGENICS foundation. This has not stopped. Not just abortions but contraceptions is 'important' to the Foundation.
The Rockefeller Foundation and the Population Council have produced a variety of contraceptive methods, because their underlying belief is that human population must be curtailed and limited to end the “problem” of climate change. As a result, the Rockefellers continue to inject tens of millions of dollars into the political machinery to bring about their world vision.
The Rockefeller Family through various funding efforts, power grabs and influence peddling has made itself an enemy of Christ.
The Rockefellers have extended their tentacles throughout the world, influencing public opinion in favor of their global agenda.
The Rockefeller Foundation may paint itself as a social help agency put in place to assist mankind but don't be fooled. The Rockefeller Foundation has an agenda that is deeply in opposition to the Christ and His Teachings.
It’s the lie that contraception is good, that its’ good for couples, good PUBLIC policy, good government policy, good for nations and its good for humanity. This all started with the Rockefeller Foundation [and the Ford Foundation].
Yet many God fearing, loving wonderful Patriots are willing to follow the social experiment that was started as a eugenics movement in both abortion, sterilization and contraception started in part by this evil. If you accept the globalist idea of want of one world government--you must accept it in its entirety--population control in all of its forms.
Citation/References:
http://2009annualreport.rockefellerfoundation.org/
http://www.cgdev.org/content/publications/detail/1424557
http://www.newswithviews.com/Cuddy/dennis143.htm Rockefeller Plan
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ClqUcScwnn8 David Rockefeller UN Ambassador dinner, 2008
http://www.citizensamericaparty.org/dynasties.htm
website abt Rockefeller 'secret' world dominence
https://www.cfr.org/ Council Foreign Relations Council started by Rockefeller one world ideology
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/10/02/60minutes/main576332.shtml Rebecca Leung 60 Minutes CBS Skull and Bones-Rockefeller
http://www.skullandcrossbones.org/articles/skullandbones.htm Skull and Bones Society
https://educate-yourself.org/ga/RF2chap1976.shtml Electronic version of Book "The Saintly Sinner" Gary Allen, 1976
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/rockefellers/timeline/index.html/ The Rockefeller Timeline PBS
http://eugenicsanddepopulation.blogspot.com/2009/09/rate-the-mental-hygiene-society-yale.html Rockefeller/Bush/SkullandBones and Eugenics
https://educate-yourself.org/cn/genociderockefellernazis2apr03.shtml
Electronic Book Rockefeller, UN, Nazi, Genocide Anton Chaitkin 2003
Eugenics, Racism, Population Control http://www.albatrus.org/english/lien_of_oz/one%20world%20government/eugenics_racism_population_control.htm
http://collegecatalog.uchicago.edu/thecollege/liberaleducationatchicago/ Explainatio
My post here will take a over 30 minutes to read, in two parts due to length. Just an FYI. My intention is to delve deep into Planned Parenthood and share its beginnings and the true octopus its orginator created. No, the originator is NOT Margaret Sanger. It is the Rockerfellers.
Thesis: The Rockefeller Foundation is actively undermining the God and in the process attempting to erase man’s natural orientation to the eternal life with God.
Background History: With the Rockerfellers, it is very definitely a family affair, with many faces. Before we examine their present designs on the world, humanity and the specifically the Roman Catholic Church. We need to look at their humbler beginnings.
The first Rockefeller to emigrate to America was Johann Peter Rockefeller … a kind of founding father of the clan in the New World … who immigrated from Germany’s Rhineland to New Jersey in 1708. One of his descendants was William Avery Rockefeller born in 1810 in Granger New York. Known as “Doc” … William was a traveling salesman and horse thief … who sold bottles of crude oil door to door as a cure for snake bite, impotence and warts.
In 1849, at the age of 40 when he was already married with six children William was accused of raping a fifteen year old girl in New York and fled to Cleveland, Ohio to avoid prosecution. At age 45 he abandoned his wife… Eliza and their six children. Marrying a twenty year old by the name of Margaret Allen without divorcing Eliza, thus establishing himself as a bigamist.
Margaret Allen proved not to be enough to quell his appetite for women as he also took up with a third woman, his mistress, Nancy Brown who bore him two daughters.
One of the children of his original marriage with Eliza was John D. Rockefeller and it is this John who will become the famous or infamous robber baron billionaire of Standard Oil.
John's mother Eliza was a strict Baptist who had some rather unusual ideas about raising her children. Albeit in an atmosphere of infidelity and abandonment.
When John was bad she would tie him to a fence post and beat him when he didn’t do exactly what she told him to do.
This childhood may have influenced his psychological make-up perhaps inculcating in him a desire to control and manipulate his surroundings and relationships, both professional and personal.
So, this was the family into which John D. Rockefeller Sr. was born and propelled him into big business, and even bigger power grabs for the Rockefeller clan.
Interestingly his “fortune hunting” is said to have been inspired by his Baptist preacher, who once told him to make as much money as possible and give away as much money as possible.
John D. Rockefeller Senior came into his own. Into the oil business, cofounding Standard Oil with his brother, William Jr. and the rest is history. As his company quickly made tens of millions of dollars through the oil business, transportation and many other ventures. His manner of doing business was efficient, cost effective and controlling. Quickly making a reputation for himself as master strategist as he gobbled up competitors and formed a massive monopoly over which he was supreme ruler.
Having established the Rockefellers as the chief family of the dynasty of the American Robber Baron families. HIS son, John Jr. took up the torch of the family business in 1897, with designs on even more important matters. Such as controlling and manipulating the fate of mankind.
His tool for this would be the dark “science” of Eugenics.
His schemes and plans put him at odds with the values of the Chrisitianity. Viewing man as nothing more than an enlightened animal … soulless and therefore in no need of salvation which of course means no need for a God or the Church.
It was John Jr. who first brought the subject of eugenics into the family.
While studying at Brown in 1894 John Jr., wrote a paper called, “The Dangers to America Arising from Unrestricted Immigration” in which he denounced immigrants as – "the scum of foreign cities; the vagabond, the tramp, the pauper, and the indolent, ignorant and hardly better than beasts."
He sought to rid the planet of these “scum” through the science of genetics. Rockefeller did this by giving money away to organizations that supported and advanced his views. The Rockefellers’ initial foray into the field was the establishment of the Eugenics Record Office at Cold Spring Harbor, New York in 1910. Furthering Rockefeller's support of eugenics research and his racist convictions.
Three years later … the crown jewel of the Rockefeller family was established.
The Rockefeller Foundation was founded in 1913 when The New York State Legislature passed an act on April 24, incorporating the Foundation. The Foundation would evolve into an organization that would infiltrate some of the most important structures of American Catholicism (more on that later).
The Rockefeller Foundation statement of purpose read: “To promote the well-being of mankind throughout the world.”
With the Foundation incorporated, John D. Rockefeller Senior, who was the organization’s founding father, made gifts to the Foundation totaling $35 million. Followed a year later by $65 million. At the time John Sr. was 75 years old.
With the Foundation, his dreams became bigger and while money couldn’t solve everything it could buy control of human events.
The secretary of the Foundation at its beginning in 1913 was Jerome D. Greene who said THIS in a memorandum describing the Foundation’s principles and policies.
"The Foundation's work ... is to “go to the root of individual or social ill-being and misery.”
This established a ROUGH framework the Foundation moving forward.
At a first meeting of the board, a long time advisor to John Sr. by the name of Frederick Gates argued that “disease is the supreme ill in human life.”
The general concept of “health” became established as a Foundation priority and would be the basis for later designs on world government through population control and climate change initiatives.
In June of 1913 the Rockefeller board laid aside its first money, $25,000 to create the International Health Commission which launched the Foundation into the area of health on a GLOBAL scale.
“HEALTH” in fact, came to have a very broad meaning. As The Foundation also helped establish the American Social Hygiene Association to direct the scientific study of biological and social factors that influence human sexual conduct.
These early years set the course of the Rockefeller Foundation to the present day. And though the Rockefeller Foundation may not exactly call it Eugenics as in the past, it is still very heavily involved in “social research”. This interest is revealed by the Foundation’s ongoing support for the Bureau of Social Hygiene for some twenty years.
The mission of the Bureau was to research and study social ills such as prostitution as well as provide “education” in birth control, maternal health and sex ed.
The Bureau finally shut its doors in 1940, as the family set their sights on other venues for social enrichment; such as population control.
In 1951, the Population Council was founded by John D. Rockefeller III, grandson of the robber baron and son of John Jr. who had become a Eugenics enthusiast.
In an effort to separate the council from the negative connotations of eugenics in a post WWII world still reeling from the horrors of Nazi death camps, the word Eugenics was dropped and replaced with the euphemism of “population control”.
The Council also fostered the development of contraceptives and the study of the social sciences. To increase the use of contraceptives among the general public, and eventually all Catholics, who at this point were the major opposition to contraception.
Some contraceptives available today were developed by Rockefeller’s Population Council.
These include: the Copper T IUD, Norplant, Jadelle (Norplant II), and the Mirena IUD.
However, increasing the use of contraception among the public was not enough for Rockefeller. He knew that the greatest obstacle to the universal use of contraceptives not to mention his plans for a global government was the Catholic Church.
In 1973, after Nixon’s Commission on Population Growth and the American Future better known as the Rockefeller Commission failed to expand abortion and contraception in America. John D. Rockefeller 3rd lamented saying:
"The greatest difficulty has been the very active opposition of the Roman Catholic Church through its various agencies in the United States."
The Rockefeller eugenics agenda would prove to be a very effective means of manipulating and controlling society. However, the Rockefellers knew it would not be enough to bring about his plan of a global government, he needed the public to WANT that government.
In order to bring the United States and ultimately, the world, under their influence the Rockefellers decided to effect change.
The Foundation firmly grasped the importance of forming young minds to its world view, so it set out on the long course to slowly bring about the necessary changes and its first target was higher education.
The Rockefellers began their insidious hijacking of the American education system by funding a number of institutions.
Spelman College, 1881 University of Chicago 1892 (Interesting note: within the original bylaws its goal is to "Rend education from its Christian roots, prepare society to accept values other than Christ and His teachings" University of Chicago is the earliest institution that overtly was created to move student, facility, society away from their proper roots of Christianity. Rockerfeller Institute for Medical Research 1901 renamed Rockerfeller University in 1965. Their goals "pharmaceutical research", "contraception industry".
John Sr. also collaborated with the American Baptist Education Society to establish the University of Chicago where his now well developed definition of education took shape with the help of Dr. John Dewey. A scholar from Johns Hopkins University.
Through Dewey, Rockefeller adopted the theory of behavioral psychology that best fit his aspirations for remaking our system of education. Dewey’s educational philosophy can be summed up as, "knowledge and truth aren’t important… but teaching students to be docile followers of a new world order,is the goal". A kind of “socialization”. This fit hand in glove with Rockefeller’s plan.
Rockefeller, through Dewey’s theory in practice. Setting himself up to educate generations of children. Solidifying the Rockefeller influence on the social order as the “god in the machine”. By heavily influencing thoughts and feelings.
After a hundred years of the Dewey educational theory, many individuals have surrendered their free will, in exchange for immediate gratification and a governmental nanny state. A kind of bread and circuses mentality.
But Rockefeller was not content with influencing the American education system alone, but wanted to showcase his educational theory on a global stage.
Nearly from the beginning, the Rockefellers have been exuberant bed-fellows with the United Nations, yet another tool, helping them to move the world toward a global government radically opposed to the worship of Christ.
In 1902 Rockefeller established his General Education Board, to further promote the agenda of global control. Rockefeller established his General Education Fund two years later. It was renamed the Rockefeller Foundation in 1910 and Chartered in 1913.
During the 1920s, Rockefeller’s General Education Board became the International Bureau of Education, (IBE). After World War II, formed a partnership with the United Nations Education Scientific and Cultural Organization … UNESCO.
The first director-general of UNESCO was Sir Julian Huxley. The author of the 1946 "UNESCO: Its Purpose and Its Philosophy" he states the goal of UNESCO is: " The moral of UNESCO is clear. It must envisage of some form of world political unity, whether through a single world government or otherwise, as the only certain means to avoid war. Specifically, in its educational system, it can stress the ultimate need for world political unity and familiarize people with the implications of the transfer of full sovereignity from separate nations to a world organization."
Thus, the United Nations’ educational arm was, from its inception, part of a plan to create a one-world government. Eradicating the rights of the individual in favor of those of the collective group.
Coincidently , (nothing is a coincidence..) Sir Julian was making his preposterous claims in the same year that Alfred Kinsey published his first of two “reports” entitled, “Sexuality in the Human Male”. Made possible by funding from the Rockefellers.
Kinsey’s “science” claimed to prove, that large sections of the population often engaged in a variety of sexually deviant practices, pedophilia, homosexuality, sado-machism, etc. Kinsey’s work was a huge source of impetus for the sexual revolution that would occur two decades later.
As you can see, through a diabolical singleness of purpose and enormous wealth, the Rockefeller cabal has continued to promote a moral, social and governmental structure radically opposed to the tenets of Christianity regarding human sexuality and free will.
The Rockefellers formed young minds, in effect creating a clean slate, ready to accept the social and sexual revolution of the decades to follow.
The Rockefellers sought to increase the use of contraception and abortion by persuading the general public of its benefits. Through the government and the education system.
But there was still opposition, major opposition that had to be confronted, and that opposition was the Catholic Church.
For this reason, Rockefeller ,toting his money bags set out for South Bend, Indiana and set in motion what would be the largest wholesale betrayal of Catholic principles and faith in American history.
At the time, perhaps no other institution in the United States so strongly represented Catholicism as the University of Notre Dame. Steeped in lore and tradition, it was emblematic of Roman Catholicism for 5 decades of Catholic immigrants. The success of its athletic teams vaulted the small school onto a stage of prominence and respect.
For many American Catholics, Notre Dame represented nothing less than the promised land.
This is why what happened at Notre Dame in the 1960s is the primary source and example of betrayal to the Faith orchestrated by by then University President Father Theodore Hesburg and continued by his sucessor Fr. Edward "Monk" Malloy and then Fr. John Jenkins.
Part 2 To Be Continued