The manmade coronavirus (COVID-19/C-19) pandemic has severely altered our lives. How has this come to pass? What sort of world are our political leaders trying to construct?
How has 2022 been for you? Have you breathed again? Is your life more or less ‘back to normal’? Apart from extra forms at the airport and a mask on the bus, we are pretty much back to normal in New South Wales. Meanwhile, our hearts have gone out to those involved in the tragedy in Ukraine and to those thrice devasted by the floods in eastern Australia.
Then to cap it all, those incessant political ads and the media hanging on every word from Scott Morrison (Liberal/Nationals) and Anthony Albanese (Australian Labor Party) as they limber up for the next federal election in late May.
I propose to you that this isn’t even half the picture — it is in fact simply a few frames taken from the biggest blockbuster movie of all time, that we are all staring into. We have all been blinded by these ‘stills’ extracted from the dynamic, apocalyptic reality being played out all around us and within us. Come with me as I seek to paint the big picture of what is seeking to shape our world.
On Friday 16 July 2021 I retired from teaching after 46 years. It was in the midst of one of Sydney’s lockdowns. A few days later, I remember sitting in my backyard, enjoying the winter sun, having a long chat with a good friend on the phone ‘about all these things that have come upon the earth in recent times’ (Luke 24:18 — paraphrased).
My friend and I agreed that the world had been turned upside down since 2020. There was more which simply did not make sense than what did. I recall the feeling of being swept along as if on the breaking crest of a tidal wave, totally out of control — and what is more, the people of the world were being led by national governments that seemed ‘out of control’, while they sought to give an air of certainty and confidence: ‘We have got this!’
But teaching is in my DNA, and in my blood. What do teachers do if they don’t understand something? They research, they question, they problem-solve. That is exactly what I have done for ten months, and I am not stopping. I have dug deep, followed evidence lines, sought to apply the principles of critical thinking and the scientific method. I have sought never to ‘accept’ anything ‘just because ‘someone says so’.
The hardest thing
I know now what I didn’t know a year ago. An obvious statement, yes, but a year ago my life radically changed. I had the opportunity, afforded to few, to begin to discover what I didn’t know. It’s as if a chasm had opened up between my present and my past; my present research-focused perspective contrasts radically with my past, which was simply dominated by work.
I now have a growing burden to seek ways to bridge this chasm and connect anew with people dominated by their work who have not had the time or space to wonder about the meaning of ‘these things’.
Most people have not had the time to think, so they have simply packaged these events of the last two years into their old paradigm. They have not been ‘happy’, or often even ‘aware’ that some things simply did not add up; they have simply been praying that some semblance of normality would return one day.
This line of thought suggests that I am wiser than most. No, I am sure that is not the case. I simply suspect that I have had the good fortune to see the big picture that others haven’t. It feels like I have been given some pages from a new dictionary that has not been published yet. It is daunting and exciting all at the same time!
I hope this essay can shine a light on these pages and that the reader won’t feel belittled or disrespected in any way. I call on you to come with me on a journey of joining the dots to reveal the big picture.
I have attempted to capture the length and breadth of this immense canvas in my essay — Can we see the Big Picture, what is seeking to shape our world? I have divided it up into roughly three equal parts: Where to start? The World Economic Forum; What’s next? The culture as we know it and The better way. The culture we can know now.
It seemed best to paint the background first, the World Economic Forum’s designs on the world. Then I try to examine the culture in which we find ourselves. Finally, I suggest there is a better story to tell, which has a much happier ending for the play.
Where to start? The World Economic Forum
When we enter a maze, that first step is so important: will it lead us to the truth, the exit, or it will lead us down a blind rabbit hole? My aim here is not to pepper my text with countless references, but rather to paint a big picture with you.
Let’s start with the World Economic Forum (WEF) an international non-governmental and lobbying organisation based in Switzerland, founded in 1971 by a German engineer and economist Klaus Schwab, who still leads it today.
For years the WEF has been publishing its plans for global reform for all to see. Their centrepiece, The Great Reset, is dependent on global cooperation and participation, but has never had the endorsement of community or political debate in western democratic counties.
The WEF has been totally transparent about the fact that they have used the C-19 event as a catalyst for the rollout of their Great Reset agenda. Yet — have you noticed? — this line has never been highlighted, explored or challenged within the mainstream media.
The Great Reset agenda
I would argue that the WEF’s foundational principle, namely, equality for the peoples of the world, is a laudable aspiration. Why would any civilised society advocate for inequality and discrimination?
However, the WEF realised that from their perspective, capitalism, entrepreneurship and individual responsibility were never going to bring about their agenda. Rather, they had to roll out their own ‘one world government’ to orchestrate their plan.
Today their agenda is well on the way, and I don’t know of any western democracy putting up their hand to say, ‘hang on there, can we stop and talk about this, can we have a vote on this to see if we actually want in?’ They are all on board and have become instruments in the de facto one world un-elected government conducted by the WEF. Do the ends justify the means?
We will own nothing and be happy: the financial and social reset
This line has received some coverage in mainstream media, but in such a way as to make it sound funny, ‘as if that could ever happen’. Let’s join some dots here. Over the last two years, governments around the world started printing money like there was no tomorrow.
They never seem to stop and ask, will we ever repay this, because it was all part of the WEF plan, and they had been assured that they would never have to worry about that as there would be a new global currency introduced based on the state owning everything and the people paying rent to use stuff — the people owning nothing!
The second part, ‘be happy’, is how the WEF envision us all post-capitalism. We will never again be stressed by the pressures of having to provide for our family, as the state will manage everything. So, at a stroke, they believe the state will eliminate depression and stress from society, as we will all be happy!
But will we really be happy with no freedom to create novel new ideas, to be entrepreneurial, to be hardworking, to have the joy of personal altruism; to be personally responsible for ourselves and our loved ones?
My reading of the totalitarian state, of the communist state, of ultra-socialism, is that their people are far from happy, and all down through history such regimes have never lasted, so why would global totalitarianism work any better today?
Ever since Thomas Malthus (1766-1834, English cleric, scholar and economist) founded demography with his catastrophic predictions of the global population’s growth far outstripping food supply, many have wrestled with how to counter exponential population growth. China’s one-child policy for example; Planned Parenthood with the pill another.
The WEF has calculated that wealth is inversely proportional to population growth and is unashamedly intent on limiting reproduction rates, as that means there will be more resources to go around for the smaller population. Bill Gates has been quite open about this for many years.
There have been many rabbit warren scenarios describing the linkage between C-19 injections and population control. I am not advocating for any of them per se; I do not have the expertise to deny them either.
But what I do believe is that there is a case to be brought against Anthony Fauci and Bill Gates for their initiation of innumerable ‘vaccine trials’ that should never have gone ahead, as they resulted in sterility, infertility, death of children and premature death of childbearing-aged women, well before C-19 came on the scene.
Now with the C-19 injection roll-out, there have been an extraordinary number of deaths of young athletic males and higher than ever recorded miscarriage rates in pregnant females. Further, we do not know the long-term impact on fertility rates or other adverse effects of the C-19 injections.
The WEF’s other agendas
The reach of the WEF is mind-boggling! For me, their audacity to believe they have the authority to choreograph the globe’s finance, social structures and population dynamics is extraordinary. Perhaps what is even more remarkable is that western democracies have bought into this without question. Perhaps one explanation is as Klaus Schwab boasted recently: the WEF has already ‘penetrated’ western nations’ governments’ cabinets with ‘up-and-coming WEF new leaders’!
In this next section, I will seek to paint the WEF’s Green Agenda, starting with the Worldwide Fund for Nature (WWF) and how they play in harmony with the Great Reset, and how they will become an increasingly dominant agenda as the C-19 headlines begin to fade into the background.
Worldwide Fund for Nature (WWF)
The Worldwide Fund for Nature is an international non-governmental organisation founded in 1961, in Morges, Switzerland (the same town where the WEF was to be founded a decade later). The fund works in the fields of wilderness preservation and the reduction of human impact on the environment and has a most cute-looking black and white panda for its logo.
I am all for wilderness preservation and the reduction of human impact on the environment; you can see me collecting plastic rubbish in my local community for recycling, for example. But the WWF does much more than seek to protect endangered species and prosecute illegal ivory hunters. For example, the WWF has pledged to create a climate-resilient and zero-carbon world, powered by renewable energy. Yes, the WWF is the foundation stone for the WEF’s Green Agenda.
The Green Agenda
In June 2020, Klaus Schwab said the next agenda (following C-19) for the WEF was ‘the call to build a greener, smarter, fairer world as we seek a way out of the COVID-19 pandemic’. Clearly, he is attaching their Green Agenda to the Great Reset at the heart of the WEF.
I used to teach green agenda themes as a Geography teacher in schools, such as the dangers of land degradation due to salination (groundwater salt coming to the surface through greedy farmers trying to get too much from the land) and desertification (the spread of deserts due to over-cultivation or overgrazing by domesticated animals). So, I am not against green principles — far from it.
But my huge concern here is that it is an unelected global organisation engineering this, rather than local communities taking responsibility for their own futures and being good global stewards as well, by applying sustainable practices that ensure both local and global future viability.
I believe that good education and good national leadership in touch with their people can make this work in a realistic fashion, in a democratic way. We don’t need global multinationals and their ambassadors to dictate our local agenda.
Again Klaus Schwab, commenting on the impact of C-19 in 2020, said, ‘Climate change could be the next global disaster, with even more dramatic consequences.’ I am not entering into a discussion as to whether or not the world’s climates are being negatively impacted by anthropogenic factors. Rather, I am drawing our attention to how core this belief is to the heart of the WEF.
Note that Schwab is predicting climate change to be ‘another global disaster’, not a ‘victory’ or a ‘solution’. It seems to me that, as with C-19, the WEF is planning for climate change to be the next ‘weapon of fear’ to seek to manipulate the people into submitting to their global plans.
Let me put it to you: if anthropomorphic climate change is a reality, surely every clear-thinking community would have been on to this decades ago. Why should it need a non-elected think tank from Switzerland to dictate to the world their remedy? That would make them super smart! Notice how the features of this next ‘disaster’ are all levers in the Great Reset.
Cut Mass Transit
One of the most disruptive impacts of the C-19 countermeasures was the closure of borders, both state and national. Cruise ships at anchor and aeroplanes in storage in the Australian desert. The WEF was rejoicing at the remarkable cut in emissions that their shutting down of economies had achieved in such record time.
Pre C-19, mass international tourism, international business travel, mass migration of peoples from one nation to another were the order of the day. This was the icing on the cake of globalism! But post C-19, the WEF doesn’t want us to return to normal.
From my perspective, the ‘working from home’ scenario will make a huge dent in mass transit, locally and internationally; already, nation after nation are now struggling with labour shortages as the mass migration of people has been stopped (except on the Mexico/US border and across the English Channel into the United Kingdom).
Human surveillance and the removal of privacy for the greater good
We had to show our passes to buy a meal, go to the movies and enter certain buildings. All this was to track a ‘pandemic’ that killed no more than the background death toll, unless you add in the effects of doctors being banned from upholding their Hippocratic Oath and the adverse effects of the C-19 injections.
The only rationale I can see for the human surveillance and the stripping away of our privacy has been to drip-feed fear into the people; while the people are terrified, they are compliant. I can see an argument that a community might agree to forgo some privileges for the greater good, if they can really see a tangible effect and then it would be for a limited time only.
Here in Australia, the rules, prior to C-19, gave the government the right to declare a state of emergency during which they could suspend the normal democratic processes. This could be for an actual invasion or a catastrophic natural disaster, but these emergency powers could not be in place for more than two weeks. Our governments have voted themself a free pass for two years, and some states are trying to get that extended!
Consider what is in the C-19 injections. There are ongoing legal battles to have full transparency regarding what the people are being coerced to have injected into their bodies. What’s in them has been the subject of countless investigations from around the world.
Now, in a sense I can understand, these injections were brought to market at record speeds, so perhaps we can concede that the data sheets did not keep up with the shipments. However, there are two aspects of the constituents that concern me: the apparent potential for actual human surveillance in these vials — Big Pharma has not denied this; and evidence that the body’s natural immune system is compromised, creating the need for repeated injections, boosters. These are two key reasons why I will never take a shot.
The desire for renewable energy goes back thousands of years. For example, I grew up marvelling at the wonders of the Snowy Hydro Scheme. The way that water can be pumped back up the mountain at night when we slept, to be released again when we needed it in the day; it was perfect, even more or less drought-proof!
Today it’s no longer government policy driving this push for a fully renewable energy supply system. Now, nearly every energy-producing and consuming corporation I see advertising is championing ‘net-zero’; together they are creating a mindset that says, that if we are not thinking ‘renewable’, we are irresponsible or even a danger to society.
Who is talking about the extinction of rare birds caught in wind turbines — the WWF? Who is talking about the huge costs in energy and raw materials to build the wind turbines, and what do we do when the wind doesn’t blow?
Who is talking about the costs of recycling solar panels, nearly all made in China at a huge energy cost? Who is standing up for the children in Africa exploited and killed to extract the lithium for our batteries, sometimes called ‘blood batteries’?
I think there should be much more open discussion and debate about options. As it is, we seem to get fixated on one side of the story, that at a stroke removes any platform for discussion and debate. When that is stripped away, the principles of the scientific method are set aside, critical thinking is seen as conspiracy theory, and before you know it, democracy is dead.
What’s next? The culture as we know it
Culture can be described as “an umbrella term which encompasses the social behaviour, institutions, and norms found in human societies, as well as the knowledge, beliefs, arts, laws, customs, capabilities, and habits of the individuals in these groups.” (Wikipedia)
For the purposes of this essay, I am thinking of the culture as the stage, the backdrop, the platform on which the World Economic Forum (WEF) is producing its epic production before us, the audience, but all of us are also the actors in the play! We have painted the set and brought out the props at the direction of the WEF.
Mass Formation Psychosis
The play opens with the mass formation psychosis of the audience and the actors. Years before C-19, governments around the world were engaging social science originations to alter the way their populations thought about a range of issues. They were called ‘nudge unites’.
These unites did their own research on their effectiveness, and one key recommendation they reported back to governments was to say that applying lessons from science to policy without rigorous testing is not desirable — nor is it easy to get away with. They knew they were in the wrong: they were manipulating society for the governments’ ends, but at the same time they also warned governments that they might get found out — and they have!
Now, what do we think about that? These nudge unites have replicated like frogspawn in the last two years, and I would argue that the vast majority of the western world has been put under a type of hypnosis. They are now conditioned to hear one message and one message only. Anything that does not accord with the message, subconsciously, they can’t process at all, or some will come right out and declare it to be misinformation or disinformation.
Where did this language come from? No one ever used this language as I was growing up, and I certainly can’t recall hearing it prior to C-19. There is information or there isn’t. It’s factual or it’s not. It seems to me that one of the byproducts of mass formation psychosis is that we have conflated the opinions about the facts with the facts. People can no longer differentiate commentary from content.
After all, science is all about proffering ‘alternative explanations’. The fun is in the testing and analysis to see if the new ideas are plausible. No healthy, intelligent culture can ever claim to have the sum of all truth, but, apparently, under mass formation psychosis, some think they can!
Now I think it’s probably appropriate to consider governments, as they, through taxpayers, have bankrolled the nudge unites to support their agendas, which in turn have channelled the WEF agendas.
One of the first things I noticed early in the C-19 episode was the unified language and timing coming from western governments across the globe. It was as if they all had the same run sheet with the same bottom line: big government. They said this is an ‘international emergency and we are the single source of truth, so follow our directives and we will all come through this together.’
Early on, I started to write to my federal member, and I have persisted for two years now, asking for a meeting or at least a phone call discussion. My representative in parliament has not once agreed to meet with me or talk with me. This tells me that government has become too big; their overreach, I would argue, is nothing short of tyrannical dictatorship.
In addition to failing to talk to a constituent, they have controlled what drugs and drug protocols doctors are allowed to prescribe when dealing with the sick; they have controlled doctors’ social media posts when they dared to criticise the government narrative; caused thousands to lose their jobs, particularly in medicine, teaching and the aviation industries; broken and divided families, restricted free citizens’ freedom of movement and freedom of expression; and printed trillions of dollars with no plans to repay. Some of the most lasting memories I will carry all my life are seeing the criminality of some of the police actions against peaceful demonstrations, simply asking to be heard and asking for their jobs back.
I did not vote for a single one of their C-19 measures. At a stroke, big government stripped away from me my personal responsibility to look after myself and those in my community; above all, they stripped away democracy, the hallmark of our culture for thousands of years.
I am not laying the blame on big government per se; they too have been the actors in their own play, I believe that the majority of big government are under mass formation psychosis just like their audience, so my line would be, ‘forgive them, for they know not what know what they do’ (Luke 23:34), but from here on, let’s ensure we hold them accountable.
I grew up with the belief that a political party’s true culture was set in stone. You could vote for a party with the confidence that you knew what you would get if they were elected. Sadly, those days of certainty are over. Now it seems self-evident that governments simply respond to their polling data, rather than their policy positions.
So, with governments’ triggering the nudge unites to spread the single narrative energised by fear, it is not surprising that the polls quickly began to show that the people approved of the governments’ measures to counter the C-19 ‘situation’ (notice I am not calling it a pandemic, as that’s an emotive term and I believe the data does not support it).
I would argue that the C-19 situation has been arbitrarily extended simply because of the ‘success’ of the nudge unites, which in turn fed right into the polls, that in turn drove the governments’ action. A circular argument, a self-fulfilling prophecy.
To break the cycle here in Australia, I believe the people need to rise up and send a resounding message to federal and state parliaments that they don’t want a repeat of the last two years under any circumstances. This is an extremely big ask if mass formation psychosis has really taken hold, as I think it has. My writing this essay is my attempt to wake someone up from their hypnosis, and I pray they will, in turn, wake up others.
Terrain or Germ Theory
I think that my understanding of this aspect of medical science is second only to my grasp of the WEF’s agendas in terms of importance! This is pivotal in my understanding of the big picture. Halfway through 2020, thanks to Dr Samantha Bailey, a medical doctor from New Zealand, I understood the difference between terrain and germ theory. Simplified, it goes like this:
Terrain theory is the older concept; literally, it refers to the ‘terrain’ we live on, the landscape, the environment, the atmosphere we breathe. If our environment is healthy, we have a healthy balanced diet, clean water, and an atmosphere free from mould spores and rich in vitamin D, our immune system will fend off most ailments and we should be able to live a healthy long life.
Germ theory, on the other hand, believes that the environment is innately full of germs and that specific germs cause specific diseases,, and specific viruses transmit specific pandemics, such as C-19.
Well, most medicine around the world for thousands of years was practised on the principle of terrain theory. Medications were derived from the natural world, plants and animals; believe it or not, some were made from snake venom.
Then in the twentieth century, pharmaceutical companies discovered that they could make synthetic drugs in vast quantities, extremely cheaply from petrochemicals. So, in order to maintain their market for drugs as people’s environments and diets improved dramatically, medicine changed its paradigm from terrain theory to germ theory.
Now, in western nations, nearly all medical professionals are trained under germ theory and know very little of terrain theory. They are now trained to look for one drug, hopefully a new, expensive one, to counteract every germ or virus they find, and the more the merrier.
We now have generations growing up obsessed with cleanliness and who never acknowledge that our bodies are the happy home for millions and millions of germs, and that a healthy gut is home to over 100 trillion bacteria.
I believe the prevalence of germ theory over terrain theory has enabled the fear of C-19 to grip the world so effectively and to drive millions to get the untried, untested C-19 injection as their only insurance against what they perceive to be a surefire killer disease. I would go further to say that yes, the world has lived through a ‘pandemic’ these last two years, the ‘pandemic of the fear of C-19’.
Many excuse the profit margin of Big Pharma over the last two years as a necessary investment to defeat this deadly enemy. But let’s look at it another way. Of all the various sectors of the world’s economies, Big Pharma and Big Tech would be the standout sectors to have made massive profits while all the others have made tragic losses.
Big Pharma got all western democracies to underwrite liability for their ‘vaccines’ (not the first-time mind you). Then they contracted each government to purchase millions of doses, paid for by taxpayers, without their agreement at the polling booth. Then it became the various governments’ responsibility to ‘market’ these ‘vaccines’ before their use-by date. So Big Pharma did not even have to spend a dollar on advertising!
It is my contention that this whole scenario started decades ago when Dr Anthony Fauci started his career in ‘public health’ which has become such a monolith, a gigantic organisation that sits between governments and Big Pharma. They collect their lifeblood of grants from governments to develop a constant stream of new synthetic therapeutics, made from petroleum to combat every new germ they can find. Then they get the governments to buy their products to inject whole populations, because, they say, if they don’t ‘immunise’ everyone, the germ may escape and wipe out humanity. It is a remarkable ruse.
I ask you, why does government need to control health? They are merely the elected representatives of the people; they have no more expertise than those they purport to represent. Surely the best place for health management of a population is in the doctor’s surgery, the private consultation between doctor and patient.
The doctor is the expert, and they know the needs of their patient. Then, if the doctor advises a particular treatment, the patient has the choice of accepting it or going off for a second opinion. For me, governments’ conflicts of interest with Big Pharma disqualify them from any involvement in managing public health.
I hear you say: well, when there is a global or national disaster, governments must have a responsibility to their people to support them and manage situations as best they can, and that might mean global or national health measures.
Yes, I tentatively agree, for a genuine pandemic. However, the World Health Organization (WHO) changed its definition of ‘pandemic’ so that it could declare the C-19 situation a ‘pandemic’. Also, I think we should consider the WEF and Big Pharma’s agendas, and particularly consider the numbers of deaths attributed to C-19 (directly ‘from’ the disease, as opposed to ‘with’ the disease) and compare these with the natural death rates to determine ‘excess’ mortality.
My read of the statistics (we must be extremely sceptical about whose data we use) is that C-19 has not been a pandemic and therefore there can be no justification for governments’ partnership with Big Pharma.
Old media, or legacy media, are the mass media institutions that predominated prior to the Information Age; particularly print media, film studios, music studios, advertising agencies, radio broadcasting, and television. (Wikipedia)
When I was a boy, I had the highest respect for the media, newsprint, television, and radio. I never had to wonder, was their coverage fair and balanced? Today, in particular through the C-19 saga, I have come to disrespect them almost completely.
My main concerns are: firstly, they have ceased to ask the hard questions, they have stopped challenging and simply parrot a single narrative, which is almost exclusively the governments’ narrative. This is simply propaganda and most in democratic nations would never suspect that their major media outlets were actually transmitting propaganda under the payroll of their governments, but they are.
Secondly, my concern is that there is no longer a clear distinction between valid opinion (everyone is entitled to their own perspective) and solid concrete facts. They are both presented together, so that opinion becomes fact in the minds of the hearer, the consumer, especially when repeated time and time again (one of the strategies of mass formation psychosis). Related to this concern is the selection of the opinion and ‘facts’ to be presented. It is such an effective strategy to saturate the news with stories that ‘support’ the official narrative and leave, unreported, anything that might contradict the story.
So, what do we do? I have noted that this year, legacy media ratings have been plummeting in many nations. Isn’t that interesting? Does it signify that populations are waking up to the propaganda they are being fed? I hope so. But when people only hear one song, it’s extremely hard for them to believe there could ever be another one.
Also consider the cancel culture rampant in western ‘democracies’, along with the increasing number of censorship issues, where for example, people can’t question the effectiveness of the ‘vaccines’ on their YouTube channels. Surely the time has come for a new narrative, a transparent story that can peacefully accommodate difference and debate, while leaving the audience to make their minds up themselves.
Medical mandates and discrimination
Here in Australia, our prime minister assured us in the middle of last year that there would be no medical mandates. However, what transpired, I can only describe as surreal. The states started issuing their own mandates, and federal parliament did nothing to stop them.
Further, individual businesses and corporations started setting their own mandates, often more draconian than the states’ mandates. Then when some of the states lifted some of their restrictions, some businesses and corporations kept theirs!
My view on all this is that federal parliament struck up the first few lines of the song, only to be echoed with a loud crescendo by the states, all the while stoking the fires of fear in the people. So, in recognition of people’s fears, perhaps responding to opinion polls, businesses and corporations started doing the ‘honourable thing, keeping their people safe’, when all along it was simply an element of mass formation psychosis responding to the propaganda repeatedly pumped out by the legacy media.
The medical mandates resulted in thousands losing their jobs as they refused to take the C-19 injection. Whole sectors of the economy are now devasted by staff shortages, but the legacy media don’t make the connection as I have. Often these shortages are on top of preexisting shortages, for example in teaching, and the problem is compounded by the lack of foreign students and new immigrants who used to fill so many roles
My chief concern has been the acceptance of medical discrimination as fair and reasonable by a culture that has fought for decades to stand up for minorities and the less fortunate. Why is it now acceptable to discriminate on the grounds of medical history, while it’s not acceptable to discriminate against race or gender?
I go further. The proponents of medical discrimination say it’s for the greater good. That’s an interesting shift. Where has the doctrine of human rights and bodily autonomy gone now? Where has the parental responsibility to their children gone now that governments can coerce minors to take medical procedures?
This flies in the face of my belief in the sacredness and immeasurable value of every individual. I can never condone medical mandates. As I said earlier, I believe that medical details and any treatment are a personal private matter, only for the consultation room with doctor and patient.
Adverse reactions and premature deaths
The C-19 injections are a novel ‘immunisation’ that has never undergone the normal trial periods and testing previously required for such interventions in healthy individuals. Every medication I have seen in the past and even today, comes with a huge list of potential side effects, and instructions to cease taking immediately if any of these reactions occur and to see your medical practitioner.
Not so with the C-19 injection. There was no list of potential side effects, and what’s more, there was no way that the patient could read what the active ingredients were. This is extraordinarily unprecedented.
In May and June of 2021 when the C-19 injections were first being rolled out, the legacy media had wall-to-wall coverage of adverse effects from all over the country. There was hardly a broadcast without one! Then, as if a switch was flicked, they stopped reporting them and instead extolled the injections virtues and paraded the take-up rates as if they were AFL match scores.
My perception today is that the numbers of adverse events have been dramatically under-reported to the medical authorities; doctors are extremely reluctant to attribute any event to the C-19 injection and compensation is extremely hard to extract, as the medical profession has not been allowed to separate the government narrative from the facts.
My main areas of concern are neurological damage, particularly in young men, an inordinate number of miscarriages and premature deaths due to heart attacks. Surely these are sufficient grounds to question the C-19 injections? Apparently not — the government ads still play urging us to collect our booster shots. This does not add up; it only supports my contention that the WEF’s agenda is the driving force.
The better way: The culture we can know now
Paul then stood up in the meeting of the Areopagus and said:
“People of Athens! I see that in every way you are very religious.
For as I walked around and looked carefully at your objects of worship,
I even found an altar with this inscription: to an unknown god.
So you are ignorant of the very thing you worship —
and this is what I am going to proclaim to you.”
(Acts 17:22, 23, New International Version)
Paul in Athens. What a great picture. He perceives that the Greeks are ‘very religious’. It’s my perception that today, most people are ‘very religious’ — they have centred their faith in big government, and by implication in the WEF and in the legacy media to keep them ‘informed’ of new developments, as the backstories of these three entities add up to another religion, a religion without God.
How am I defining a religion? A set of beliefs that dictate actions, energised by a faith that it works. It is my contention that the majority of the western world’s populations, that have succumbed to mass formation psychosis, have subconsciously signed up to a type of religion; let’s call it the WEF’s agenda for short.
There are so many great visions within the WEF’s agenda and it’s so uplifting to be part of a movement that receives such rounded applause on nearly every stage. But what if the heart of it all is rotten to the core, and the end is not going to turn out well for the world’s peoples?
You may have noticed, as we have travelled along this journey together, I have not referenced the world’s population much. More often than not, it’s the western world’s democratic nations that seem to be the primary target for the WEF’s agenda.
China and Asia tend to be more of a law unto themselves and have not let the WEF into their lives to any large extent. The same goes for Africa, which often could not afford Big Pharma’s price tag anyway. I am also aware of a number of African nations standing up to the WEF over the decades. Naturally, this did not get much airtime from the legacy media, but their rejection of Big Pharma has been spectacular nonetheless. I know of no western democracies that have rejected the narrative from national government leadership down, like they have.
Where do we centre, or focus, our faith? I say, as a Christian, in God who was before time, created all things, is outside of time, the infinite and the one who calls each one of us into His plan and purpose.
God is completely left outside of the WEF agenda — there is no acknowledgement or recognition of the creator or the created. For them, we are simply data, a resource and a consumer. The WEF’s agenda is most definitely predictable and is dependent on everyone’s submissive compliance for success. If we were in a dark tunnel or if we were blind, we might, for a season, trust another to guide us out into the light, but I am sure God does not want that for our permanent way of life.
I don’t believe we should ever lead a divided life. By that I mean, the spiritual, eternal life on the one hand and the natural, finite on the other, as if the latter is the vehicle for the former. No, for me, as a Christian, it is one life now, it’s spiritual and natural and it’s eternal; at present I am on the earth, but this is not my eternal home. So, if my life is not divided, everything in my life is both spiritual and natural at the same time. I find the WEF agenda is incompatible with God’s agenda and would demand I lead a divided life if I were to try to accommodate both. I find them irreconcilable.
God has given us a sound mind, the power of discernment between right and wrong, between the right way to live and the wrong way, the best way to serve others and the way of selfishness, and between large and small-mindedness.
I believe God wants us all to approach life with Him at the centre and Him as our focus as we individually seek to walk in His calling for our lives. His perfect love casts out fear, and He is light so we can walk in full transparency, testing the validity of all the voices we encounter along the way. We don’t need the government narrative, translated into propaganda, to direct our steps; we simply need to follow God wherever He leads us.
Romans 13:1-7 — Submit to Governments or to God
These verses from Paul are extremely complex and they have often been referenced by Christians these last two years in the context of the C-19 story. Some Christians have vehemently championed this passage saying that there is no debate, all authority is God-given and Christians must obey that authority even if it brings pain.
On the other hand, some Christians acknowledge that this scripture does say that we should submit to authority, but only if that authority aligns with God’s will (Acts 5:29). What they are claiming there is a hierarchy, and God always trumps man.
An oft-quoted narrative in this context is the dilemma faced by the German theologian Dietrich Bonhoeffer at the end of World War II. He saw what Hitler and his regime were doing to millions of Jews and he had the opportunity to join a plot to assassinate Hitler. What would you have done? Well, he did join the conspiracy, but it failed, and he was executed for his part in it.
Returning to the subject of this essay, the big picture, what does Romans 13:1-7 say about it? My approach has been to seek the ‘peace of God’ at every step, over every chapter and with every mandate. I will give three examples of how I have used this principle.
- When I saw that the legacy media were not giving a balanced coverage of the facts, coupled with the rise of press and public censorship, I turned away from ‘following’ their stories as best I could. I would leave the room when the news came on or I would mute the sound if I had the remote! I was not submitting to their authority.
- When I saw that the statistics for C-19 deaths were being conflated by including any who died ‘with’ covid as well as those who died ‘of’ covid, I took a long hard look at all the statistics. I was not believing everything that was being said.
- When I understood mass formation psychosis, I went to prayer as to how I might save the one from their hypnosis; fully aware that for some, to wake them from their trance would be highly traumatic and most likely result in the release of a good deal of anger and resentment to start with at least.
Perhaps the hardest application of Romans for me has been to acknowledge that I will never submit to a C-19 injection even if it means I am taken away and locked up. If the ‘vaccine mandates’ never lift, I am resigned to never see my family in England again and I will never be able to travel again, one of my greatest joys on earth.
The currency of fear or the riches of faith
I don’t fear death; I don’t recall ever fearing death since I became a Christian in August 1972. The use of the ‘case numbers’, the ‘hospitalisation statistics’ and the ‘deaths’ were all, in my mind, used to create and maintain the fear of C-19. In 2021, this fear was also used to drive the C-19 injection rates.
It never captivated me, in fact, it angered me that governments would stoop so low as to seek to manipulate their people. I have not walked across to the other side of the pavement out of fear, but occasionally I have, out of respect for others’ fear of me! I am heartbroken by those who are still captivated by fear; for example, those walking outside with a mask on, is classic evidence of their fear.
For me, I encourage myself to let perfect love cast out all fear (1 John 4:18). That does not mean I should be irresponsible with myself and loved ones, but I do believe I can focus on ‘looking after myself and others’. Aiming for and maintaining the highest level of fitness I can, eating a balanced diet in moderation, having a good intake of vitamins C and D and plenty of healthy stress-free recreation.
I will never forget the scenes on Bondi Beach, Sydney, in autumn 2020, when the police would swoop on crowds on the beach and swimmers in the sea! The beach goers were doing the best thing to counter the new threat by getting out and exercising in the sun and the sea, yet the authorities condemned their actions and the legacy media, backing the authorities, ridiculed those with common sense!
My experience of the C-19 story became much easier when I realised it was a man-made pandemic of fear and that it was created to facilitate the WEF’s agenda. I was determined not to be a part of it but rather to be part of the opposition, fighting against it. My faith kicked in that God was going to win in the end.
This year I started a channel on Telegram, called Jim’s Stand. It had struck me that we lead busy lives with pressures all around and often we can’t see the ground being taken away from under our feet until we no longer have solid ground to stand on. I have lived long enough to see the rate of change accelerate beyond my wildest imagination.
I see the C-19 story as a tidal wave seeking to demolish all the principles I seek to uphold and by which I direct my life. Yes, that’s dramatic language, but that’s what it is: it’s complete destruction, reset, so that ‘they’ can ‘build back better’ in their own eyes, a utopia that feeds their dreams but is dead set against the Christian faith and the church of Jesus Christ.
For most of my life, I have been apolitical. In 2014, I became an Australian citizen and had the honour of being inducted into the Australian culture by my own local federal member in a private ceremony. I guess I have followed politics quite closely since then, as I now ‘have’ to vote, but in the last two years, I have progressed from a tentative first gear to a very prayerful top speed in my political awareness!
I haven’t joined any political party and don’t intend to, but I am passionate about ensuring my vote is the way that the Lord wants me to vote, and I would encourage everyone to be serious about their politics, as its one way we can all make a stand for what is right. Our single vote, you may say, is a drop in the ocean, but I believe every drop counts in God’s economy. He does not need a majority to change things; He simply needs men and women of faith to make a stand.
One of the stand-out features of the various state and federal responses to the C-19 story has been the stripping away of our personal responsibility and its replacement with state responsibility. I have always taught my children, and my students, to take more and more responsibility as they grow in experience and maturity. I believe the mark of a truly mature man and woman is their personal responsibility.
Governments around the world have sidelined our intelligence and our capacity for critical thinking, and simply told us what we can and cannot do. They have rarely given any justification for their ‘rules’ other than to say it’s for the ‘greater good’ or we are ‘all in this together’. These platitudes do not respect the people.
A very small minority of western nations and the odd American state ‘kept business as usual’ over these last two years and urged their people to take personal responsibility. If you do the statistical analysis now and compare these nations and states with the rest that had their personal responsibility and their livelihoods stripped away, there is no empirical evidence that they did any worse; in fact quite often, they did better, and they have had fewer family breakdowns and crushed economies to rebuild.
I believe in small government. I believe that people were God-created, highly intelligent men and women. If you expect them to rise to the occasion and practice responsibility, by and large they will. But if you have to define and control every single aspect of individuals’ lives, they actually grow less responsible and more and more dependent on more and more rules and regulations as they can’t think for themselves. Big government is so inefficient, so expensive, and so prone to being taken over by tyrannical dictatorships where even the people’s thought-life is censored.
I believe we should all take personal responsibility and resist at all costs the intrusions of the state into our lives.
What is the real C-19 story?
We have all experienced the outworking of the C-19 story over the last two years; however, I believe it started much earlier than that. We can all tell our own story of these events; mine is a reflection based on prayer, study and time. I don’t expect my story to be the complete big picture; I am sure some parts of the picture will benefit from more light being shed on those hidden features; but I hope it will cast out some fears and bring some joy and hope to others.
The WEF has been planning this for ages — they have had many simulated pandemics, but the C-19 story was a meticulous planned real-life drama, designed to create compliance from the people by the creation of fear.
Influenza has always claimed tens of thousands of lives every year. Every year, a number of new strains emerge. So, the WEF decided to call out SARS-CoV-2 and named it Covid-19, which originated in Wuhan, China, in late 2019.
The key to the creation of the ‘pandemic’ was the employment of the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test. It was invented in 1983 by the American biochemist Kary Mullis, but it was never intended to be the diagnostic tool for an infection. However, that’s what the majority of nations have used to ‘track’ the spread of the so-called C-19 in populations.
There are two problems with the use of the PCR. Firstly, a C-19 virus has never been isolated, so what the PCR tests detect is simply the presence of a ‘minute fragment’ of genetic material that could have come from anywhere, and most significantly could indicate the subject had had a virus in the past but was now no longer sick.
Secondly, it was simply used on a daily basis to report ‘the number of positive cases’. That number was in fact a much better indication of the level of fear in a population than the spread of the disease. The more fearful a community, the more would go and get tested and the higher would be the number of cases. This, in turn, fed the fear factor and more came forward for testing, and so the ‘pandemic of fear’ was born, a brilliant strategy.
At this point, you may say that in some countries, some cities, there was certainly an ‘excess mortality’ in evidence. Yes, I would agree, but first, remember the way that the statistics have been gathered and used. During the C-19 story, doctors were forced to record as a ‘Covid death’ anyone who died of anything in the last two years if they also had a positive PCR test. This ‘deception’ is coming out now, but the spread of ingenuous statistics has already had its desired effect, namely, to build the fear factor.
The other thing to note is that the medical profession has been ‘forbidden’ to use various tried and tested cheap medications that had already come off patent; as the ‘authorities’ needed to be able to say there was nothing to fight this ‘killer’. So, governments said, here you are, have this money (from taxpayers) to develop a vaccine as quickly as you can. Meanwhile, thousands were untreated and sadly died.
Further, notably in the USA, the medical profession was ‘instructed’ to use Remdesivir, an intravenous drug with a huge literature of adverse effects already. It is believed that the excess deaths in the USA can be attributed to the lack of use of the proven drugs and the criminal use of Remdesivir.
So the C-19 story was the outworking of a plan by the WEF to catapult their various agendas on a world stage that would never naturally agree to such central control, such global governance and such tyranny. The plan simply used naturally occurring influenza that always used to spread quite rapidly around the world, particularly in aeroplanes with the mass movement of people.
What of the ‘vaccines’ then? Haven’t they worked? My short retort is no. A report came out this week that AstraZeneca had a 1% effect of reducing the impact of C-19, while Pfizer had a zero effect. After two years the severity of any influenza wans with time and the population do build up immunity, so to claim the ‘vaccines’ have worked is disingenuous — such a claim can only be used to stimulate more fear and drive further uptake of boosters.
The longer-term impact of the C-19 injections on the world’s population will be to confirm their addiction to germ theory and the belief that the only way forward for a safe long life is to have more and more injections as more and more ‘viruses’ and their variants are discovered. For me, the simple message has been ‘get fit, exercise well, eat well and enjoy the sunshine’.
Perhaps the most criminal aspect of the ‘vaccines’ is the underreporting of ‘adverse effects’ including death. In the past, a fraction of the adverse effects would have halted the rollout of an injection, but for this one, no one seems in the slightest concerned, certainly the media and the politicians aren’t concerned.
Another aspect of the C-19 injections is that the marketing/coercion has now reached children, the group least likely to be affected badly by influenza. And perhaps the worst aspect of this is that in some parts of the world, parents’ responsibility is being sidelined, as children are now allowed to take the jab without their parents’ approval.
Where should we go from here? I would encourage us all to let perfect love cast out all fear (1 John 4:18). C-19 was a variety of influenza that you and your medical practitioner know how to manage. Don’t take any C-19 injections, they are useless (at best), and don’t take any more if you have already one or two.
Look to God for your calling, His plan and purpose in your life and run after it with all your heart. Be alert to and prepared for the strategies of the enemy and his scheming agendas, and don’t let him take another inch of your inheritance.
Anyone who now advocates for a ‘new normal’ needs to examine the basis for such a claim. I believe it is entirely baseless.
Photo by Yan Krukov.
Thank the Source