1𝟲𝟲𝟲 The Year the Bankers Set Fire to London!
The Great London Fire was the clandestine operation of the City of London’s banking and business cabal, its purpose being 1) to divert public attention from the cabal’s legislative schemes and 2) to accelerate the national debt ...
... and ultimately achieve a “great reset” of the financial system. The connection is almost too obvious to avoid, yet virtually every historian avoids it, since they are paid to. I’m not going to convince you by painstakingly unfolding the details of the event.
My method will be much simpler and more convincing. All I need to do is show you the lasting financial and political impact of the fire and who were its beneficiaries, and it will become apparent that those same actors must have had a hand in its creation.
Nowadays all history must be read backwards in this way, starting with effects to get at the cause, since we know that historical events are dominated by a very small cadre of actors, mostly bankers and other rogues from ancient lines.
Speaking of 𝗕𝗮𝗻𝗸𝗲𝗿𝘀 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗢𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗿 𝗥𝗼𝗴𝘂𝗲𝘀, the first clue that sparked my interest in this topic came from a little book of that title by Alexander Del Mar.
Del Mar was the Director of the Bureau of Statistics and the Mining Commissioner to the US Monetary Commission of 1876. Del Mar doesn’t say anything about the London fire but he does point our attention to the significance of the year 1666 for the banking system. In his own words
Del Mar goes on to detail exactly how this was done:
In other words, by tucking the necessary language into separate pieces of legislation spread over many years, the British citizenry were kept in the dark about the full implications of these Parliamentary acts. Sound familiar? They use this same tactic to this very day.
The first two goals were accomplished by the 1663 Staple Act, while the third and final nail was hammered in by the 𝟭𝟲𝟲𝟲 𝗖𝗼𝗶𝗻𝗮𝗴𝗲 𝗔𝗰𝘁.
The stated goal of these laws, as Wikipedia puts it, was “𝘵𝘰 𝘧𝘢𝘤𝘪𝘭𝘪𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘰𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘦𝘢𝘴 𝘰𝘱𝘦𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘴 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘤𝘩𝘢𝘳𝘵𝘦𝘳 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘱𝘢𝘯𝘪𝘦𝘴.”
These laws essentially gave the East India Company completely unchecked freedom to import and export as much gold and silver as they wanted for their own proft, and even minting their own coins with the EIC logo rather than the royal English seal.
Put simply, the EIC became its own sovereign nation, which has since proliferated into the all-powerful corporatocracies that shape our modern world.
Indian Half Anna 1835. The insignia looks like an official government seal; but it isn’t. It’s the crest of the EIC, which was a private, for-profit company, just like the Federal Reserve insignia printed on every U.S. bill looks like, but is not, an official government seal.
The Federal Reserve is an unregulated consortium of private, for-profit banks. The whole modern central banking system can be traced back to the EIC and its close associates in the goldsmith’s guild, the peerage, and Parliament.
The motto of the EIC (shown in abbr. form on the coin) tells you as much: Auspicio Regis et Senatus Angliae. This is usually translated “by command of” or “under the authority of” the king and senate of England, but of course the literal translation is “under the auspices of”.
In case you don’t know, that means with the support and approval of. Legally, it does not have to mean you are doing it for them or that you even answer to them.
That means the entire country of India was not ruled by the British government but was in fact the property of a private corporation for over two centuries.
India is still owned by private interests, of course, unless you are naïve enough to believe its citizens actually gained “independence” in 19𝟰𝟳.
But the fact most pertinent to our topic is that 1666 marked the legislative replacement of sovereign money with private money in England, and only months before the Great London Fire.
To understand how these events connect, let’s jump ahead to 1683, when the City of London Corporation defaulted on its loans. This is the first major default in modern history that is well-documented. I refer you to the research of Nathan Sussman. graduateinstitute.ch/sites/internet…
This graph is worth a thousand words as it clearly shows the cause and effect of the 1666 fire and the 1683 default. In case you didn’t know the City of London Corporation was not (and to this day is not) a government body but a private for-profit corporation as its name suggests
It was to land what the EIC was to sea. The City of London is essentially a sovereign nation located geographically within – but totally independent of – the political entity known as the Kingdom of Great Britain.
As Sussman notes, it “enjoyed privileges and rights, especially 𝗹𝗮𝗰𝗸 𝗼𝗳 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝘁𝗿𝗼𝗹 𝗯𝘆 𝗣𝗮𝗿𝗹𝗶𝗮𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗹𝗮𝗰𝗸 𝗼𝗳 𝗮𝗰𝗰𝗼𝘂𝗻𝘁𝗮𝗯𝗶𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝘁𝗼 𝗮𝗻𝘆 𝗼𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗿 𝗶𝗻𝘀𝘁𝗶𝘁𝘂𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗶𝗻 𝗘𝗻𝗴𝗹𝗮𝗻𝗱.”
Inside the City of London are the corporate headquarters of the banks and their various financial operations centers.
So, the Great Fire was 𝗱𝗶𝗿𝗲𝗰𝘁𝗹𝘆 𝗿𝗲𝘀𝗽𝗼𝗻𝘀𝗶𝗯𝗹𝗲 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝟭𝟲𝟴𝟯 𝗱𝗲𝗳𝗮𝘂𝗹𝘁 of the City of London. So what? Well, the City of London’s financial issues led to the Parliament initiating a Quo Warranto trial against it beginning in 1681.
In other words, terminating its charter and thereby revoking its sovereignty. They accomplished this in June 1683. Sounds like a good thing, right? Except that revoking its sovereignty meant the Corporation was no longer a legal entity responsible for its debts.
When it defaulted a few months later, there were no repercussions for any of its shareholders. No one went to jail and no one paid a dime. Who was hurt in all of this? The taxpayer, of course.
Look at the graph again, and you’ll see the Corporation had been receiving government funding through the Orphan Fund, a.k.a. taxpayer money. And yes, the Orphan Fund was supposed to be going to orphans, not to rich capitalists and aristocrats.
What’s more:
𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗶𝗻𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗺𝗲𝗱 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝘄𝗲𝗮𝗹𝘁𝗵𝘆 𝗺𝗮𝗻𝗮𝗴𝗲𝗱 𝘁𝗼 𝗯𝗮𝗶𝗹 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗺𝘀𝗲𝗹𝘃𝗲𝘀 𝗼𝘂𝘁 𝗯𝗲𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗲 𝗱𝗲𝗳𝗮𝘂𝗹𝘁.
If you’re lost at this point, let me unwind it for you. Rebuilding London after the Great Fire caused an explosion in the City of London Corporation’s debts, forcing it to default 16 years later.
But through some legal maneuvering none of its shareholders were ever held responsible for this unpaid debt, much of which was borrowed directly from the Treasury and the Orphans Fund.
Of the remaining loans provided by private individuals, the average Joes were left holding the bag while the well-connected investors got all their money out in time. But it gets worse.
The default of the Corporation was only one of two major defaults precipitated by the Great Fire. The other was the default of the Crown itself in 1672, which triggered the Great Stop of the Exchequer.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_of_t…
The king at this time was Charles II, a descendent of the northern crypto-Jewish Jagiellonian dynasty that can be traced all through the royal lines of Europe.
It seems one of Charles’ primary tasks was to ratchet up the national debt as much as possible. He did this through the Third Anglo-Dutch War among other things. By ’72 the Crown was no longer able to service its debts and ceased repayments to the goldsmith-bankers.
Here we get the meat of it:
It’s possible some bankers at the bottom of the totem pole were burned, but on the whole it was a massive boon for the banking industry, since the creation of the Bank of England guaranteed the bankers would always be repaid.
How exactly that follows is left vague, but I can give you a clue. The Bank of England was the first institution legally allowed to issue loans without any assets to back them. They simply created loans out of thin air, which nevertheless had to be repaid with real money+interest
This is the central fraud of the modern banking system, which most people still don’t get, even though the Bank of England itself admits it.
bankofengland.co.uk/-/media/boe/fi…
This is how the bankers ensured they would always be repaid: when you only lend out Monopoly money, even the smallest repayment becomes gravy.
But that still leaves the question: who specifically was behind the fire? To give you a clue, the fire occurred during the longest-running Parliament in English history, known as the Cavalier Parliament. It lasted from 1661 to 1679, 𝟭𝟴 years of Charles II’s 25-year reign.
Indicating that the bankers had several high-priority agendas that needed rubber-stamping during this time.
Indeed, a quick read through its Wikipedia page en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cavalier_… shows the Cavalier Parliament’s 18 years were a time of pretty much constant crisis in England, followed by fascist legislation and sundry nefarious dealings.
Remember, this was the very beginning of the Restoration period, immediately following Cromwell’s Commonwealth. It’s clear the Commonwealth era was simply a setup for the Restoration, during which time some of the most fascist and pro-banking legislation got pushed through
This included the Corporation Act and Clarendon Code which gave massive power to the protestant church; the Quaker Act which curbed religious freedom; the Licensing of the Press Act which gave government power to censor the press; ....
.... laws promoting the English linen industry (who would want to do that? I’ll give you one guess…) and various mercantilist laws that gave special privileges to the EIC; the highly unpopular hearth tax, which required tax collectors to go inside people’s homes to count hearths
and the infamous Poor Laws which were laws against the poor, not for them.
It was under the Cavalier Parliament that England’s pauper population grew to unprecedented numbers, which just goes to show how unabashed these wig-headed aristocrats were about enriching themselves at the expense of everyone else.
It was the most blatantly corrupt government Britain had ever had up to that point. They even made up a fake story about tax money earmarked for the Second Anglo-Dutch War being embezzled by court officers as an excuse for why the war had gone so badly.
In reality, it was the wig-heads themselves who pocketed the money. Charles II launched an investigation into the embezzlement accusation which, surprise, surprise, turned out inconclusive.
The two-party Whig and Tory system can also be traced back to the Cavalier Parliament. A subgroup had formed a loose association known as the Cabal Ministry which was accused of being more or less a “deep state”. (There’s nothing new under the sun, is there?)
In response, a group of MPs formed the Country Party, bound together “by their suspicion of corruption in high places”. Controlled opposition, no doubt – I wouldn’t be surprised if their slogan was “drain the swamp” or “MEGA” (Make England Great Again).
Point being, the Cavalier Parliament had absolutely no scruples, making it far easier to entertain the thought that they could have deliberately orchestrated the Great London Fire.
They had already figured out that crisis = profit and had proven themselves competent administrators of this business model.
But let’s name some names. Remember that Del Mar averred that the aristocrats in Parliament were in league with both the goldsmith-bankers and the EIC to engineer the final substitution of private money for sovereign money in 1666. Was there someone with ties to all three?
There were several, but Sir Josiah Child makes an easy case study. In fact, Del Mar calls him the “arch intrigant” behind the 1666 Coinage Act.
He was an economist, mercantilist, politician, and Governor of the East India Company.
His father Richard was a “merchant of Fleet Street”. We get the usual lie about his coming from common stock and working his way “after much struggle” (those words come directly from his Wikipedia page) to become an “agent to the Navy Treasury”.
What that job entitled is anyone’s guess. He “amassed a comfortable fortune”, though we aren’t told how, and became a “considerable” stockholder in the EIC. This was all in his 20s, mind you. By age 28 or 29 he was elected to Parliament.
He was later re-elected to Parliament in 1673, during the Cavalier Parliament. Del Mar even tells us that Child wielded his influence to keep his buddies in Parliament, which pretty much tells us that he was the unspoken leader of the Cavalier Parliament.
But did he have banking ties? They try to hide them but the link is his father’s connection to Fleet Street. That was one of the main arteries of the City of London, and two of the highest profile banks had their headquarters on this street, including Hoare & Co. and…Child & Co.
Child & Co. is the third oldest bank in the world today and the oldest bank in the UK, predating the Bank of England. It is believed that the bank became the model for Charles Dickens' fictitious Tellson's Bank in A Tale of Two Cities.
It has one of the most exclusive client bases of any bank in the world, including the Big Four professional services firms of Deloitte, Ernst & Young, KPMG, and PricewaterhouseCoopers. It was started by Sir Francis Child.
Like Josiah, Francis’ family origins are also obscured, and we only learn that his father Robert was a clothier – indicating Jewish roots, of course. Francis went into the goldsmithing business, being admitted into the Goldsmiths’ Company in 1664.
He took over the business of the Wheeler family (Jewish), located on Fleet Street. Wikipedia tells us that “Francis was the first banker who gave up the goldsmith’s business, and he is called…‘the father of the profession.’” Father of the banking profession – oh-ho!
One of his wealthiest clients was Barbara Villiers. Remember, Del Mar outed Barbara as one of the central figures in the unholy alliance that orchestrated the 1666 Coinage Act.
Going back to Josiah, Wikipedia tacitly admits that he was related to Francis and the Child & Co. banking family:
And yes, the Childs later intermarried with the Villiers. See George Child-Villiers, 5th Earl of the Island of Jersey.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Ch…
Neither of George’s parents were Childs – he took the name from his wife, Lady Sarah Sophia Fane. And as you can see, it wasn’t even her maiden name, it was her mother’s maiden name.
This indicates that the Childs were so prominent that George considered it of at least equal rank with the Villiers name, which is saying a lot since the Villiers were Earls going back many generations.
He could have taken his wife’s maiden name, since the Fanes were also Earls, related to Neville, Earls of Westmorland, Manner, Earls of Rutland, Percy, Audley, Stafford, FitzAlan, d’Aubigny, and further back to von Sachsen and Pepin III, father of Charlemagne.
In fact, you can trace the Fanes through Pepin III all the way back to the Emesene Dynasty, a Roman “client dynasty” beginning in 46 BC.
The Emesene “priest-kings” were supposedly of Arab origin, though some historians say they were actually Semitic Arameans, which is another way of saying Hebrew/Phoenician. Coins surviving from the Emesene Dynasty depict an eagle perched on a black stone.
Would that be like Blackstone, as in the investment group? We are probably not dealing with an eagle, since eagles are not native to the Middle East. Rather, it was a Phoenix, because the Emesenes were Phoenician.
Their black stone was an actual stone believed to be a meteorite that served as the betyl (cult stone) of their god, Elagabalus. We’re told Elagabalus (El-Gabal) is Arabic for “God of the mountain”, but there are no large mountains near Emesa (Homs, Syria, north of Lebanon).
I assume the deity’s name actually derives from the names of the two chief Babylonian/Phoenician gods, El and Baal. That would explain why the Romans later associated Elagabalus with the sun; the Phoenicians worshipped Baal as the sun god, as well as the storm/lightning god.
That the Emesene cult stone was a meteorite fits well with this idea (streak of light coming from the heavens), further proving the Emesenes were not Arabic but Phoenician. The fact that they were called priest-kings is another obvious tell.
Elsewhere the black stone/meteorite combination appeared to be very popular as well.
That was a rabbit trail but a very important one, because it provides at least one definite link from the British aristocracy back to the Roman aristocracy and further back to the Phoenicians.
But it still doesn’t tell us much about the Childs, except that their bloodlines were at least as “pure” as the Fanes, who we just traced back to the Phoenicians. So let’s do a little more digging on Josiah Child’s ancestry.
Here we can follow the Childe line all the way back to Alwin Childe circa 1066.
geni.com/people/Sir-Jos…
We pick up his story here, where we learn he was a direct descendent of Childeric I hence the name Child.
stagge-parker.blogspot.com/2013/02/childe…
Childeric I was a Merovingian king. Napoleon had sewn on his coronation robe 300 gold bees that were recovered from the tomb of Childeric I in 1653.
Also recovered from his tomb was a golden bull’s head, which gives us a clue to the origins of the Merovingians. The bull’s head was a common symbol for Baal and his earlier prototype, Marduk. In Hebrew the name is Merodach, which means “bull calf of the sun god [Utu]”.
Merodach was also the god of the sea. The name of the Merovingian dynasty’s founder was Merovech. Do you see? Merovech/Merodach. The Merovingians were just another branch of the Babylonians/Phoenicians.
This means the Childs were of at least equal rank with the Fanes as well as distant cousins, since Charlemagne was a descendent of Childeric I, as well.
The Childs must have had a slightly higher concentration of Phoenician blood than the Fanes, which is why George Villiers took the former name over the latter.
There was another Child around 1666, who even worked closely with Josiah at the EIC, but who they vehemently deny was related to him or to the banking Childs. Sir John Child, 1st Baronet, was the first governor-general of India and chief of the EIC’s affairs in Surat and Bombay.
Wikipedia goes out of its way to emphasize that he had no relation to Josiah, but if we flip back to Josiah’s genealogy, we see that he in fact had a brother named John.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sir_John_…
How do we know it’s the same John? Because John’s baronetcy passed to a son named Caesar, and Josiah’s brother John had a son named Caesar. That was too easy.
For a bit of fun I thought I’d look into Julia Child to see if there’s any connection.

They admit her family came from extraordinary wealth, her mother being the heiress of the Weston Paper Company. Did you know that Julia worked for the Secret Intelligence division of the OSS?
I’m not kidding. Julia Child was basically a CIA agent before she became everyone’s favorite celebrity chef.
In fact, we are told her love for cooking started when she was assigned to concoct a shark repellent that would keep sharks from getting too close to underwater explosives and detonating them. I’m not making this up.
She met her husband Paul Cushing Child, also an OSS employee, when they were both stationed in Kunming, China. Prior to the OSS, Paul “had lived in Paris as an artist and poet”, which begs the question why he joined the OSS. Unless his artistic pursuits were just an early CIA gig
That’s Paul on the left. No, they don’t admit he was Jewish, but that nose, oi vey! He inherited it from his mother (right), Bertha Cushing Child, who was a famous singer in Boston. She frequently sang at the Synagogue Ardath Israel.
Her father was John Russell Cushing, linking us to the Dukes of Bedford. Being from Boston, she was likely related to Dr. Harvey Cushing, a Boston brain surgeon who fathered the “fabulous Cushing sisters”.
Daughter Barbara “Babe” married into the peerage with her first husband Stanley Grafton Mortimer, Jr., the grandson of Henry Morgan Tilford, one of the founders of Standard Oil. Babe’s second husband was William Paley (Jewish), founder of CBS.
Her sister Minnie married Vincent Astor and her other sister Betsey married one of FDR’s sons. Cushing is likely a Jewish name, like similar Jewish names Cushman and Cushenberry.
This also links us to actor Peter Cushing, who played Victor Frankenstein and Sherlock Holmes, but is best known by our generation as Grand Moff Tarkin from Star Wars.
I couldn’t trace Paul Child’s ancestry back more than a few generations, but it doesn’t matter anyway since it’s admitted that Julia herself is a direct descendent of Charlemagne, which means she is a direct descendent of Childeric I. She was a Child before she married Paul.
Back to the Great London Fire which started just months after the final piece of legislation that effectively replaced the royal prerogative of money creation with the private banking system, and that this is no coincidence .....
..... since the massive debt created by rebuilding the City of London was the catalyst that led to the founding of the Bank of England. So the fire served both as an ideal distraction and a convenient pretext
A distraction because it kept the public attention away from the massively corrupt Coinage Act that was passed just a few months prior;
a pretext because it could be blamed for the “necessity” of creating the Bank of England, which might have been linked to the 1666 Coinage Act, the EIC, and the reality that the monarchy had been hollowed out by the bankers, who now controlled the conditions of British life.
The City of London cabal (banks, EIC, Parliament, and aristocracy combined) had an overwhelming motive and the means to make it happen without getting caught, not to mention the total lack of scruples. The fire was too convenient an event not to have been planned.
The governors needed maximum instability to sell the Bank of England as a stabilizing force for society and the economy.
As usual, they flipped the truth upside-down, telling us the banks are a source of stability when in fact they are always and intentionally the source of all our instability.
Wikipedia doesn’t bother to say how Josiah Child got so rich so young, but Britannica online does: “Child amassed a fortune as supplier of food to the navy.” Why does that matter?
britannica.com/biography/Sir-…
Because the official story is that the London fire started on Pudding Lane at the bakery of Thomas Farriner. And what do we learn about him?
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Fa…
Now you know why Wikipedia avoids all mention of Josiah Child’s line of work as a food supplier, and why he is never mentioned in relation to the London fire.
They don’t want you to make the connection that Child must have been a close associate of Thomas Farriner and likely had a controlling interest in Farriner’s bakery where the fire started.
That would mean the official story is partially true – the fire did start at Farriner’s bakery. This explains why Farriner was immediately cleared of suspicion and Robert Hubert was rushed on stage as the scapegoat.
Hubert was a mentally challenged Frenchman who falsely confessed to starting the fire. Amazingly, it is admitted that everyone involved in the trial, including the judge and jury, knew Hubert’s confession was false.
He initially confessed to starting a fire in Westminster, which was never even touched by the fire. When he learned it started in the bakery, he changed his story and claimed he threw a grenade through the bakery window – though apparently the bakery had no windows.
The fact that the judge and jury knowingly convicted and executed an innocent man is heinous – or just a sign that it was a fake trial. Thomas Farriner and two of his family members were on the jury, further proving the whole thing was theater.
No details are given about Hubert’s execution; they likely just shipped him back to the sanitarium from whence they had found him. Meanwhile, the public was sold the story that a French spy had started the fire, playing into the anti-French and anti-Catholic sentiment of the era,
and the public eye was safely kept off the real culprits. However, we do learn that many Londoners had suspected Charles II himself of orchestrating the fire.
This suggests a significant minority of the public were getting wise to the games of the elites, even if they couldn’t pinpoint exactly who was behind it all – or didn’t realize how far-reaching the conspiracy was.
It is admitted that the fire mysteriously spared the Jewish quarters, as well as the properties of the Komnenes/Phoenicians. This was used at the time to blame the poor Jews for starting the fire, but as you can see that wasn't true.
But the rich Phoenicians weren't above allowing their poorer cousins to take the blame.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Goldstein

Goldstein Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @MrGoldstein7

9 Apr
Ayfer Koç, that looks a lot like Koch, as in the KOCH brothers. Seeing where she's at, we must assume they are related, and she's Jewish.

dagelijksestandaard.nl/2021/04/oorlog…
Jennifer Lawrence's mother is a Koch. I assume this means she is related to the Koch brothers, although nothing comes up on that online. Through her father, she is first cousin to Thomas Jefferson, so she is definitely from the Families. Image
She is also related to her Hunger Games co-star Jeremy Renner, although they pretend that they didn't know that until recently. Image
Read 49 tweets
8 Apr
Rutgers and Cornell, as well as several other universities, have now stated they will require vaccines for enrollment in the fall. In response, I am calling for students at those universities to unenroll and demand a full refund. #boycottuniversities
usatoday.com/story/news/edu…
I remind students and their parents that they are the customers here, and the customer is always right. You are the ones paying big money for an education. You are not paying to be treated like the subjects of a dictatorship.
You are not guinea pigs for dangerous experimental gene therapy masquerading as a vaccine. These universities, like the state and local governments, have caved or been bought out by Big Pharma, Bill Gates, and the other criminal billionaires and trillionaires running this country
Read 5 tweets
8 Apr
Kuhn, Loeb & Co. acted as the leading investment house for John D. Rockefeller, through the guidance of his investment adviser, Frederick T. Gates […] Image
Overseas ventures that Rockefeller also got involved with included the bank's loans to the Chinese and Imperial Japanese governments.” Among the general partners of the bank you can find also a Stewart, a Hall, and a Schwartz.
Who else is a Schwarz? Lawrence S. Schwartz, former top aide to Governor Cuomo and his current “vaccine czar”. He has been a longtime adviser to Democratic politicians and he replaced Steven M. Cohen, whose role had been overseeing Mr. Cuomo’s transition to the governor’s office Image
Read 23 tweets
8 Apr
The Gates Foundation is the largest private donor to the WHO.
weforum.org/agenda/2020/04…
Two quotes from the US National Intelligence Council's report The Global Infectious Disease Threat and its Implications for the United States (2000):
dni.gov/files/document… Image
Frederic Taylor Gates was the principal business and philanthropic advisor to David Rockefeller. Image
Read 9 tweets
8 Apr
The Rockefellers knew what was coming and made appropriate recommendations as to what has to be done in 2020 to get the economy back on track after the first lockdown in spring. In April 2020, they published the paper National Covid-19 Testing Action Plan.
rockefellerfoundation.org/wp-content/upl… Image
Testing has been promoted since the very beginning by the WHO: “We have a simple message to all countries – test, test, test […] All countries should be able to test all suspected cases, they cannot fight this pandemic blindfolded.”
reuters.com/article/us-hea…
In fall 2020, mass testing has started to be done by countries all over the world. But, as you know by now, those tests should have never been used for this purpose in the first place, and the authorities know this well. cormandrostenreview.com Image
Read 29 tweets
8 Apr
Remember the NIC 2020 Project report? It was published in 2004. A year later, the Bush administration took action:
abcnews.go.com/Politics/georg…
The word “mysterious” tells me it was probably another manufactured, inflated, fake event – or maybe I should use the word tale. Barry is a football-coach-turned-author, expert on pandemic preparedness, advisor to Bush, Obama and WHO. His true profession: freelance spook. Image
So Dumbya was on a vacation, flipping through a book written by a former football coach, and the book said that such events occur every 100 years, and here we are, exactly 100 years later, another “killer” pandemic. How pathetic, I mean prophetic.
mississippitoday.org/2020/09/02/coa…
Read 14 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!