FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist  Chat Chat  UsergroupsUsergroups  CalendarCalendar RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Lockstep Document 2010 Rockefeller Plandemic

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    9/11, 7/7, Covid-1984 & the War on Freedom Forum Index -> The Bigger Picture
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
TonyGosling
Editor
Editor


Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 18335
Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England

PostPosted: Sat Aug 08, 2020 11:54 pm    Post subject: Lockstep Document 2010 Rockefeller Plandemic Reply with quote

“Lockstep” Written 10 years ago chronicles how to bring the world down with a pandemic | This report was produced by The Rockefeller Foundation
April 18, 2020 Q “Lockstep”, pandemic, The Rockefeller Foundation
Scenarios for the Future of Technology and International Development


This report was produced by The Rockefeller Foundation and Global Business Network. May 2010
Horrific! This evil doc written by the Rockefeller Globalist Foundation, gives scenarios for bringing the world to a global one world order. This pdf section called “Lockstep.”Written 10 years ago chronicles how to bring the world down with a pandemic



EXCERPTS FROM THE PAPER
LOCK STEP
A world of tighter top-down government control and more
authoritarian leadership, with limited innovation and growing
citizen pushback
In 2012, the pandemic that the world had been
anticipating for years finally hit. Unlike 2009’s
H1N1, this new influenza strain — originating
from wild geese — was extremely virulent and
deadly. Even the most pandemic-prepared
nations were quickly overwhelmed when the
virus streaked around the world



“The United States’s initial policy of
“strongly discouraging” citizens from flying
proved deadly in its leniency, accelerating the
spread of the virus not just within the U.S. but
across borders. However, a few countries did
fare better — China in particular. The Chinese
government’s quick imposition and enforcement
of mandatory quarantine for all citizens, as well
as its instant and near-hermetic sealing off of
all borders”



China’s government was not the only one that took extreme measures to protect its citizens from risk and exposure. During the pandemic, national leaders around the world flexed their authority and imposed airtight rules and Restrictions, from the mandatory wearing of face masks to body-temperature checks at the entries to communal spaces like train stations and supermarkets. Even after the pandemic faded, this more authoritarian control and oversight
of citizens and their activities stuck and even intensified. In order to protect themselves from the spread of increasingly global problems — from pandemics and transnational terrorism to environmental crises and rising poverty — leaders around the world took a firmer grip on power.

At first, the notion of a more controlled world gained wide acceptance and approval. Citizens
willingly gave up some of their sovereignty — and their privacy — to more paternalistic states in exchange for greater safety and stability. Citizens were more tolerant, and even eager, for top-down direction and oversight, and national leaders had more latitude to impose order in the ways they saw fit. In developed countries, this
heightened oversight took many forms: biometric IDs for all citizens, for example, and tighter regulation of key industries whose stability was deemed vital to national interests. In many developed countries, enforced cooperation with a suite of new regulations and agreements slowly but steadily restored both order and, importantly, economic growth.



Across the developing world, however, the story was different — and much more variable. Top-down authority took different forms in different countries, hinging largely on the capacity, caliber, and intentions of their
leaders. In countries with strong and thoughtful leaders, citizens’ overall economic status and quality of life increased. In India, for example, air quality drastically improved after 2016, when the government outlawed high-
emitting vehicles. In Ghana, the introduction of ambitious government programs to improve basic infrastructure and ensure the availability of clean water for all her people led to a sharp decline in water-borne diseases. But more
authoritarian leadership worked less well — and in some cases tragically — in countries run by irresponsible elites who used their increased power to pursue their own interests at the expense of their citizens.

There were other downsides, as the rise of virulent nationalism created new hazards:
By 2025, people seemed to be growing weary of so much top-down control and letting leaders and authorities make Choices for them.

Wherever national interests clashed with individual interests, there was conflict. Sporadic pushback became increasingly organized and coordinated, as disaffected youth and people who had seen their status and opportunities slip away — largely in developing countries — incited civil unrest. In 2026, protestors in Nigeria brought down the government, fed up with the entrenched cronyism and corruption. Even those who liked the greater stability and predictability of this world began to grow uncomfortable and constrained by so many tight rules and by the
strictness of national boundaries. The feeling lingered that sooner or later, something would inevitably upset the neat order that the world’s governments had worked so hard to establish. •

TECHNOLOGY IN LOCK STEP

While there is no way of accurately predicting what the important technological advancements will be in the future, the scenario narratives point to areas where conditions may enable or accelerate the development of certain kinds of technologies.

Thus for each scenario we offer a sense of the context for technological innovation, taking into consideration the pace, geography, and key creators. We also suggest a few technology trends and applications that could flourish in each scenario.

Technological innovation in “Lock Step” is largely driven by government and is focused on issues of national security and health and safety. Most technological improvements are created by and for developed countries, shaped by governments’ dual desire to control and to monitor their citizens. In states with poor governance, large-scale projects that fail to progress abound.

• Scanners using advanced functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI)
technology become the norm at airports and other public areas to detect
abnormal behavior that may indicate “antisocial intent.”

• In the aftermath of pandemic scares, smarter packaging for food and beverages
is applied first by big companies and producers in a business-to-business
environment, and then adopted for individual products and consumers.

• New diagnostics are developed to detect communicable diseases. The
application of health screening also changes; screening becomes a prerequisite
for release from a hospital or prison, successfully slowing the spread of many
diseases.

• Tele-presence technologies respond to the demand for less expensive, lower-
bandwidth, sophisticated communications systems for populations whose travel
is restricted.

• Driven by protectionism and national security concerns, nations create their
own independent, regionally defined IT networks, mimicking China’s firewalls.
Governments have varying degrees of success in policing internet traffic, but
these efforts nevertheless fracture the “World Wide” Web.

“WHAT IS OFTEN SURPRISING ABOUT NEW TECHNOLOGIES IS COLLATERAL DAMAGE: THE EXTENT OF THE PROBLEM THAT YOU CAN CREATE BY SOLVING ANOTHER PROBLEM IS ALWAYS A BIT OF A SURPRISE.”
– Michael Free, Program for Appropriate Technology in Health (PATH)



TECHNOLOGY IN CLEVER TOGETHER
In “Clever Together,” strong global cooperation on a range of issues drives technological breakthroughs that combat disease, climate change, and energy shortages. Trade and foreign direct investment spread technologies in all directions and make products cheaper for people in the developing world, thereby widening access to a range of technologies. The atmosphere of cooperation and transparency allows states and regions to glean insights from massive datasets to vastly improve the management and allocation of financial and environmental resources.

Technology trends and applications we might see:



• Intelligent electricity, water distribution, and transportation systems develop
in urban areas. In these “smart cities,” internet access is seen as a basic right
by the late 2010s.

• A malaria vaccine is developed and deployed broadly — saving millions of lives
in the developing world.

• Advances in low-cost mind-controlled prosthetics aid the 80 percent of global
amputees who live in developing countries.

• Solar power is made vastly more efficient through advances in materials,
including polymers and nanoparticles. An effective combination of
government subsidies and microfinance means solar is used for everything
from desalination for agriculture to wi-fi networks.

• Flexible and rapid mobile payment systems drive dynamic economic growth
in the developing world, while the developed world is hampered by entrenched
banking interests and regulation.

There is much more in the original paper. Rockefeller Foundation Scenarios for the Future of Technology and International Development
As well please do like and share on your social media. Thank you.

TonyGosling wrote:
Rockefeller Foundation Paper published in 2010-‘Lockstep’
Published May 9, 2020 by admin
https://thealterofdeceit.net/2020/05/09/rockefeller-foundation-paper-p ublished-in-2010-lockstep/

Rockefeller Foundation Paper Published in 2010 Predicted How a Pandemic Can be Used as an Excuse to Establish Global Authoritarian Power
March 16, 2020 F. William Engdahl

The Rockefeller Foundation published a report in May 2010 in cooperation with the Global Business Network of futurologist Peter Schwartz. It was called Scenarios for the Future of Technology and International Development. The first scenario, titled, “Lock Step”, describes a world of total government control and authoritarian leadership. It envisions a future where a pandemic would allow national leaders to flex their authority and impose airtight rules and restrictions that would remain after the pandemic faded. The first half of this scenario already has unfolded. Will it continue as predicted? The information on Lock Step begins at about the two-thirds point of the article. The Rockefeller report in its entirety can be downloaded here. [The importance of this document cannot be overstated.] -GEG
Every day world mainstream news reports more people in more countries diagnosed “positive” for the coronavirus illness, now called COVID-19. As the reported numbers grow, so does widespread nervousness, often in the form of panic shopping for masks, disinfections, toilet paper, canned goods. We are told to accept the testing results as science-based. While it is next to impossible to get a full picture of what is taking place in China, the center of the novel virus storm, there is a process, being fed by mainstream media accounts and genuine panic in populations unclear what the real dangers are, that has alarming implications for the post-pandemic future.

During the last week of January the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) ordered an unprecedented lock down of an entire city of 11 million, Wuhan, in an attempt to contain a public health situation that had clearly gotten out of control. Never before in the history of modern public health had a government placed an entire city in quarantine by imposing a cordon sanitaire around it. That lock down was quickly extended to other China cities to the extent that, for the past weeks, a major part of the world’s second largest national economy has shut down. That in turn is impacting the global economy.

At this point, as cases and the first deaths are being reported in countries outside of China, especially in South Korea, Japan, Iran and Italy, the prime question everyone has is how dangerous this virus is. The fiasco with the US CDC, where the putative tests for the novel virus were shown defective, underscores the fact that the testing for the now-named virus, SARS-CoV-2, said to cause the disease called COVID-19, is anything but 100% reliable. Despite this, influenced by a steady stream of mainstream media images of empty shop shelves in Italy, of police cordons around Washington State nursing homes said to house several presumed Coronavirus patients, of pictures of Iranian hospitals filled with body bags, millions of citizens are understandably becoming alarmed and fearful.

What is being done in city after city and country after country is cancellation of major events where many people come together. This has included the Venice Carnival, major sports events, trade shows in Switzerland and elsewhere being canceled. Major airlines are being financially devastated as people around the world cancel holiday flights, as are cruise ship lines. China orders burning of cash notes claiming they might be contaminated. The French Louvre reopens but does not accept cash, only cards, as paper might be contaminated. WHO warns about paper money contagion risk. Countries are introducing laws such as in the UK allowing legal detention of citizens who might have a virus. Growing media promotion in the West of shop shelves bare of everyday essentials such as rice, pasta, toilet paper is feeding panic buying everywhere.

Questions on Death Rate

It is important to have a perspective on the apparent deaths provably due to COVID-19. Here facts become very imprecise.

As of March 3, 2020 according to WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom, worldwide there were a total of 90,893 cases of COVID-19, with 3,110 resulting in death. He then called this a 3.4% mortality rate, a figure highly disputed by other health experts. Tedros stated, “Globally, about 3.4% of reported COVID-19 cases have died. By comparison, seasonal flu generally kills far fewer than 1% of those infected.”

The problem is that no one can say precisely what the true death rate is. That’s because globally we have not tested all who might have mild cases of the virus and the accuracy of those tests are anything but 100% certain. But a statement about a death rate more than three times that of seasonal flu is a real panic-maker if true.

The reality is very likely a far lower true mortality according to epidemic experts. “We do not report all the cases,” says Professor John Edmunds of the Centre for the Mathematical Modelling of Infectious Diseases at the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine. “In fact, we only usually report a small proportion of them. If there are many more cases in reality, then the case fatality ratio will be lower.” Edmunds went on to say, “What you can safely say […] is that if you divide the number of reported deaths by the number of reported cases [to get the case fatality ratio], you will almost certainly get the wrong answer.” The WHO under Tedros seems to be erring on the side of spreading panic.

The WHO and the USA CDC some years ago changed the definition of deaths from seasonal flu to “deaths of flu or pneumonia.” The CDC calculates only an approximate flu death count by totaling death certificates processed that list “pneumonia or influenza” as the underlying or contributing cause of death. The CDC estimates 45 Million Flu Cases, and 61,000 what they deftly call “Flu-Associated” Deaths in 2017-2018 US Flu Season. How many were elderly with pneumonia or other lung diseases is unclear. Naturally the numbers help spread fear and sell seasonal flu vaccines whose positive effect is anything but proven. Worldwide, the CDC estimated in a study in 2017 that, “between 291,000 and 646,000 people worldwide die from seasonal influenza-related respiratory illnesses each year.”

In China alone the estimate for seasonal influenza-associated (including pneumonia) deaths was about 300,000 in 2018. Note that 3,000 corona-attributed deaths, as tragic as it is, is but 1% of the “normal” annual deaths from lung-related illnesses in China, and because of the mixed or changing China accounting, it is not clear how many of the 3,000 China deaths are even from seasonal pneumonia. But owing to dramatic videos, not verifiable, of people allegedly dropping dead on the streets in China, with no proof, or of Wuhan hospitals filled in the corridors with body bags apparently of dead from COVID-19, much of the world is understandably anxious about this strange exogenous invader.

Amid what is clearly confusion among many well-meaning health officials and likely opportunism by Western vaccine makers like GlaxoSmithKline or Gilead and others, with alarming speed our world is being transformed in ways just months ago we could not have imagined.

‘LOCK STEP’

Whatever has occurred inside China at this point it is almost impossible to say owing to conflicting reactions of the Beijing authorities and several changes in ways of counting COVID-19 cases. The question now is how the relevant authorities in the West will use this crisis. Here it is useful to go back to a highly relevant report published a decade ago by the Rockefeller Foundation, one of the world’s leading backers of eugenics, and creators of GMO among other things.

The report in question has the bland title, “Scenarios for the Future of Technology and International Development.” It was published in May 2010 in cooperation with the Global Business Network of futurologist Peter Schwartz. The report contains various futurist scenarios developed by Schwartz and company. One scenario carries the intriguing title, “LOCK STEP: A world of tighter top-down government control and more authoritarian leadership, with limited innovation and growing citizen pushback.” Here it gets interesting as in what some term predictive programming.

The Schwartz scenario states, “In 2012, the pandemic that the world had been anticipating for years finally hit. Unlike 2009’s H1N1, this new influenza strain — originating from wild geese — was extremely virulent and deadly. Even the most pandemic-prepared nations were quickly overwhelmed when the virus streaked around the world, infecting nearly 20 percent of the global population and killing 8 million in just seven months…” He continues, “The pandemic also had a deadly effect on economies: international mobility of both people and goods screeched to a halt, debilitating industries like tourism and breaking global supply chains. Even locally, normally bustling shops and office buildings sat empty for months, devoid of both employees and customers.” This sounds eerily familiar.

Then the scenario gets very interesting: “During the pandemic, national leaders around the world flexed their authority and imposed airtight rules and restrictions, from the mandatory wearing of face masks to body-temperature checks at the entries to communal spaces like train stations and supermarkets. Even after the pandemic faded, this more authoritarian control and oversight of citizens and their activities stuck and even intensified. In order to protect themselves from the spread of increasingly global problems — from pandemics and transnational terrorism to environmental crises and rising poverty — leaders around the world took a firmer grip on power.”

A relevant question is whether certain bad actors, and there are some in this world, are opportunistically using the widespread fears around the COVID-19 to advance an agenda of “lock step” top down social control, one that would include stark limits on travel, perhaps replacing of cash by “sanitary” electronic cash, mandatory vaccination even though the long term side effects are not proven safe, unlimited surveillance and the curtailing of personal freedoms such as political protests on the excuse it will allow “identification of people who refuse to be tested or vaccinated,” and countless other restrictions. Much of the Rockefeller 2010 scenario is already evident. Fear is never a good guide to sound reason.

F. William Engdahl is strategic risk consultant and lecturer, he holds a degree in politics from Princeton University and is a best-selling author on oil and geopolitics, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook.”

TonyGosling wrote:
‘Lock Step’: 2010 Rockefeller Foundation Paper Laid Out Ominous Scenario How A Pandemic Could Be Used To Lock Down Society With Alarming Implications For Our Post-Pandemic Future
March 19, 202003841
by Stefan Stanford, All News Pipeline:
https://www.sgtreport.com/2020/03/lock-step-2010-rockefeller-foundatio n-paper-laid-out-ominous-scenario-how-a-pandemic-could-be-used-to-lock -down-society-with-alarming-implications-for-our-post-pandemic-future/

‘The End Of The World As We Know It’.

While some Americans believed we’d never see it in our lifetime’s, 10’s of millions of Americans and hundreds of millions more across the world are already witnessing it this very moment with much of life being shuttered and shut in, businesses closed ‘en mass’ with a boatload of unemployed soon to follow.

And while this TEOTWAWKI may look much differently than many thought it would, with President Trump and the White House just unveiling their ’15 Days To Slow The Spread’ strategy outlining their recommendations to Americans on how to get this beast under control, they also warned that new guidelines may be issued in 15 days if the spread of the virus hasn’t yet been controlled and we can do a lot more than only imagine what those ‘new guidelines’ might be.


As we’ll explore in the next section of this story and the 1st video at the bottom of this story, a Rockefeller Foundation paper published back in 2010 predicted a pandemic could be used as an excuse to establish an authoritarian global government with their ‘Lock Step’ scenario unfolding nearly exactly as we’re witnessing with the coronavirus pandemic now. Predicting mass shutdowns across America and the world, that Rockefeller paper, which we’ve also embedded for you to read at the bottom of this story, also predicted a scenario eerily similar to ‘Event 201‘, the pandemic simulation staged last October by Johns Hopkins University with the World Economic Forum, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and Johnson & Johnson.

So with the spread of the number of cases of COVID-19 doubling every few days according to this story over at Forbes, undergoing exponential growth that will continue as long as long as there is at least one infected person within a population who is exposed to others, it’s easy to understand why some are now warning this crisis and the resulting ‘lockdowns’ could last for 2 years or more as reported in this new Daily Mail story. And interestingly, the ‘lockdowns’ are happening in ‘lock step’ from one nation to the next.

Yet with ‘Kid Rock’ refusing to close down his Nashville, Tennessee bar, arguing that the mandate from the Nashville mayor to close all bars and restaurants was ‘unconstitutional’, showing that not everybody will be going along with government mandates, this Sacramento Bee story saved at archive titled “Coronavirus vs Constitution: What Can Government Stop You From Doing During A Pandemic” offers us an interesting look at what will likely be unfolding all across America until this killer disease is eradicated or America transformed into a ‘medical police state’.

Public closures, a ban on gatherings, quarantine notices and orders for isolation have become increasingly common as the coronavirus continues to spread across the United States.

Officials in Washington state and San Francisco are limiting the number of people allowed to attend public gatherings. The governor of California joined them on Thursday in urging the cancellation of all events with more than 250 people in attendance. The governor of Kentucky, a Bible belt state, has asked churches and other religious institutions to temporarily cancel services.

But if it seems these actions are infringing on individual freedoms guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution, think again.

“You don’t have a right to assemble against the backdrop of known public health risk,” James G. Hodge told McClatchy News.

Officials typically have to go through legal processes to close an establishment or shut down public gatherings, Hodge said. But under a state of emergency, everything is expedited.

“It’s not that we don’t have time for First Amendment interests, it’s that we must act fast,” he said. “What was opened today can be closed tomorrow.”

That doesn’t mean communities in the U.S. will see the kind of large-scale lock-downs happening in Italy and China, Hodge added. But there are circumstances under which a voluntary recommendation can become involuntary.

_________________
www.lawyerscommitteefor9-11inquiry.org
www.rethink911.org
www.patriotsquestion911.com
www.actorsandartistsfor911truth.org
www.mediafor911truth.org
www.pilotsfor911truth.org
www.mp911truth.org
www.ae911truth.org
www.rl911truth.org
www.stj911.org
www.v911t.org
www.thisweek.org.uk
www.abolishwar.org.uk
www.elementary.org.uk
www.radio4all.net/index.php/contributor/2149
http://utangente.free.fr/2003/media2003.pdf
"The maintenance of secrets acts like a psychic poison which alienates the possessor from the community" Carl Jung
https://37.220.108.147/members/www.bilderberg.org/phpBB2/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website MSN Messenger
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    9/11, 7/7, Covid-1984 & the War on Freedom Forum Index -> The Bigger Picture All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group