World Economic Forum event

[AcornAutumn]

Two days ago, this event took place, re Scaling Up Digital ID.

www.weforum.org/events/global-technology-governance-summit-2021/sessions/scaling-up-digital-identity-systems

A written summary here

sociable.co/government-and-policy/vaccine-passports-drive-forced-consent-standardization-digital-identity-schemes-wef-summit/

It refers to vaccine passports in many ways.

Some posters seem to think it's about showing your vax status. It isn't. These tech developments are happening in front of us. No secrecy, no conspiracy. If you are happy with it, great.

Quotes include:

“I’m hoping with the desire and global demand for some sort of vaccine passport — so that people can get traveling and working again — will drive forced consent, standardization, and frankly, cooperation across the world” — Sandra Ro, CEO at Global Blockchain Business Council

---

“Our goal is to enable all life situations with this digital ID” — Mykhailo Fedorov, Ukraine’s Minister of Digital Transformation

He hopes to achieve this in 3 years.

“The war on pandemics” is similar to the “war on terror”

It’s an invisible enemy which can be harnessed to generate fear in the populace and justify the erosion of civil liberties.

Orwell did write in 1984:
"So long as they (the Proles) continued to work and breed, their other activities were without importance. Left to themselves, like cattle turned loose upon the plains of Argentina, they had reverted to a style of life that appeared to be natural to them, a sort of ancestral pattern...Heavy physical work, the care of home and children, petty quarrels with neighbors, films, football, beer and above all, gambling filled up the horizon of their minds. To keep them in control was not difficult."
Add all the electronic gadgets, social media influencers and other modern "distractions" and control is easy, even welcomed.

Dr Mike Yeadon suggests the ultimate goal is depopulation. Because of climate change.

The way the vaccine is designed, any gene can be added to do any number of things - including sterilise people. So be wary of top up vaccines. The EMA and other medical regulators have apparently already said they don't needs to approve the tweaked, 'top up' vaccines the companies are working on as the 'variant' is so similar to original Covid and therefore the tweaked vaccine is very similar. So a potentially unregulated vaccine could be used to top us all up.

Not saying I agree with him, but it's food for thought.

In the interview I listened to, Dr Yeadon said that variants of covid aren't different enough to necessitate a separate or top up vaccine. That even the most different variant is still less than 1% different from the original, and therefore the immune system can still easily recognise it.

He didn't outright say that he thought it was a depopulation tactic, he only said that firstly, there are people who had theorised that the planet would not be sustainable unless the current global population were reduced by 90% (I've also heard that before). Secondly, that if depopulation were the goal, a globally pushed and then enforced vaccine would be a very efficient way to do it (none of the damage to the environment that war or poisons would cause, also cheaper than warfare). And third, that he couldn't think of a benign reason to push/enforce a vaccine with unknown long term effects, and known short term risks, on an entire population including young and healthy people who are at no real risk from covid.

Would people in general be accepting of a top up vaccine though, when there is still some controversy that this is still very new technology, some known risk, and no knowledge of long term effects? A one off acceptance to buy normality and freedom is one thing, but yearly or more top ups is something very different.

To think we were called tin foil hatters and conspiracy theorists a year ago on here and some still do despite this info being in the public domain the whole time. I hate how this corrupt Government have lied to us all about Covid to push the WEF policy's through. They are absolute scum.

But who are they “they”. Much as I loathe the current government - and think vaccines are a big gamble longer term - who would be the “ they” behind all this?

I don’t genuinely think there scientific types think their vaccines will be able to do this.these are scientists with their own families. Same with the government in the U.K. as much as I can’t stand the lot of them.

This would suggest a more organised infiltration and I don’t know if I see that, unless the pure purpose of covid is to achieve the above aim without scientists and governments realising it

And if there is 90 per cent depopulation required why didn’t covid just let rip throughout the world which would have seen off millions of that elderly?

I do find vaccine passports utterly chilling and don’t doubt those documents above or their authenticity. But I’m not sure if I can completely join the dots yet. However I will fight vaccine passports until my last breathe.

@Roonerspismed,

Who are ‘they’ is the key question, which won’t get meaningfully answered, because the answers always turn out to be either risible or racist.

The WEF is a powerless talking shop, not some grey superpower. I know people who are invited but choose not to go, as they tell me it is just people showing off and nothing ever gets accomplished. If the W.E.F is being chosen as evidence for a shadowy global superpower, it just shows how desperate the conspiracy theorists are getting.

And if there really was intent to depopulate the planet or control people, there would be infinitely better ways than to release a virus with 1.3% mortality, spend a year with different groups developing a vaccine and then putting something in the vaccine! How much easier to just put a chemical in the water supply.

If you look at actual evidence and spend 2 minutes thinking about it, nothing adds up,

A discussion around big tech and how they can influence us is useful and has been going on already, ever since the big tech companies actually had enough data on us to use it to influence decisions. However, it is completely separate to the COVID response and need for lockdowns.

The microchip to detect whether covid has entered our bodies is now ready to go.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9460389/Pentagon-scientists-invent-microchip-senses-COVID-19-body-symptoms.html#comments

Does anyone remember the Borg from StarTrek? I think the end-game is to merge humans with the machines, create an Internet of Bodies, as described on the WEF site.

www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/06/internet-of-bodies-covid19-recovery-governance-health-data/

@Roonerspismed Personally I'm not sure the depopulation thing is really a goal. Though if it were, I don't agree that letting covid run rampant would have been a useful approach, it may have killed a lot more people than it has but nowhere near 90% of the population, not when the majority of the young and healthy are unaffected by it. Meanwhile letting it claim so many lives unhindered would have caused a public outcry, no matter the spin put on things.

From what I see, it's far more about control. To what end, I can't be sure, but slowly but surely things have been put in place for decades now that have lead to this point where an incredible level of surveillance is possible.

As to your point about scientists not willingly developing something horrible or dangerous... All the weapons of war we're developed by scientists with either good intentions but their work was applied to horrible uses, or scientists who only asked if they could do a thing, not whether they should do a thing. I would argue that CRISPR is a great example of the arrogance of a certain number of scientists who think that they have the right to play God and develop technologies that could easily be turned to horrifically immoral, dangerous and unethical uses.

That's not to say at all that all scientists are like this, obviously. But you only need some.

I sometimes wonder, and I could be very wrong, if the media reads many threads from mumsnet, and then decides to release an article, or write one, linked to what MNetters have written. Odd that the D M have written that article, only a few hours after this thread.

That post was after the @SmallTownSouthernGirl one.

Who are ‘they’ is the key question, which won’t get meaningfully answered, because the answers always turn out to be either risible or racist.

My thoughts are
Some world leaders, top world bankers, leaders of countries with lots of money to lend, top business leaders who are billionaires, free ma sons?
Any group or individual who has much power, influence, and much money at their disposal.

@SmallTownSouthernGirl Thanks for sharing that.

Seriously though. I mean, seriously.

From the article:

"The microchip is sure to spark worries among some about a government agency implanting a microchip in a citizen.

Officials who spoke to the 60 Minutes team said the Pentagon isn't looking to track your every move.

A more detailed explanation was not given. "

After conspiracy theorists and others have been taking about microchips as a way to control populations for years now, and then they seriously trot this out? I'd laugh if it wasn't so awful.

And what's even worse, I'm sure there'll be plenty of people who'll say, "But this microchip is just to protect you from Covid, it's not for anything else- the government said so! Stop being such a tin foil hatter!"

So literally, as they're having a microchip implanted, some will still be rolling their eyes at anyone who has been saying for years that the government wants to microchip it's citizens.

It's like some kind of very dark comedy...

I'm not sure the WEF can be dismissed quite so easily as a "powerless talking shop" when our own PM is using its slogan "Build back better" in his speeches.

Like you, I wondered about this very thing though, and am currently wading through stuff trying to educate my self on the subject.

I found this article very interesting:

www.tni.org/es/node/84

Within it is this passage:

"Of great significance also was the attendance of Nelson Mandela, the new president of South Africa. When Mandela was released from prison in 1990, he declared the policy of the African National Congress (ANC) was to implement “the nationalization of the mines, banks and monopoly industries.” When Mandela attended the January 1992 meeting of the WEF just after becoming president, he changed his views and embraced “capitalism and globalization.”

Mandela attended the meeting alongside the governor of the central bank of South Africa, Tito Mboweni, who explained that Mandela arrived with a speech written by ANC officials focusing on nationalization. As the week’s meetings continued, Mandela met with leaders from Communist Parties in China and Vietnam, who told him, “We are currently striving to privatize state enterprises and invite private enterprise into our economies. We are Communist Party governments, and you are a leader of a national liberation movement. Why are you talking about nationalization?”

As a result, Mandela changed his views, telling the Davos crowd that he would open South Africa up as a market economy and encourage investment. South Africa subsequently became the continent’s fastest growing economy, though inequality today is greater than it was during apartheid. As Mandela explained to his official biographer, he came home from the 1992 WEF meeting and told other top officials that they had to choose: “We either keep nationalization and get no investment, or we modify our own attitude and get investment.” "

Which I found interesting. A pragmatic business decision for his country perhaps, but definitely a sign of influence.

This was written in 2015 so long before Covid of course.

I also don't think you can easily separate out the big tech question from Covid at any level, because so much of the response to the pandemic is building on the data already there and also there is a scramble for all the new data to apply to solutions to the problems caused by the pandemic, and getting society up to speed in readiness for a new normal. The WEF is presenting itself as a networking platform to achieve this.

It's also interesting that the WEF operates a hierarchy as to who goes where and participates in what:

From the BBC:

www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-51134164

@TheReluctantPhoenix - is it possible that your invited friends don't have the multi-pass, and therefore don't know what gets accomplished at levels they don't have access to?

I don't think it can be denied that while these sorts of events may outwardly seem like an extended jolly for the rich and powerful, they facilitate networking, contact building, the chance for alliances to be formed. Which is all well and good and maybe normal in those circles, but corporations wield alot of power and influence, and are having a massive global influence.

Until this year, the WEF was just something rumbling along in the background for most of us. If you google "WEF and Covid response", you get around 1,800,000 results. Obviously I haven't looked at them all, but just scrolling through the first few pages shows the scope of their reach.

It may not be a "grey super power" but it's hard to deny it does have broad reach and influence. The phrase "hiding in plain sight" comes to mind.

Anyway, we shall see.

More people than ever will be closely watching who are involved in the G7 summit. And what precisely is said.
I am surprised by the venue. As it happens, I have been in that hotel. I wouldnt have thought it is that security conscious generally, but presume it will be while the event is happening.

It may not be a "grey super power" but it's hard to deny it does have broad reach and influence. The phrase "hiding in plain sight" comes to mind.
Alternatively, there could be a rogue group of speech writers who like the
phonetically "ugly" phrase "build back better" 😉
m.youtube.com/watch?v=oST_5nzU3NE

Personally I'm not sure the depopulation thing is really a goal.

Take a look at the Georgia Guidestones.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgia_Guidestones

A message consisting of a set of ten guidelines or principles is engraved on the Georgia Guidestones[8] in eight different languages, one language on each face of the four large upright stones. Moving clockwise around the structure from due north, these languages are: English, Spanish, Swahili, Hindi, Hebrew, Arabic, Traditional Chinese, and Russian.

Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature.
Guide reproduction wisely — improving fitness and diversity.
Unite humanity with a living new language.
Rule passion — faith — tradition — and all things with tempered reason.
Protect people and nations with fair laws and just courts.
Let all nations rule internally resolving external disputes in a world court.
Avoid petty laws and useless officials.
Balance personal rights with social duties.
Prize truth — beauty — love — seeking harmony with the infinite.
Be not a cancer on the Earth — Leave room for nature — Leave room for nature.

I’m not convinced by the depopulation motivation either.

My own doubts around the coronavirus response occurred in december, when we were locked down (again), and my DH went abroad for a funeral. This is a “third world country” with an ok but not amazing health service. DH sent me lots of pictures and videos of him out and about with family. He’d send me a picture of a crowded market with no social distancing and only a couple of people wearing masks by choice. Obviously I questioned this. DH explained that while the country did have an outbreak and some excess deaths among the elderly and ill, there was no crisis as such. That really surprised me because everyone lives in multi-generational households, and there is no practical way the vulnerable could shield.

It was hard to square that with having to queue in the freezing cold in a mask for the supermarket, and being told that these measures were necessary because otherwise all the grannies would die.

So then I started digging, and found bad science wherever I looked. PCR testing, controversial death reportage, the unverified claims about asymptomatic spreaders. These are the main justifications used to lock everything down but they all rest on shaky ground. And then for all the fearmongering, the mean death age of covid is 80. For those under 70 it is no more dangerous than seasonal flu.

So why rush to vaccinate the whole population against a mostly mild disease with new vaccine technologies for which we lack any long term safety data?

It’s illogical and reckless and it just doesn’t make sense from a public health perspective.

But then Boris announces vaccine passports and suddenly it does make sense and we end up here, despairing over the phrase “forced consent”. As I’ve said before, this isn’t even a conspiracy because it’s all out in the open. This is just the ground that would’ve been covered by investigative journalists, when they still existed.

@TheReluctantPhoenix

The massive problem is the disconnect between the people who run our society (mainly PPE graduates) and the people who make tech.

You cannot critique technology, or our response to, it if you do not understand it. When I hear people with zero knowledge of exponential curves, r numbers and k numbers pontificate about doing their own 'risk assessments', I don't know whether to laugh or cry.

IMO, most of this thread is 'tin hat' stuff. I don't think that there is a Machiavellian plot to control people through tech or to unnecessarily restrict people's freedom. Most of our leaders are far too stupid and lazy to be working towards some hidden goal. These days, they are mostly just looking towards how much money they can make when they leave politics.

However, there is a trade off between 'connectedness', which most people seem extremely keen on and privacy which, for many people, is far less important. Most people find the prospect of being chipped abhorrent but willingly carry a device around with them that will give away their location and, increasingly, what they have bought and where. And the sneaky increase of CCTV cameras is very useful to catch criminals but, again, means that we cannot drive (or even walk) anywhere without a recording of us being made.

There is a very worthwhile debate on where we are going with technology and what we are willing to give up in return for increasing wealth and convenience. However, to be a meaningful part of the debate, you have to have some knowledge of both ethics and tech, something few do, as most arts graduates have a low opinion of the STEM subjects and vice versa.

This is definitely the most balanced post on this thread so thank you for that. I was beginning to wonder if I was missing something but having looked at all the research myself (I do have a science-based PhD although not related to this) I feel well able to draw my own conclusions and totally agree with you.

Saying or implying people are too stupid to understand what is properly going on, and they need or must have the relevant qualifications to do so, doesnt mean things are not going on!

Most people have enough IQ to read!

If the WEF is a powerless talking shop, then I don't know where this came from

www.gov.uk/government/speeches/reimagining-policy-making-for-4ir-closing-speech

I know govt spend a lot of time talking about stuff and not doing it but that doesn't appear to be the case here.

We’re entering the era of the “Internet of Bodies”: collecting our physical data via a range of devices that can be implanted, swallowed or worn.
The result is a huge amount of health-related data that could improve human wellbeing around the world, and prove crucial in fighting the COVID-19 pandemic.
But a number of risks and challenges must be addressed to realize the potential of this technology, from privacy issues to practical hurdles.

From the WEF article. Chilling.

@AcornAutumn

If the WEF is a powerless talking shop, then I don't know where this came from

www.gov.uk/government/speeches/reimagining-policy-making-for-4ir-closing-speech

I know govt spend a lot of time talking about stuff and not doing it but that doesn't appear to be the case here.

I don't like this speech Matt Hancock delivered to the WEF. I don't like it at all.

@Ephe17 I'm aware of the Georgia guidestones, and I don't dismiss the possibility that it is a 'hiding in plain sight' declaration of actual intent. I've heard the theory before that, if there is a sinister global group doing something behind the scenes, that they are or feel compelled to publicly state their intent before acting, and therefore responsibility for what they do is on the population who received their message but didn't act. It's an interesting theory, but pretty impossible to either prove or disprove.

The Georgia guidestones may be interesting to any PPs who haven't heard of them before, though.

Just stating for the record, I don't believe there's a depopulation agenda.