It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
CURRENT EBOLA OUTBREAK PREDICTED, FICTIONALIZED AS “FLU”
A Rockefeller Foundation white paper published in May of 2010 titled Scenarios for the Future of Technology and International Development takes a look at hypothetical future scenarios which may be used to benefit privy globalist corporations, businessmen and organizations at a later time.
Shockingly published in the Scenario Narratives section on page 18, titled Lock Step, the Rockefeller Foundation nearly hit the nail on the head with their futuristic and fictitious scenario. I mean what are the chances? Come on. It literally follows lockstep.
An excerpt from page 18 reads:
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, the majority of them healthy young adults. 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.
The pandemic blanketed the planet though disproportionate numbers died in Africa, Southeast Asia, and Central America, where the virus spread like wildfire in the absence of official containment protocols. But even in developed countries, containment was a challenge. 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, saved millions of lives, stopping the spread of the virus far earlier than in other countries and enabling a swifter post-pandemic recovery.
No. Not really.
Yikes! This is a fictional scenario but you can see that this is in fact a pre-plan of what THEY want to happen.
The scenarios that follow are not meant to be exhaustive — rather, they are designed to be both plausible and provocative, to engage your imagination while also raising new questions for you about what that future might look and feel like. Each scenario tells a story of how the world, and in particular the developing world, might progress over the next 15 to 20 years, with an emphasis on those elements relating to the use of different technologies and the interaction of these technologies with the lives of the poor and vulnerable.
There was a push for major innovations in energy and water for the developing world, as those areas were thought to be the key to improving equity. Better food distribution was also high on the agenda, and more open markets and south-south trade helped make this a reality. In 2022, a consortium of nations, NGOs, and companies established the Global Technology Assessment Office, providing easily accessible, real-time information about the costs and benefits of various technology applications to developing and developed countries alike. All of these efforts translated into real progress on real problems, opening up new opportunities to address the needs of the bottom billion — and enabling developing countries to become engines of growth in their own right.
First, we’ve got population. The world today has 6.8 billion people. That’s headed up to about nine billion. Now, if we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that by, perhaps, 10 or 15 percent, but there we see an increase of about 1.3.
Or how about listened to Bill Gates speeches talking about how new vaccines can lower the population by 10 or 15 percent.
www.ted.com...
First, we've got population. The world today has 6.8 billion people. That's headed up to about nine billion. Now, if we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that by, perhaps, 10 or 15 percent, but there we see an increase of about 1.3.
originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Tedgoat
www.ted.com...
First, we've got population. The world today has 6.8 billion people. That's headed up to about nine billion. Now, if we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that by, perhaps, 10 or 15 percent, but there we see an increase of about 1.3.
originally posted by: ParkerCramer
originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Tedgoat
How about you actually listen to what he says. (You know, like actually reading the Rockefeller piece? But I know, it's more fun to read what other people tell you about what he said.)
www.ted.com...
First, we've got population. The world today has 6.8 billion people. That's headed up to about nine billion. Now, if we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that by, perhaps, 10 or 15 percent, but there we see an increase of about 1.3.
Perhaps Mr. Phage. you should take your OWN advice and actually read and comprehend the article.
Two of the three solutions offered by Mr. Gates and espoused by YOU would actually sustain life, allowing people to live LONGER, thus increasing population, the only one of those three choices that could possibly decrease population would be reproductive health.
It appears as though you like to admonish others for just posting content without reading and/or attempting to deny ignorance, it would seem that your glass house seems to have some cracks.
Parker
US Representative Dr.A.L.Miller, Chairman of the Special Committee on Chemicals and Foods, stated, "I sometimes wonder if ALCOA Aluminum and its subsidiaries might not have a deep interest in getting rid of sodium fluoride, a toxic waste product of the aluminum industry. In this connection it is interesting to note that the person in charge of the public health, Oscar Ewing, is also an attorney for ALCOA."
Two of the three solutions offered by Mr. Gates and espoused by YOU would actually sustain life, allowing people to live LONGER, thus increasing population, the only one of those three choices that could possibly decrease population would be reproductive health.
Source
Take Afghanistan, where child mortality—the number of children who die before turning five years old—is very high. Afghan women have an average of 6.2 children. As a result, even though more than 10 percent of Afghan children don’t survive, the country’s population is projected to grow from 30 million today to 55 million by 2050. Clearly, high death rates don’t prevent population growth (not to mention the fact that Afghanistan is nobody’s idea of a model for a prosperous future).