Monday, November 30, 2020

Now or Never: A Call to White Resistance, by Giles Corey - The Unz Review

This election was not stolen from Donald Trump. It was stolen from White America.


I harbored no illusions about Donald “Platinum Plan” Trump, and did not plan on voting at all in this election. I knew that this election was almost wholly irrelevant to the American prospect, to the fate of White America. It isn’t that the “breathing room” argument is unsound, but rather that President Trump has never once shown the will or capacity to match his rhetoric with action. It’s the fact that the Republican Party is just as compromised by Satanic Jews as the Democrats, and the fact that Republicans have presided over the ruin of our nation without presenting any more than token opposition to the increasingly totalitarian Left. My feeling, put simply, was that the Judeocracy already had the reins of our nation firmly in its grasp, whether they permitted Donald Trump to be reelected or not.

And yet: I still voted for President Trump. I went to vote with the intention of only voting for the local and State elections, given that these are the people who most directly affect our lives, but, while I stood at the machine, I could not bring myself not to vote for Donald Trump. Despite the incalculable lost opportunities of the Trump Administration, despite my hard-nosed calculation that Whites were accelerating toward genocide either way, despite it all, in the end I clung to the hope that maybe another Trump Administration could in fact give us time, if only a little, to prepare to resist the Great Reset. More significantly, though, I saw it not as casting my vote for the man, but for the character that others had made him: the avatar of White America. My vote for Trump was a vote for decent, red-blooded Trump supporters.

I have spent the past three weeks ravenously consuming the daily revelations of what is, without a doubt, the most massive electoral fraud in American history. The evidence is too immense to recount here, and has been amply documented elsewhere, thanks in large part to the heroism of attorneys Lin Wood and Sidney Powell, as well as websites like The Gateway Pundit.

I would like to be optimistic regarding the President’s odds of emerging victorious from the stolen election, but this seems foolish given the totally corrupt nature of our occupied government. To those of us who would argue that the enormity of fraud that took place to steal this election doesn’t matter, that we need to “move on,” I would say that it does matter. In fact, nothing matters more right now. The moment we “move on,” we concede; this concession, mind you, would be no ordinary concession, but rather a concession of our nation, our civilization, and our very lives.

We saw the color revolution as it was set into motion; in this respect, it was not surprising in the least. Watching the coup d’état in real time, however, is a different matter entirely. As Kevin MacDonald wrote in his preface to my book, this is the endgame in the Jewish conquest of White America. They are not hiding it now—it’s all in the open, plain for any thinking White to see. This election was not stolen from Donald Trump. It was stolen from White America.

There is one silver lining to the nigh impenetrably dark storm that now looms directly overhead: The System has been completely delegitimized for tens of millions of Whites in one fell swoop. This delegitimization will be irreparable if, after all of his efforts are exhausted, the American system of government fails to deliver the White House to President Trump. The President’s legal efforts will ultimately end in the Supreme Court, where there is only one reliably conservative Justice—ironically, Clarence Thomas, a Black man.

Even if those legal efforts fail, Republican State legislatures could simply choose not to certify their Electors for the Electoral College and instead send their own competing slate of Electors to vote for President Trump. Can Republican legislatures be relied upon to do the right thing? Unfortunately, they almost certainly cannot, although Pennsylvania is making moves in that direction.

So, if the President limits his options within legal means, he is likely—though not guaranteed—to fail. Too many compromised demons in human skin stand in the way. If he really does lose this, if a senile pedophile controlled by International Jewry is really allowed to steal this election, that’s it. Tens of millions of Whites will know, as the vanguard of White Nationalists have for decades, that the System is a sick, nihilistic sham. This Great Disillusionment is a tinderbox that, paired with the gleeful acceleration of the Great Replacement, provides us with all of the preconditions for civil war.

The Great Disillusionment promises to be a great boon for our cause. With each new betrayal by the Republican Party—the party that White America emphatically defeated and spat upon by voting for Donald Trump in 2016, more normie Republicans look to the solutions that we offer. Fox News committed suicide this month, and its tens of millions of viewers crave the answers that only we can give them. With every single new instance of anarcho-tyranny, average Americans understand that we are on our own. The Jewish Sackler family, solely responsible for initiating the opioid epidemic which has killed almost one million Americans, were just “punished” with a penalty that doesn’t even rise to the standard of a slap on the wrist. They deserve to be condemned to a lingering death as they watch their own loved ones waste away in thralldom to the poison they intentionally pushed on Whites for twenty years. Whites are awakening to realize that electoral politics is a will-o’-the-wisp leading them astray into a dark cul-de-sac, not the path to salvation.

There has already been at least one opportunity for civil war. President Trump’s base of support is emotionally invested in him; again, not as himself, but as the avatar of themselves, their families, and, somewhere deep down inside, their race. They will follow him if he calls them. In the immediate aftermath of the stolen election, the President should have called his followers—all seventy million of them—into the streets. At the Million MAGA March, he should have gotten out of his motorcade and led an impromptu rally. Instead, he allegedly played golf. Later that night, his supporters, who have gone unprotected by the State for four years, were beaten and harassed by Negroid monsters, Jewish black bloc militants, and deluded Whites. All it would take is one word from the President to conjure violent White resistance. We know it is a fantasy to expect him to do this, but White resistance is no fantasy. Far from it.

It truly is now or never. The Jewish Enemy is poised to irrevocably destroy America and annihilate the White race from the face of the earth. Consider what they are publicly planning for us; I will not recount the litany of policy proposals that the parties behind the potential “Biden Administration” have unveiled, as you’ve seen then by now. This is nothing short of extermination. But before then, humiliation. They state, openly now, that the Allied occupation and remaking of postwar Germany was too lenient, that Southern Reconstruction was far too kind to the White South. They look to South Africa as a shining beacon. White genocide is real, and it’s here. The fact that they feel no need to hide, explain, or justify it says everything. This is it. This is the end.

Will it be with a whimper, or shall it be with a bang? Are we men, or are we whores to Jewish money-power? Are we sons of the West, or whipped, besotted curs? We have run out of time. The United States of America might be a walking corpse, a rotting husk, but its people and our heritage are not. Our long slumber must not be mistaken for death.

The Enemy is the Jew. It has always been the Jew, and, until we act once and for all time, it will always be the Jew. We have no place anymore for anyone in our movement who does not accept this plain truth. Certainly, to enter into enlightenment on the Jewish Question, a learning curve is par for the course; yet once the truth has been illuminated for them, they must accept it. If they will not, they are not with us, and if they are not with us, they are against us. We care nothing for inclusion, but rather exclusion, for we cannot defeat that which we cannot name.

Speak now and spread the word among family, friends, and potentially sympathetic colleagues. Give them Kevin MacDonald’s Culture of Critique, give Christians my own book, send them to The Occidental Observer—before it’s too late. You have far more to lose than your social standing in a world where sodomy and pedophilia are celebrated as virtues.

Any mainstream Trump supporter already possesses extreme, unadulterated animus toward Jewish figures like George Soros. Many are aware of the role of the media in bringing about the torrent of hatred that has rained down on Trump from the beginning, and, if they are unaware of exactly who owns the media and whose views it expresses, they are aware that it is the enemy and that it must be completely tuned out. The increasingly paleoconservative-oriented base of Trump’s support, and particularly the younger generation that comprises the “Groypers,” is deeply and rightfully suspicious of Israel and its neoconservative agents, who have become clearly identified as the instigators of the “War on Terror.” This passed without much mention in the news, but Trump supporters will not be quick to forget Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu’s congratulatory message to “President-Elect” Biden, especially given that Netanyahu was one of the first foreign leaders to do so. President Trump unfollowed the Jew on Twitter; this was not coupled with any corresponding action, but it is something to work with. The millions of Whites who believe in the QAnon theory are well aware of the Satanic ritual pedophilia that suffuses the “Western” ruling class, and the case of the Jews Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell will not leave their minds anytime soon. It would be no stretch to suggest to these open-minded citizens that this is a modern manifestation of Jewish ritual murder.

Jews do not possess unlimited power; directed by their father in Hell, there is seemingly no end to the heinous depredations which they have perpetrated against our people and our nation. But this aura of invincibility is simply a smokescreen, based upon the simple fact that they have faced no meaningful White resistance since Charles Lindbergh and the America First Committee, and no White resistance at all in recent decades. It cannot be overstated: The Enemy seems to possess unlimited power, but he does not. This is only because he has operated unchallenged for at least eighty years.

Steel yourselves and fulfill the destiny of your forefathers. Wollt ihr den totalen Krieg? The Enemy certainly is. Nun, Volk, steh auf und Sturm brich los! 

Tyranny, Inc. - Contemplations on the Tree of Woe - Alexander Macris

What government wants to do but cannot, it can require corporations to do for it.


If you’ve read the Parable of the Seasteader, you’ll already know that at sufficient scale the public/private distinction collapses — a private entity of sufficient size can have all the power of a public entity. It is certainly arguable that Facebook and Google have reached such size. Here, however, I want to discuss a different dilemma - government’s use of private entities to regulate freedoms it cannot directly abridge.

We’re going to look at one specific right (the right to free speech) and one specific set of Federal regulations (§ 1604.11) but the pattern I’m describing here has become ubiquitous in our country. Nowadays, almost anything government is forbidden to regulate, it can require corporations to regulate for it. The government has outsourced tyranny. Let’s see how this black magic is performed.

Expression of Viewpoints is Guaranteed to be Free from Government Abridgement, Even if the Viewpoints are Hateful…

The First Amendment to the United States Constitution is a remarkable provision that has, for centuries, protected Americans from the abridgment of their freedom of speech by their government. Even so-called “hate speech” is protected.

The relevant provision states that “Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech.” As written, the guarantee of free speech originally applied only to the federal government. However, the Supreme Court ruled in Gitlow v. New York that the guarantee had been “incorporated” in the Fourteenth Amendment and the guarantee is now applied to all state and local governments as well.

Now, in practice, there are laws regulating speech (you cannot shout “fire” in a crowded theater, and so on), but such regulations are generally “time, place, and manner” restrictions. Our Courts have universally frowned on what is called viewpoint discrimination:

Viewpoint discrimination is a form of content discrimination particularly disfavored by the courts. When the government engages in content discrimination, it is restricting speech on a given subject matter. When it engages in viewpoint discrimination, it is singling out a particular opinion or perspective on that subject matter for treatment unlike that given to other viewpoints.

And, yes, viewpoint discrimination explicitly includes hateful, hostile, and offensive viewpoints. This position was unanimously upheld by the United States Supreme Court in Matal vs. TamJustice Samuel Alito wrote:

Speech may not be banned on the ground that it expresses ideas that offend.

The disparagement clause denies registration to any mark that is offensive to a substantial percentage of the members of any group… That is viewpoint discrimination in the sense relevant here: Giving offense is a viewpoint.

Speech that demeans on the basis of race, ethnicity, gender, religion, age, disability, or any other similar ground is hateful, but the proudest boast of our free speech jurisprudence is that we protect the freedom to express ‘the thought that we hate.’

A more explicit statement could not be made. Speech may not be banned for being offensive or hateful. Giving offense is a viewpoint. There is no “hate speech” exception to the First Amendment.

But Expression of Viewpoints is Not Guaranteed Against Private Abridgement

Government cannot regulate your expression of your viewpoint - but corporations can.

Most people understand that the First Amendment does not apply to private actors on their private property. A person or corporation can choose to allow free speech in their home or business, or can choose to regulate free speech, even viewpoints, as they deem. This “exception” to the First Amendment has been the case since the foundation of Anglo-American law, and it is absolutely necessary to protect the rights of property owners.

For instance, if I am running a bicycle shop, I am absolutely permitted to prevent my employees from putting up posters that say “bicycles suck” or telling my customers to “buy a scooter.” Likewise, if I am running a video game news site, I am absolutely permitted to tell my journalists not to write about the beauties of Sistine Chapel instead. And if I invite you to my home to binge-watch Babylon 5, and you express the offensive viewpoint that Star Trek is better, I am altogether within my rights to make you leave.

Admittedly, there have been occasional exceptions to this rule under the so-called state actor doctrine. Most notably, the US Supreme Court ruled in Marsh v Alabama (1946) that the First Amendment fully applied to expressive activities on the company-owned sidewalks and streets of a company-owned town. The precedent of Marsh v Alabama was expanded in Amalgamated Food Employees Union v Logan Valley Plaza (1968) then overturned in Hudgens v NLRB (1976)Since Hudgens, the state actor doctrine has waned in importance, despite numerous conservative efforts to sue online platforms.

We will put aside the so-far toothless Section 230 for a discussion another day. In general, private corporations can regulate the expression of viewpoints, even though government cannot, and that’s the law.

In Fact, Private Abridgment Is Often Required!

What most people don’t understand, however, is that private actor aren’t just free to regulate viewpoint. They are required by government to regulate viewpoints. What a paradox! Government can require a private actor to undertake regulation over speech that the government couldn’t itself take? Yes!

Let’s look at one of many examples. Title 29 of the Code of Federal Regulations covers labor law. Chapter 14 of Title 29 regulates the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, and Part 1604 of Chapter 14 provides guidelines on discrimination because of sex.

§1604.11 is of particular interest. You can read the entirety of § 1604.11 here. Below I have excerpted just the key points, with emphasis added in italics:

(a) Harassment on the basis of sex is a violation…. Unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature constitute sexual harassment when… such conduct has the… effect of… creating an intimidating, hostile, or offensive working environment.

(e) An employer may also be responsible for the acts of non-employees, with respect to sexual harassment of employees in the workplace, where the employer (or its agents or supervisory employees) knows or should have known of the conduct and fails to take immediate and appropriate corrective action.

(f) Prevention is the best tool for the elimination of sexual harassment. An employer should take all steps necessary to prevent sexual harassment from occurring, such as affirmatively raising the subject, expressing strong disapproval, developing appropriate sanctions, informing employees of their right to raise and how to raise the issue of harassment under title VII, and developing methods to sensitize all concerned.

Now, scanning the above, there doesn’t seem to be much to be alarmed about. Ending sexual harassment in the workplace has been a noble goal for every developed country. Sadly, noble intent can often result in pernicious outcomes, or, worse, disguise pernicious motives. Let’s simplify the above into even plainer language:

·         Sexual harassment is a violation of Federal regulation.

·         Sexual harassment occurs when conduct has the effect of creating an intimidating, hostile, or offensive working environment.

·         An employer can be held liable for non-employee conduct that it knows or should have known about.

·         To avoid liability, the employer should take all steps necessary to stop the offensive conduct.

Now keep the above in mind as we put the pieces together.

Let’s imagine a scenario as follows. A social media company builds a platform to enable users to create discussion groups where they can share links and content - something like Reddit, perhaps. We’ll call it Talkish.

Let’s further imagine that some Talkish users establish a discussion group called “Women Don’t Exist.” On this group, forum trolls post long diatribes explaining why, in their view, the female sex simply doesn’t exist. They’re like Flat Earthers but for an entire sex. Some typical posts:

“If breasts are really part of human anatomy, why do plastic surgeons have to install implants, then, huh?! OWNED.”

“u want me 2 believe u have a vagina? then let me inspect it cuz i have never seen 1 irl and dont think they exist”

Now, it seems self-evident that “women don’t exist” is a ridiculous and ignorant viewpoint that is indefensibly stupid. But, nevertheless, it’s a viewpoint. People are allowed to say things that are ridiculous, ignorant, and indefensibly stupid. Viewpoint discrimination is forbidden by the 1A guarantee of freedom of speech. As we saw in Matal v Tam, a government couldn’t pass a law making this viewpoint illegal.

However, it also seems self-evident that “women don’t exist” is a viewpoint that will cause offense to a great many people, particularly to, well, women.

So let’s imagine that you are the CEO of Talkish. You are a hardcore libertarian who will stop at nothing in your relentless promotion of FREEDOM!!! Every day you look at the wide range of viewpoints on your website in satisfaction and wave your Gadsden flag with pride before saying your prayers over Atlas Shrugged.

Then one day your Vice President of Human Resources comes in with a stern look. “The ‘Women Don’t Exist’ discussion board is generating a lot of offensive content,” she says. “It’s reached the point where journalists are writing about it on other sites. Our employees are sharing lots of upset messages. Two of our female employees were so offended we allow it to be published that they had to take paid time off to process it. We need to take steps to address the situation, or we’ll risk liability.”

Then she runs you through the checklist:

·         Sexual harassment occurs when conduct has the effect of creating an intimidating, hostile, or offensive working environment. Check!

·         An employer can be held liable for non-employee conduct that it knows or should have known about. Check!

·         Sexual harassment is a violation of Federal regulation. Check!

·         To avoid liability, the employer should take all steps necessary to stop the offensive conduct. Uh-oh!

When she finishes, you realize that if you maintain your support for freedom of speech, your start-up could get sued for millions of dollars. In order to protect Talkish, you need to take “all steps necessary.” Being a rational egoist devoted to the pursuit of profit for free enterprise, you spring into action! You quarantine the group, ban half the users, flag the posts as offensive, and, eventually you delete Women Don’t Exist.

Now, note that I’m assuming you were a libertarian CEO here. You wanted to run a free speech platform. But you couldn’tThe Federal government’s regulations forced you, on pain of significant monetary fines, to abridge the freedom of speech of your users, even though the Federal government itself couldn’t have passed those regulationsSorcery!

This Is Not Just a Hypothetical, It’s a Trend

The thought experiment above is just a hypothetical, but the fact pattern it describes is real. The potential conflict between employer liability law and freedom of speech has been known for decades.

25 years ago, Eugene Volokh, in “How Harassment Law Restricts Free Speech,” 47 Rutgers I. Rev. 563 (1995) argued that hostile environments law should be limited to face-to-face verbal harassment directed at particular individuals because otherwise it would impinge on freedom. Had Volokh’s view held, we wouldn’t be in this situation. But it didn’t win the day.

J.M. Balkin’s did. In “Free Speech and Hostile Environments,” Columbia Law Review, Vol. 99, No. 8 (Dec., 1999), pp. 2295-2320, Balkin argued in favor of employer liability for hostile environments, even at the cost of free expression. Balkin’s views are now mainstream. Most jurists, certainly all progressive ones, argue that it is a good thing, a just thing, for speech to be regulated by private actors.

And Volokh and Balkin’s debate took place a decade before social media existed. The stakes are much higher now. The leading jurists of our day openly argue that private corporations should be, must be, and are legally and ethically obligated to censor offensive viewpoints. Consider this article at Lawfare:

The ever-increasing centrality of social media as a public space for exercising basic rights is likely to prompt more and more demands that platforms depart from their traditional “hands-off” approach and adopt new human rights-based content moderation policies. Furthermore, once online platforms begin to engage in extensive content moderation, the public may expect them to incur responsibility for harm caused by offensive content that they could and should have blocked. Put differently, nce social media companies have become in practice “arbiters of speech,” including in difficult cases that raise sensitive questions about freedom of expression, there are good reasons to subject their power to moderate content to legal checks and balances.

Put simply: Since our government cannot regulate content for being offensive, private corporations can, should, and must do so!

I chose the First Amendment and sexual harassment law for this example simply because it would be easy to understand for every reader. But §1604.11 is just one of many weapons in the arsenal of censorship.

For instance, Title IX prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex by universities. This law had noble intent, too. But in Feminist Majority Foundation v Hurleythe Fourth Circuit held that the University of Mary Washington could be held liable under Title IX because it permitted its students to post offensive messages on a social messaging platform. The President of UMW argued that the university would have abridged the student’s rights to free expression had it undertaken action. No matter, said the court - not only could UMW have taken action, it was required to do so:

The majority opinion agrees and would hold a public university and its officers liable for an allegedly inadequate response to anonymous messages posted by unknown persons on a third-party social media app unrelated to the university.

Meanwhile, H.R. 1865, the “Allow States and Victims to Fight Online Sex Trafficking Act of 2017” (commonly known as “FOSTA”) holds private platforms liable for other people’s content if it promotes prostitution. That also seems like a good law, but the Electronic Frontier Foundation has pointed out that it inevitably censors the opinions and viewpoints of sex worker advocates that are seeking to help or improve their condition. Again, the same trend: The government can’t make it illegal to advocate for sex worker’s rights - but it can make it illegal for private companies to permit you to advocate for them.

Nor is free speech the only right that is under siege. For instance, in District of Columbia v Heller (2008)the Supreme Court held that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual right to keep and bear arms. In response, according to Cato Institute, gun control advocates have begun efforts to “attack Second Amendment rights through a never​ending series of lawsuits against manufacturers and retailers of firearms to hold them financially responsible for crimes committed using the weapons they make and sell.” This effort was temporarily stalled by 2005’s Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, but that law has proven relatively toothless — the Supreme Court decided to permit litigation against Remington for marketing the AR-15.

Already US citizens have a right to say things that no one is able to permit them to say. Now, US citizens will get a right to own firearms that no one is able to manufacture and sell to them.

By such methods, the Bill of Rights can be castrated. Government, instituted to defend our rights, can pretend to be our protector, while ordering its corporatist agents to control us.

Allowing Tyranny to be Outsourced is the Road to Serfdom

This essay has only scratched the surface of a very deep topic. The mechanisms by which tyranny is outsourced are ubiquitous. And it’s not just bypassing the Bill of Rights. Outsourcing of tyranny is used everywhere to bypass the checks and balances placed on our government. Whether it’s accepting control over our currency from the Treasury, offering private mercenaries unconcerned about the laws of war, or monitoring and recording all of your private data, Tyranny Inc. is ready to do the dirty job that government isn’t supposed… but really wants… to do.

One of the most astute points that F.A. Hayek makes in The Road to Serfdom is that socialism and fascism lead to the same place (serfdom) by different means. In socialism, the government controls your labor and capital directly. In fascism, the government controls the corporations, and the corporations control your labor and capital.

What I’ve described above is similar, but broader in scope. The government controls the corporations, and the corporations control you.

Arguably, it’s even worse than that. Arguably the corporations control the government. They then inform the government how they’d like to control you. Then the government dutifully passes the necessary laws, which the corporations use to control you. If you complain to the government, they say that the Bill of Rights doesn’t apply to actions taken by corporations. If you complain to the corporations, they say they’re just following the law laid down by government. It is as sublime as it is evil.

Contemplate this on the Tree of Woe. 

Playbook for World Domination - Brought to you by one minion of the Father of Lies - By Ellen Finnigan

Do you have more money than you know what to do with? Do you have big dreams and connections in high places? Do I have a plan for you!

Getting Started

  • First, make a plan. World domination isn’t just going to fall into your lap. Read old school case studies like The Project for a New American Century and from more recently, the World Economic Forum’s Great Reset, the WHO’s Agenda 2030ID2020 and UN Agenda 2030.
  • Create a crisis. It must be a “catastrophic and catalyzing event.” It will be easier to implement your plan in the chaos that follows.Buy New $25.99(as of 04:43 EST - Details)
  • Fear is your friend. Paralyze them with fear. They’ll go along with anything.
  • The crisis should have mysterious foreign origins. Cave-dwelling terrorists in Afghanistan, cave-dwelling bats in Wuhan. For some reason, caves work, maybe something about their primitive connotations. Plus, it’s not like journalists are going to investigate something that happened in some God-forsaken foreign nation when they can earn a paycheck by “reporting” on what happened last night on Twitter from the comfort of their own beds.
  • But the place can’t be totally random. You’re going to need some connections in high places. Remember, Bush’s connections with Saudi Arabia, the CIA with Osama Bin Laden, Bill Gates with China, and Anthony Fauci with that Wuhan lab?
  • Psychologically prepare the population. This is most easily accomplished by making movies for the plebes. See Pearl Harbor (May 2001) and Pandemic (January 2020).
  • You need an “invisible enemy” that “knows no borders,” one that is impossible to definitively eradicate. But don’t use terrorists or a virus again. That’s played out. You’ll have to come up with something bigger and better next time. Aliens might be cool.
  • Make the epicenter the Big Apple, because those folks are generally on our side and always easy to work with. Also, take a cue from Hollywood: Godzilla didn’t invade Charleston, and I Am Legend doesn’t take place in Helena. There is a reason for this.
  • Go big or go home. Is it likely that commercial airliners would manage to fly through some the most heavily defended airspace in the world and hit two buildings, 18 minutes apart, and the Pentagon? No — LOL! Is it likely that a virus would manage to escape one of the most highly secured and secretive labs in the entire world? Probably not. But the good news is: You don’t have to worry about what is likely or probable or believable. Just concern yourself with what is plausibly deniable and go from there. Seriously, the bigger the lie, the easier it is to believe, because they won’t be able to believe that someone would tell a lie that big. It’s all about chutzpah!
  • Plant a few seeds or make sure there is some precedent for the incredulous, like this and this.
  • Practice makes perfect! We recommend running some simulations, like the Pentagon Mass Casualty Project or the September 11 NORAD drills or Event 201. They can be good for cover or confusion or just for looking like you are trying to prepare for a crisis instead of planning one.


Now that you’re ready, you can trigger your “catastrophic and catalyzing” event. (D-Day stands for “Demo Day,” by the way. Ha ha.)Buy New $26.00(as of 04:43 EST - Details)

  • Surprise, surprise. Condoleeza Rice and President Bush both said that no one could have imagined terrorists using planes as missiles! (Though the military had imagined and prepared for this very thing.) And even though the Wuhan lab had 1,500 viruses in its stockpile, the virus that caused the plandemic was of course totally unknown to mankind, like nobody knew how it worked and stuff. This is important, like whatever happens needs to seem to come out of nowhere.
  • Instantly associate your new crisis with an iconic old one, but don’t recreate the wheel. Humans have short memories. “Pearl Harbor” usually works. See The Boston Globe in September 2001, and The Boston Globe again in April 2020.
  • Provide instant answers and verbalize the plan immediately. By the afternoon of September 11, 2001, Osama Bin Laden’s face was plastered all over the television screen, and people were calling for war (the plan) shortly thereafter. With the virus, it was important to tell people immediately what it was, where it came from, and that there would be no hope in combatting it without a vaccine (the plan), right away. First impressions are important. After that, humans will for some reason just, like, go with it.


  • Re-traumatize through repetition. In 2001, television stations broadcasted the images of the towers collapsing over and over again for months. In 2020, no one could escape the daily reports on “cases.” Repetition is key. Don’t worry: We’ve laid the groundwork for you here. The media will dutifully repeat whatever you tell them, and then the humans will, in turn, repeat whatever they hear from the media. We didn’t call it “Operation Mockingbird” for nothing!
  • Make up slogansLet’s roll! Never forget. Never again. These colors don’t run. Flatten the curve. Stay safe. Socially distance. Shelter in place. #wearadamnmask. You know, dumb crap like that.
  • You need some branding, something catchy to get people on board, something like “The War on Terror” or “The Great Reset.”
  • Promote unity. If someone questioned the events of September 11th he was deemed “unpatriotic.” If he questioned the narrative of COVID-1984, he was surely a sociopath! Next time, if shame doesn’t work, send them to a “re-education camp” or just start killing people, ideally in public.
  • The all-seeing eye. After September 11: “If you see something, say something” and “Report suspicious activity.” After the virus, people started snitching on their neighbors who were having a birthday party or playing football in the park.
  • Allow virtue signaling. Give people a way to show their buy-in, like by wearing an American flag on their lapel or donning a face diaper. Just make sure it’s easy, because people will do anything to seem like a good person, but not if it’s hard.
  • Tell them everything has changed. Use terms like “post-9/11” and the “New Normal.” The crisis must be characterized as a watershed event that will forever change the way they live (key word being “they”… ha ha.)
  • Never look back. Discourage reflection and “how did we get here” conversations, like about “blowback” or the ethics of engaging in biological warfare research or the pervasive problem of generally weakened immune systems from nutrition-less, GMO foods. People should only look forward (to the war/vaccine), never back.Buy New $28.00(as of 04:43 EST - Details)
  • Combat dissent. For anyone who 1) points out the published agendas in written documents, 2) speaks about large gatherings of powerful elites like Davos Group, Council on Foreign Relations, Bilderberg Group, etc., 3) dares to speak aloud the names of conspirators or the organizations they fund and associate with, 3) questions the origins of the crisis, or 4) urges prudence instead of haste, 5) calls attention to the downsides of the plan, 6) questions the plan in anyway, censor them, call them “conspiracy theorists” or say that they want to “do nothing” in a time of crisis.

Moving towards implementation, you must create the right environment.

  • The threat must be ongoing. After September 11, they used an ever-changing, color-coded warning system. After the virus, they did this too. In both cases there were constant reports of “break-outs” and predictions of a second wave, and ongoing “scientific discoveries” like: “It causes brain damage!” or “It causes infertility!” or “People who walk their dogs are 78% more likely to get the virus!”
  • Create logical chaos. For a thinking person, there is nothing so maddening. For example, in 2001, people were told that the fires from jet fuel were so hot that they could cause steel structures to collapse and disintegrate into dust, yet one of the terrorists’ passports was supposedly found lying on the ground. People were told the terrorists were in Afghanistan but “we” needed to invade Iraq. People were told the virus could live on surfaces for up to two weeks, but then it couldn’t. It wasn’t necessary to wear a mask, but then it was. Asymptomatic people could transmit the virus, then only pre-symptomatic people could. The virus could spread at anti-lockdown protests but not at BLM protests. This kind of thing will drive thinking people crazy. Good. That’s what you want.
  • Create social chaos. Thinking people will spend hours, years, decades, trying to figure out the truth, sharing the latest information, and then arguing, especially on social media, about what is true and what is not. Keep them arguing over the truth of what really happened while you implement the plan.
  • Ignore, play down protests and it will be like they didn’t happen. Most people had no idea of the extent of the protests against the invasion of Iraq, or about the extent of the protests against the lockdowns. So when the plan proceeded unimpeded, it didn’t strike many as being against the will of the people.
  • Make people feel physically insecure and unsafe. After September 11, they unleashed the Anthrax scare. After the virus, they funded the BLM and Antifa riots, started race wars, and worked toward color revolution. While Rome is burning, you will be calmly implementing your plan.

As you implement the plan:

  • Manufacture evidence. The intelligence agencies were pressured to “find” the evidence that would support the plan to invade Iraq; just like hospitals and doctors were bribed or pressured to report the cause of deaths as COVID-1984.
  • Dismiss family ties as conspiracy theory. George W. Bush was the son of Herbert Walker Bush, former President and head of the CIA (who didn’t remember where he was the day Kennedy died), had waged a previous war against Saddam Hussein, and had publicly called for a “new world order,” yet the “War on Terror” could have nothing to do with any of that. Bill Gates came from a family of eugenicists, engaged in dishonest business practices his whole life, and publicly called for population reduction and control, but this vaccine could have nothing to do with any of that.Buy New $49.95(as of 04:43 EST - Details)
  • Move at warp speed. The post-September 11 cries that we must “Do something!” fueled the rush to war. The panic over the virus fueled “Operation Warp Speed,” the push for a vaccine. The wreckage at the World Trade Center was carted off and sold to China before anyone could blink. Likewise, there was no time to investigate Gates’ and Fauci’s ties to the Wuhan lab, how the virus escaped, whether the virus was manmade, the fraudulent testing and reporting, and certainly no time to for the necessary trials to test the vaccine before it went to market.
  • Mission creep: Just like the need to bomb the caves in Afghanistan where the terrorists supposedly dwelled led to the invasion for Iraq, and then the occupation of both countries for decades, so “fourteen days to flatten the curve” led to six months of “lockdown” and economic devastation and, then, the need to stop climate change, to move to digital currency, to usher in the fourth industrial revolution and trans-humanism.
  • Get the Catholic Church on your side. One way to do this might be to have a major paper publish drop a perfectly timed bombshell that exposes the largest sex scandal in history, thereby discrediting them, embroiling them in controversy, and preoccupying them with lawsuits for the foreseeable future so they can’t, or won’t, speak out against war. If you can’t do that, buy their silence with millions of dollars. Like the folks in NYC, the people at the top of the USCCB have proven historically very easy to work with: They didn’t bring up Just War Theory when the U.S. government invaded Iraq, and they didn’t bring up fetal tissue from aborted babies when they pushed the vaccine.

Now is the time for a power grab. Just like everything and anything could be justified in the name of national security after September 11, 2001, everything and anything could be justified in the name of public health in the wake of COVID-1984, including the following:

  • Increase surveillance and trampling of civil rights: There was the Patriot Act in the wake of September 11th and “contact tracing” in the wake of the virus.
  • Install new government busybodies: Like the TSA, then contact tracers.
  • Censor! Silence anyone who criticizes or questions the government’s narrative, even those – especially those — who are well qualified in related fields, such as doctors, immunologistsstructural engineers, and architects. Refer to all as “conspiracy theorists” and put them all on a media blacklist.
  • Rake in obscene profits. The military-industrial complex on the one hand, BigPharma and the Davos billionaires on the other. Luckily these two massive industries eventually blended, with DARPA and the Department of Defense involved in the developing and deploying of the vaccine. With Big Military, Big Tech, and Big Pharma all blending, things things are getting harder for people to sort out. That’s good!

Psy-ops are necessary to psychologically condition the population for your long term plan.

  • Promote loss of bodily privacy. Just like everyone had to become accustomed to being radiated and photographed naked in order to board a plane, or be subject to a feel-up by a rubber-gloved TSA agent, after the virus they had to let random strangers, like the guy at the front desk at the gym give them temperature checks or bark at them to wear a mask. This made it easier for them to accept when someone eventually told them they had to get a vaccine.
  • Everyone is a threat. The United States’ was criticized because, at the airports, they “were looking for weapons instead of for terrorists”. In other words, they didn’t use profiling. But that was the whole point. Everyone got used to being treated like a terrorist or potential terrorist, just like everyone became accustomed to being treated as if they were sick, or were potentially sick, even if they were not.
  • Subject them to asinine, arbitrary nonsense. Why is bringing 8 ounces of liquid on a plane dangerous but bringing 4 ounces of liquid is not? Who knows! Where is “the science” that says viruses can’t travel seven feet but they can travel four? Who cares!
  • Take over science. Just like you need your assets in the media, you need your assets in the scientific community, so if anyone who tries to question the narrative based on science, you can call their science “unscientific.” Most people know nothing about science, so this will be easy. Just establish who the “real” scientists are and then use the logical fallacy of appeal to authority.
  • Gas-lightning. It doesn’t take a genius to notice that “9/11” also happens to be the emergency number to be called in times of a life-threatening situation. Coincidence? We’ll never tell. But here’s some more examples of fun with numbers:

a. The “COVID-19 Testing, Reaching, and Contacting Everyone (TRACE) Act” introduced in May of 2020 was numbered H.R. 6666.

b. Microsoft applied for a patent in 2019 for a device that monitors peoples “body activity data” and allows that person to be rewarded with cryptocurrency; it is numbered WO/2020/060606.

c. Bill Gates developed something called the “Implantable Quantum Dot Microneedle Vaccination Delivery System,” also referred to as a “digital tattoo,” which was essentially a high-tech bar code / branding system for humans. I don’t purport to understand all the details, but from what I’ve gathered, there is an enzyme involved, or a nanogel, which was named “Luciferase,” which makes the tattoo glow so you can see it and scan it. (Lucifer was an angel that rebelled against God; his name means “light bearer.” Jesus warned us about the anti-Christ appearing as an “angel of light.”)

d. On Good Friday in 2020, when “they” had successfully locked the entire Christian world away in their homes and prevented them from gathering in remembrance of Christ’s passion and resurrection, Microsoft came out with an ad for their HoloLens “virtual reality platform” featuring none other than Marina Abramovic, Washington’s favorite witch, a weirdo no one cared about until she was made infamous by her appearances in the Wikileaks “PizzaGate” emails. The media reported that the ad had to be “pulled” because Christian and right-wing “conspiracy theorists” were throwing a hissy fit. The point of all of this is that you can have so much fun gas-lighting the Christians. Put it all out there and then when they say they see signs of Satanic or occult activity, tell them they are seeing things that aren’t there! It’s all a coincidence. It’s all in their head. And when they start talking about the “mark of the beast,” they’ll only make themselves sound crazy to “normal” people who understand things like “art” and “science.” (This part isn’t necessarily a crucial part of the playbook, but it’s just so much fun. You should try it.)

  • Dehumanization. If there is a war in the works (as there usually is), this is key. Find elements of the foreign culture that are most offensive or disgusting to people in the West and then harp on it constantly. After September 11, pundits and authors (conservative ones especially) homed in on things like the 27 virgins, the personal vices of Muhammed, the repression of women, genital mutilation, and pedophilia. Hollywood villains soon became Islamic terrorists in pretty much every movie and television show. After the virus, it was made acceptable to make fun of Chinese people for eating weird food, and the government was vilified as duplicitous. The virus was also repeatedly called “The China Virus” by President Trump and Republicans, which was a good move. The point is the psychological conditioning should start sooner rather than later. You can’t expect humans to go kill other humans if they see them as humans, more like them than different.
  • In praise of force. The “War on Terror” demanded the constant idolization of the military and public displays of support for “the troops,” including all who “serve” (fire fighters, cops, first responders). The BLM/Antifa riots and simultaneous calls to “Defund the Police” produced the desired backlash in the form of calls for “law and order” and cries of support for cops and soldiers, especially those who had “fallen.” This was good, very good. Find a way to do this, because if you’re going to make a play for more control, you’re going to need more force to back you up, and you’re going to need to make the use of that force look acceptable to the people you need on your side.

Follow these simple steps and you will be a master of this world in no time, not to mention richly rewarded in the next. I promise.

The Best of Ellen Finnigan

Ellen Finnigan [send her mail] teaches writing and literature at an online, Catholic school for homeschoolers. She runs a website and a podcast called Catholics Against Militarism. You can find her on Twitter @EllenFinnigan and read more of her writing here.

Copyright © Ellen Finnigan