Has anybody read the other Whitney Webb articles related to
Engineering Contagion above? What do you think? (And does anyone know if Whitney is related to Garry Webb?)
https://www.thelastamericanvagabond.com ... rk-winter/
https://www.thelastamericanvagabond.com ... re-market/
https://www.thelastamericanvagabond.com ... rt-kadlec/
I've just started on them, only part way through, but one thing stood out immediately. From the first of the three links above, something that if I already knew it, I'd forgotten:
Yet, upon examining not only these biosafety incidents at Fort Detrick, but the 2001 Anthrax attacks and the current Covid-19 outbreak, another odd commonality stands out — high-level war games exercise took place in June 2001 that eerily predicted not only the Anthrax attacks, but also the initial government narrative of those attacks and much, much more.
That June 2001 exercise, known as “Dark Winter,” also predicted many aspects of government pandemic response that would later re-emerge in last October’s simulation “Event 201,” which predicted a global pandemic caused by a novel Coronavirus just months before the Covid-19 outbreak. In addition, the U.S. government would lead its own multi-part series of pandemic simulations, called “Crimson Contagion,” that would also predict aspects of the Covid-19 outbreak and government response.
I've
always been slightly dissatisfied with at least some of the explanations which theorists use to account for the many exercises preceding or occurring during world changing events. Simply to create confusion makes some sense in specific cases like 9/11, but certainly not in others where confusion wouldn’t necessarily be an immediate factor, like Covid19, or wherever the exercise/simulation precedes the event by a margin, and so could not possibly cover for the antagonists on the day. Another explanation, 'to test and perfect methodology,' doesn’t make total sense either, since drawing attention to a crime before the crime is committed would seem to defeat the purpose of the crime, and so on. But if we are to imagine the perps in any such theory, they are hard headed individuals, not inclined to frivolousness. So what on earth might be their reason? This unavoidable fact of an increasingly visible correlation between event and simulation would actually tend to mitigate away from conspiracy as an explanation for many observers, simply because, logically it wouldn’t make sense if one were engaged in a terrible crime to actively draw attention to that crime by constantly rehearsing the crime itself beforehand. And yet this kind of circular logic would obviously work in the favour of any would be conspirator, even though it doesn’t yet fully explain why a conspirator would repetitively go to all the effort involved.
This instantly made me wonder about some implications of Rupert Sheldrake's view, his theory of Morphic Resonance. In one of his favourite anecdotes, Sheldrake's eldest child proposed to use his theory to improve exam scores:
I and my friends have just thought of a great way of getting extra marks without doing extra work. We’re going to do the last two questions first, and then go back to the first and second and third questions. We’ll be ten minutes behind everyone else in Britain so we’ll get a boost by Morpic Resonance...We worked out that if it doesn’t exist we wouldn’t lose anything, but if it does, we’d gain extra marks.
Time: 49:00 to 50:00 (Although the whole talk is a great introduction to the idea of Morphic Resonance.)
A friend suggested to me many years ago that the purpose of these exercises was primarily to ‘foreground’ later events in some way, as he put it, but I never really bought into that explanation. Latterly I suspect he was right in some important respects. The numerous examples of precognition in art and culture would certainly seem to make sense in this light. Various committed men thinking hard about something of the magnitude we're talking about and, sometimes for many years beforehand, which they intend to carry out, this would probably create waves, as it were. If Sheldrake is right, it would create waves in the morphic field which innevitably find their way to sensitive individuals, artists in particular. Furthermore, these realistic enactments might be used to cast the mould, as it were. To help direct later interpretations of what happened along the desired lines. And for a while at least, if this is indeed a mechanism, it has worked.
Obviously, this argument is not going to convince anyone of anything. But what it does do is give at least one example of what the underlying assumptions of the perps might be. One which does make some sense of their observed methods. Even a conspiracy sceptic would have to admit that anyone contemplating benefiting from such crimes must already be quite radically unusual in their thought processes and reasoning.
Whenever confronted by a new technology or idea, one of my least favourite questions, but as I tend to find, the most necessary and important is: what would the very worst amongst us do with it?
