Vaccine ‘passports’ being put in place by the European Union and Australia as well as some U.S. states and businesses are one of the more alarming instruments advancing the ‘heart and soul of Technocracy and Scientific Dictatorship.’

As must be increasingly apparent to anyone capable of digging beneath the toxic media’s daily outpouring of Orwellian propaganda, the planet-wide changes ushered in by the conveniently timed COVID crisis have surprisingly little to do with health.

Facilitated by big tech, big military, big pharma’s injectable operating systems and other such Big Brother, the hijacking of entire nations and their helpless populations being engineered by private central bankers and their technocratic partners represents no less than a complete end-run around human freedom.

Vaccine ‘passports’ or ‘certificates,’ being put in place by the European Union and Australia as well as some U.S. states and businesses, are one of the more alarming instruments advancing this tyrannical centralization and control agenda.

Not one to mince words, author Naomi Wolf makes the case that the ‘passports,’ if allowed to become the norm, could trigger ‘the end of civil society’ and ‘literally the end of human liberty in the West.’

Why is there such a strong push to make travel and commerce contingent on vaccine passports? One important answer, well understood by Wolf as CEO of a tech company, is ‘location intelligence’, what technocracy expert Patrick Wood calls the heart and soul of Technocracy and Scientific Dictatorship. Without irony, the champions of location data rhapsodise that such data are ‘a powerful way to connect people to place, transactions to actions, responses to trends, and customers to where they do business and the kind of business they do’, ultimately enabling the digital transformation of society on the whole.

Less cheerfully, technocrats understand, even if the general public does not, that location data permit control at the most granular levels and provide ‘a platform for understanding what’s going on at all scales.’ This point was disturbingly illustrated in a June 21 study in JAMA Internal Medicine, which essentially condemned ‘small and informal social gatherings,’ positing that children’s birthday parties are potential hotbeds of SARS-CoV-2 transmission.

On its webpage devoted to ‘small gatherings,’ updated May 6, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) addresses the topic of social gatherings with family and friends, ‘such as small holiday parties, family dinners and small special celebrations.’

To make such events ‘safer,’ CDC counsels hosts and attendees to limit the number of guests, wear a mask ‘with two or more layers, indoors and outdoors except when eating or drinking,’ socially distance, avoid handshakes and hugs, supply one’s own food and dishes, and avoid any cheering or singing. Better yet, CDC says, simply have a virtual gathering!

The JAMA birthday party study helpfully reinforces the CDC’s hideous advice. Conducted by private-sector researchers from RAND Corporation, Harvard and ‘healthcare navigation’ company Castlight Health, the study looked at privately insured households whose members did or did not have a birthday in the preceding two weeks and county-level COVID-19 prevalence data.

As is par for the course in risk pronouncements designed to steer COVID-related behaviour in a particular direction, the researchers said nothing about absolute risk, even though many consider absolute risk statistics to be ‘the most useful way of presenting research results to help … decision-making.’

The heavy-handed marketing of COVID injections and COVID vaccine passports as tickets to ‘freedom’ has brought George Orwell’s inverted ‘freedom is slavery’ logic fully to the fore.

The ‘appendix’ to 1984 explains that while the fictional totalitarian regime Oceania could readily use of the word ‘free’ in statements such as ‘This dog is free from lice’ or ‘This field is free from weeds,’ usages such as ‘politically free’ or ‘intellectually free’ had disappeared entirely and intentionally extinct because the concepts themselves had been erased.

The alarming speed with which the Western democracies were able to implement ‘elements of a locked-in, 360-degree totalitarianism’ was facilitated not just by a heretofore unimaginable level of global policy coordination but also by the public’s complacency. The pressing question of the day, therefore, is whether citizens will continue to tolerate blatant efforts to memory-hole freedom. Source