Good article. Thanks.IllinoisJayhawk wrote: ↑Sun May 17, 2020 8:07 pm https://www.cbpp.org/research/economy/c ... on-economy
Since DC gave me the dreaded "OMFG" figured I better do some of my own reading up on the current state of the economy to determine if its truly 90% trashed.
They’re doing exactly what I expected. It is a controlled reopening accompanied by misleading numbers designed to justify locking things back down until after the election. Rather than just letting things run their course and preserving the economy, we’re sticking to the Agenda 21 game plan, which is to wreck the economy, force austerity measures, and use fear and hunger to move people into centralized living areas where they will be more easily controlled.twocoach wrote: ↑Sun May 17, 2020 7:18 pmYou sounded fine with a controlled reopening before we began the controlled reopening. So what's the complaint now?HouseDivided wrote: ↑Sun May 17, 2020 5:29 pmI know, right? It's only been eight weeks and the economy is only 90% trashed. Heck, the election is still five and half months away. We're just getting started. Time to fudge some more scary numbers.
If the stats were showing that a full reopening was a better course of action than a controlled reopening, would you still feel like the numbers were "fudged"?
I have family members who have had it and recovered from it. Not sure how much closer to home it can get. People get sick. It is a part of life.
"They"? If "they" were doing what you are claiming then why would "they" only be putting these misleading stats out in states where there were less restrictions? Why wouldn't "they" want to scare everyone in every states, regardless of their reopening plan? Why are these "misleading" stats only in states where significant numbers of people are not following the established guidelines and not everywhere? And what exactly is "misleading" about the stats?HouseDivided wrote: ↑Mon May 18, 2020 1:26 amThey’re doing exactly what I expected. It is a controlled reopening accompanied by misleading numbers designed to justify locking things back down until after the election. Rather than just letting things run their course and preserving the economy, we’re sticking to the Agenda 21 game plan, which is to wreck the economy, force austerity measures, and use fear and hunger to move people into centralized living areas where they will be more easily controlled.twocoach wrote: ↑Sun May 17, 2020 7:18 pmYou sounded fine with a controlled reopening before we began the controlled reopening. So what's the complaint now?HouseDivided wrote: ↑Sun May 17, 2020 5:29 pm
I know, right? It's only been eight weeks and the economy is only 90% trashed. Heck, the election is still five and half months away. We're just getting started. Time to fudge some more scary numbers.
If the stats were showing that a full reopening was a better course of action than a controlled reopening, would you still feel like the numbers were "fudged"?
You can read the official version full of euphemisms straight from the U.N. here: https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/o ... s/agenda21twocoach wrote: ↑Mon May 18, 2020 8:06 am"They"? If "they" were doing what you are claiming then why would "they" only be putting these misleading stats out in states where there were less restrictions? Why wouldn't "they" want to scare everyone in every states, regardless of their reopening plan? Why are these "misleading" stats only in states where significant numbers of people are not following the established guidelines and not everywhere? And what exactly is "misleading" about the stats?HouseDivided wrote: ↑Mon May 18, 2020 1:26 amThey’re doing exactly what I expected. It is a controlled reopening accompanied by misleading numbers designed to justify locking things back down until after the election. Rather than just letting things run their course and preserving the economy, we’re sticking to the Agenda 21 game plan, which is to wreck the economy, force austerity measures, and use fear and hunger to move people into centralized living areas where they will be more easily controlled.twocoach wrote: ↑Sun May 17, 2020 7:18 pm
You sounded fine with a controlled reopening before we began the controlled reopening. So what's the complaint now?
If the stats were showing that a full reopening was a better course of action than a controlled reopening, would you still feel like the numbers were "fudged"?
And by all means, please provide a link to when "they" start relocating people into centralized living areas. I would like to see an example of this.
Do you ever stop to think these conspiracies through or does that take some of the fun out of it?
Thank you for the link. I downloaded the PDF and read Chapter 7 "Promoting Sustainable Human Settlement Development" over my lunch break and then did some searches of the document as a whole.HouseDivided wrote: ↑Mon May 18, 2020 9:24 amYou can read the official version full of euphemisms straight from the U.N. here: https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/o ... s/agenda21twocoach wrote: ↑Mon May 18, 2020 8:06 am"They"? If "they" were doing what you are claiming then why would "they" only be putting these misleading stats out in states where there were less restrictions? Why wouldn't "they" want to scare everyone in every states, regardless of their reopening plan? Why are these "misleading" stats only in states where significant numbers of people are not following the established guidelines and not everywhere? And what exactly is "misleading" about the stats?HouseDivided wrote: ↑Mon May 18, 2020 1:26 am
They’re doing exactly what I expected. It is a controlled reopening accompanied by misleading numbers designed to justify locking things back down until after the election. Rather than just letting things run their course and preserving the economy, we’re sticking to the Agenda 21 game plan, which is to wreck the economy, force austerity measures, and use fear and hunger to move people into centralized living areas where they will be more easily controlled.
And by all means, please provide a link to when "they" start relocating people into centralized living areas. I would like to see an example of this.
Do you ever stop to think these conspiracies through or does that take some of the fun out of it?
You can read about what it means in practical terms here:
The author of the book has multiple interviews where she breaks down the data as it relates to the current Plandemic that are easily found via search engine.
Agenda 21 is so-named because it is a blueprint for sweeping global changes over the course of the century. It has been in progress for the last 50+ years in small increments. Koire has done a great deal of exhaustive research, and ironically, started out with doing it in order to debunk the tinfoil hat conspiracies. By the time she finished, she joined the other team. You can find a lot of the documentation you are looking for here: https://www.democratsagainstunagenda21.com/. Sorry about the faulty Amazon link. Not sure why that happened.twocoach wrote: ↑Mon May 18, 2020 1:27 pmThank you for the link. I downloaded the PDF and read Chapter 7 "Promoting Sustainable Human Settlement Development" over my lunch break and then did some searches of the document as a whole.HouseDivided wrote: ↑Mon May 18, 2020 9:24 amYou can read the official version full of euphemisms straight from the U.N. here: https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/o ... s/agenda21twocoach wrote: ↑Mon May 18, 2020 8:06 am
"They"? If "they" were doing what you are claiming then why would "they" only be putting these misleading stats out in states where there were less restrictions? Why wouldn't "they" want to scare everyone in every states, regardless of their reopening plan? Why are these "misleading" stats only in states where significant numbers of people are not following the established guidelines and not everywhere? And what exactly is "misleading" about the stats?
And by all means, please provide a link to when "they" start relocating people into centralized living areas. I would like to see an example of this.
Do you ever stop to think these conspiracies through or does that take some of the fun out of it?
You can read about what it means in practical terms here:
The author of the book has multiple interviews where she breaks down the data as it relates to the current Plandemic that are easily found via search engine.
The term "resettlement" shows up twice, one in reference to resettling displaced refugees and the other in reference to people displaced by natural disasters. "Relocate" and "relocation" are not used once. The term "move" is never used in relation to moving people. In fact, I do not find anything at all in that document that even remotely supports your claim that there will be a purposeful effort to relocate people to centralized locations.
As for the Amazon link, it just took me to Amazon.com in general so I typed "Agenda 21" into the search:
"Behind the Green Mask: UN Agenda 21" seems the most likely to be the book you are referencing based on the description:
"If you've been wanting an interesting, clearly written, how-to-manual for identifying and fighting UN Agenda 21, here it is. Agenda 21--All the information you need to understand what is happening in your town, why it's happening, who is behind it, and what you can do to stop it. BEHIND THE GREEN MASK: U.N. Agenda 21 is 172 pages of truth. Part history, part current events, part hand-to-hand combat, and part blueprint for keeping your freedom, this is one book that you'll put to work immediately. Boots on the ground and all hands on deck is the order of the day. Awareness is the first step in the Resistance."
The fact that it is written by a former real estate appraiser and that you can also buy it on the InfoWars website should tell you all you need to know about it's legitimacy: http://www.infowarsshop.com/Behind-The- ... p_585.html
Here's a typical quote from Rosa Koire, the author of your great book: “[Y]our local government is in the process of controlling where and how you live, what you eat, what your children learn, and what laws you will live under.” She also says on her website that the Agenda 21 plan means “to inventory and control all land, all water, all minerals, all plants, all animals, all construction, all means of production, all energy, all education, all information, and all human beings in the world.”
So typical goofball conspiracy stuff.
So do you have what I was looking for in actual links to actual examples of actual governments within the United States forcibly relocating people to centralized locations to better control them? Since the UN's Agenda 21 document was published in 1992, I would assume that this has happened at least once in the 28 years since to support people believing such conspiracy theories.
Looking forward to your links...but I won't hold my breath.
They key component of Agenda 21 is to TRUST Agenda 21.twocoach wrote: ↑Mon May 18, 2020 8:06 am"They"? If "they" were doing what you are claiming then why would "they" only be putting these misleading stats out in states where there were less restrictions? Why wouldn't "they" want to scare everyone in every states, regardless of their reopening plan? Why are these "misleading" stats only in states where significant numbers of people are not following the established guidelines and not everywhere? And what exactly is "misleading" about the stats?HouseDivided wrote: ↑Mon May 18, 2020 1:26 amThey’re doing exactly what I expected. It is a controlled reopening accompanied by misleading numbers designed to justify locking things back down until after the election. Rather than just letting things run their course and preserving the economy, we’re sticking to the Agenda 21 game plan, which is to wreck the economy, force austerity measures, and use fear and hunger to move people into centralized living areas where they will be more easily controlled.twocoach wrote: ↑Sun May 17, 2020 7:18 pm
You sounded fine with a controlled reopening before we began the controlled reopening. So what's the complaint now?
If the stats were showing that a full reopening was a better course of action than a controlled reopening, would you still feel like the numbers were "fudged"?
And by all means, please provide a link to when "they" start relocating people into centralized living areas. I would like to see an example of this.
Do you ever stop to think these conspiracies through or does that take some of the fun out of it?
Are you talking about the actual Agenda 21 (the non-binding document from the UN that is basically a wish list for improving global conditions) or the Glenn Beck-fueled Agenda 21 that has tinfoil hat wearers spazzing out that a global cabal is going to move them to government housing to run on a treadmill to power the neighborhood power grid?chiknbut wrote: ↑Mon May 18, 2020 2:54 pmThey key component of Agenda 21 is to TRUST Agenda 21.twocoach wrote: ↑Mon May 18, 2020 8:06 am"They"? If "they" were doing what you are claiming then why would "they" only be putting these misleading stats out in states where there were less restrictions? Why wouldn't "they" want to scare everyone in every states, regardless of their reopening plan? Why are these "misleading" stats only in states where significant numbers of people are not following the established guidelines and not everywhere? And what exactly is "misleading" about the stats?HouseDivided wrote: ↑Mon May 18, 2020 1:26 am
They’re doing exactly what I expected. It is a controlled reopening accompanied by misleading numbers designed to justify locking things back down until after the election. Rather than just letting things run their course and preserving the economy, we’re sticking to the Agenda 21 game plan, which is to wreck the economy, force austerity measures, and use fear and hunger to move people into centralized living areas where they will be more easily controlled.
And by all means, please provide a link to when "they" start relocating people into centralized living areas. I would like to see an example of this.
Do you ever stop to think these conspiracies through or does that take some of the fun out of it?
The rest will take care of itself.
I’ll bet that whoever is giving him the pills is giving him Tylenol instead of the real hydroxychloroquine. I’m also wondering if it’s that goofy NYC doctor who wrote the letter before the election is the one who wrote him the script?