A friend sent me a link (https://www.bitchute.com/video/OfUvXQAxGnsy/) to a recorded interview with Catherine Austin Fitts, a gal with an impressive resume (look up her details) as an in-the-know economics authority. In the interview, she engagingly makes the argument that the covid vaccinations are a tool for hooking us up to a sort of Borg collective. Her connections would tend to give her fantastic theory credence, but I have problems with it.
As I listened, it was not always clear to me what she meant. For example, she talked about the social security coffers being emptied and the blame being apportioned to the virus, but I don't see any sign of that. She also said, or at least implied, things that I don't think are true. For example, the deliberate destruction of small business to transfer their market share to mega-retailers such as Amazon and Walmart, and she even lumped into her small business category professional practices (CPAs and lawyers), implying they are having their income crippled so they won't support populist political candidates. If the aim of government is to put small business under, why all the grants and subsidies that have kept so many of them in business?
There is no doubt that the virus is real, not just an imaginary invisible affliction. If it wasn't real, someone in health care would have blown the whistle by now.
I agree that the lockdown isn't the way to deal with the problem. Lockdowns work in theory, but they do not seem to have worked in practice. The masks, social distancing and frequent hand washing seem to be what is needed more. They are efficacious and do not demolish the economy. Make no mistake: the economy is being shredded. Yes, we still have abundance, but that isn’t from our production so much as it is from China sending stuff to us.
I agree with the interviewee that there is an effort to get rid of cash, and probably as a tool to control the masses. Maybe someone will be able to use the pandemic as a context in which to do that, but I have yet to see signs of it.
I don't doubt that there are rich people who collaborate with the aim of changing the world. I expect that if I was super rich, I would want to use my wealth to change the world also. I think that what may be happening is that they talk to each other and get so exclusionary that their ideas are inbred. They get out of touch with reality, and their ideas do not have the power we might otherwise expect. The interviewee claims that the elite want to greatly reduce human population, replacing us with robots to serve them. The problem with that is that most disruptive and transformative ideas arise from the intellect of the common man, not from the elite. Get rid of most of humanity, and you have gotten rid of most creativity. I suspect the elite know that, but maybe they are more inbred in their thinking than I think they are, and actually do have the nefarious plan of which they are accused.
I did find it interesting that riots occur in areas where some rich guys might want to buy commercial real estate cheaply. I can believe that happening. So yeah, there are some assertions of Catherine Austin Fitts that do ring true, but I’m not buying her ideas as a package deal.
