Some quotes from the article: "Luckily for us, we do not need to be mind-readers or fortune tellers to know what the globalists are preparing for our dystopian

Some quotes from the article: "Luckily for us, we do not need to be mind-readers or fortune tellers to know what the globalists are preparing for our dystopian future. We simply have to read their documents. And boy, have they released some real doozies in the past month, three documents that lay out a precise timeline and an overview of what they're hoping to achieve and how they're hoping to achieve it." "We learn that what is really being proposed is not that political blather about "banding together for a common cause" but creating a legally-binding agreement to govern the global response to global public health "crises" (real or imaginary)." "The document is precisely as disturbing as you would expect, laying out step-by-step exactly how to hardwire the biosecurity state into place through the creation of centralized testing, surveillance, data sharing, monitoring and reporting standards." "The notice asks the companies to submit “exactly how many users saw or may have been exposed to instances of Covid-19 misinformation,” as well as aggregate data on demographics that may have been disproportionately exposed to or affected by the misinformation." "Given what we have just seen taking place in Canada around the doxing and financial de-personing of the Freedom Convoy supporters, can there be any doubt that the systems are now being erected so that thoughtcriminals will be penalized for sharing "misinformation" about the next scamdemic?" "The social engineers know what they are doing. They are wearing the population down, first generating hysteria over a perceived crisis and then slipping in the poison pill once the public's attention has turned elsewhere." -- In response to the comment (I'm unable to reply). You can say puerile rubbish, etc - that's fine. Stick to the BBC, guardian, NYC for information. But must we stick to those sources? Is it unaccaptable to look elsewhere too? Is the article is still a pontentially valid interpretation of the documents? What you are ignoring in your comment is that he is providing links to the documentation so you can confirm for yourself what is being stated. The sources belong to governance structure itself - the EU, the White House. So you can check for yourself! Ignore the article (albeit it draws these threads together) no problem - but how do you intepret the linked information?