Event 201 was a signaling exercise, but it was also, as we shall see, a training run for a “government in waiting.” Its principals would quickly move into key positions to run pandemic response a few months later.
At Gates’s direction, the participants role-played members of a Pandemic Control Council, war-gaming a contagion that serves as pretext for this insurgency against American democracy. They drilled a retinue of psychological warfare techniques for controlling official narratives, silencing dissent, forcibly masking large populations, and leveraging the pandemic to promote mandatory mass vaccinations. Needless to say, there was little talk of building or fortifying immune systems, existing off-the-shelf remedies, or off-patent therapeutic drugs and vitamins. Instead, there was abundant palaver about expanding government’s authoritarian powers, imposing draconian restrictions, curtailing traditional civil rights, which might include of rights of assembly, free speech, private property, jury trials, due process, and religious worship, as well as promoting and coercing the uptake of new, patentable, antiviral drugs and vaccines. The participants walked through imaginary global coronavirus contagion scenarios that focused on fear-mongering, blanket censorship, mass propaganda, and police state strategies culminating in compulsory mass vaccination.
As with the Clade X simulation, the most trusted Pharma-friendly media attended. Forbes and Bloomberg participated in the exercise, which focused on war-gaming the medical cartel’s censorship initiative. The Bloomberg Foundation is a major funder of the Johns Hopkins Center. Oddly, Gates later claimed that this simulation didn’t occur. On April 12, 2020, Gates told BBC, “Now here we are. We didn’t simulate this, we didn’t practice, so both the health policies and economic policies, we find ourselves in uncharted territory.”248 Unfortunately for that whopper, the videos of the event are still available across the Internet. They show that Gates and team did indeed simulate health and economic policies. It’s hard to swallow that Gates had forgotten.
Organizers billed Event 201 as a vehicle for delineating “areas where public/private partnerships will be necessary during the response to a severe pandemic in order to diminish large-scale economic and societal consequences.” They reminded attendees that “experts agree” that it is only a matter of time before one of these epidemics becomes “global.”249
Event 201 was as close as one could get to a “real-time” simulation. It was a meeting of a hypothetical Pandemic Emergency Board, in the same week that COVID-19 was already claiming its first victims in Wuhan. “We’re not sure how big this could get, but there’s no end in sight,”250 warns one hypothetical physician in an opening briefing. Gates’s simulated coronavirus epidemic was far worse than the authentic COVID-19 outbreak that would hit America just weeks later. The simulated version caused 65 million deaths at the eighteen-month end point and global economic collapse lasting up to a decade.251 Compared to the Gates simulation, therefore, the actual COVID-19 crisis is a bit of a dud. Public health officials claim 2.5 million deaths “attributed to COVID” globally over 13 months. The death counts from COVID in our real-life COVID-19 predicament are highly inflated and questionable. Further, the death of 2.5 million must be put in the context of a global population of 7.8 billion, with around 59 million deaths expected annually in any event. Event 201’s predictions of decade-long economic collapse will probably prove more accurate—but only because of the draconian lockdown promoted by both Gates and Dr. Fauci.
The theme of Event 201 was that such a crisis would prove an opportunity to promote new vaccines and tighten information and behavioral controls through propaganda, censorship, and surveillance. Gates’s script anticipates vast anti-vaccine resistance triggered by mandates and fanned by Internet posts.
Muzzling Talk of Lab Generation
Five months before WHO declared a global pandemic, at a time when 99.999 percent of Americans had never heard the phrase “gain-of-function,” key government officials were already planning strategies for suppressing public discussion of the potential that a coronavirus might have been deliberately manipulated to enhance its pathogenicity and transmissibility in humans.
One of their central fixations was how to silence “rumors” that the coronavirus was laboratory-generated. Event 201’s fourth simulation anticipated the manipulation and control of public opinion and muzzling any colloquy about artificially enhanced pathogens. Everyone voiced their urgent concerns that authorities must instantly squelch and discredit any speculation that someone deliberately or accidentally released a lab-made bug. This segment is most revealing for its uncannily accurate prediction of democracy’s current crisis. The fundamental assumption of all participants was that censorship and propaganda are legitimate exercises of Federal power. The participants discussed mechanisms for stamping out “disinformation” and “misinformation,” by “flooding” the media with propaganda (“good information”), imposing penalties for spreading falsehoods, and discrediting dissent (“the anti-vaccination movement”).
What follows are thumbnail portraits of some of the participants in this aspect of the operation, along with accounts of their specific comments and actions:
? George Gao, the director of the Chinese Center for Disease Control (CCDC), worried about how to suppress the inevitable “rumors” that the virus is laboratory generated: “People believe, ‘This is a manmade’ . . . [and that] some pharmaceutical company made the virus.” Two months after speaking those words, Gao himself would lead the Chinese effort to tamp down rumors of lab creation. Gao also orchestrated the Chinese government drive to vaccinate a billion Chinese citizens.252
? Dr. Tara Kirk Sell, a senior scholar at Bloomberg School of Health’s Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security, worried that pharmaceutical companies are being accused of introducing the virus so they can make money on drugs and vaccines: “[We] have seen public faith in their products plummet.” She notes with alarm that “Unrest, due to false rumors and divisive messaging, is rising and is exacerbating spread of the disease as levels of trust fall and people stop cooperating with response efforts. This is a massive problem, one that threatens governments and trusted institutions.”253