- Viganò: Considerations on the Great Reset and the New World Order
(LifeSiteNews) – Editor’s Note: the following is a speech delivered by Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò on August 28, 2021.
LIBERA NOS A MALO
Considerations on the Great Reset and the New World Order
No one will be part of the New World Order
unless he carries out an act of worship to Lucifer.
No one will enter the New Age unless he receives Luciferian initiation.
David Spangler, Director of the United Nations Planetary Initiative Project
(Reflections on The Christ, Findhorn, 1978)
For more than a year and a half we have been helplessly witnessing the succession of incongruent events to which most of us are unable to give a plausible justification. The pandemic emergency has made particularly evident the contradictions and illogicalities of measures nominally intended to limit contagion – lockdowns, curfews, closures of commercial activities, limitations of public services and classes, suspension of citizens’ rights – but which are disavowed daily by conflicting voices, by clear evidence of ineffectiveness, by contradictions on the part of the same health authorities. There is no need to list the measures that almost all the governments of the world have taken without achieving the promised results. If we limit ourselves to the presumed advantages that the experimental gene serum should have brought to the community – above all immunity to the virus and renewed freedom of movement – we discover that an Oxford University study published in The Lancet (here) stated that the viral load of those vaccinated with a double dose is 251 times greater than the first strains of the virus (here), despite the proclamations of world leaders, starting with the Italian Prime Minister Mario Draghi, according to whom “whoever gets vaccinated lives, whoever does not get the vaccine dies.” The side effects of the gene serum, cleverly disguised or deliberately not registered by the national health authorities, seem to confirm the danger of taking the vaccine and the disturbing unknowns for the health of citizens which we will soon have to face.
From science to scientism
The art of medicine – which is not science, but the application of scientific principles to different cases each time, on an experiential and experimental basis – seems to have renounced its prudence, in the name of an emergency that has risen to the level of priesthood of a religion – the religion of science, in fact – which in order to be such has cloaked itself in a dogmatism bordering on superstition. The ministers of this cult have constituted themselves as a caste of untouchables, exempt from any criticism even when their claims are denied by the evidence of the facts. The principles of medicine, considered universally valid until February 2020, have given way to improvisation, to the point of being advised to vaccinate at the height of the pandemic, the obligation of masks being imposed although they are useless, the arbitrary mandating of bizarre distances, the prohibition of treatments with effective drugs and the imposition of experimental gene therapies in violation of normal safety protocols. And just as there are new Covid priests, so there are also new heretics, that is, those who reject the new pandemic religion and want to remain faithful to the Hippocratic Oath. Not infrequently, the aura of infallibility that surrounds virologists and other more or less titled scientists does not seem to be questioned due to their conflicts of interest or by the substantial financial benefits received by pharmaceutical companies, which under normal conditions would be scandalous and criminal.
What many fail to understand is the inconsistency between the stated aims and the means that are adopted in a constantly changing manner in order to achieve them. If in Sweden the absence of lockdowns and masks did not lead to higher infection rates than those in countries where people have been confined to their homes or where they have had masks put on even in primary schools, this element is not considered as proof of ineffectiveness of the measures. If in Israel or in Great Britain mass vaccination has increased infections and made them more virulent, their example does not induce the rulers of other countries to be cautious in the vaccination campaign, but rather pushes them to evaluate the mandatory nature of their giving of the vaccine. If ivermectin or hyperimmune plasma prove to be valid treatments, this is not enough to authorize them, let alone recommend them. And those who wonder the reason for this disconcerting irrationality end up refraining from judgment, giving a sort of fideistic acceptance to the pronouncements of the Covid priests, or conversely considering doctors as unreliable sorcerers.