This “alternative” crowd believes that a cyber attack aimed at taking down the grid will be a sort of “false flag” operation designed to accelerate a push towards a digital dystopia under the guise of “The Great Reset”.
On the eve of the World Economic Forum’s Cyber Polygon simulation of a cyberhack a number of independent journalists and their supporters are warning of a potential power grid failure. Is there reason to be concerned?
In recent months various independent media outlets and journalists have been sounding the alarms, warning their followers of the potential for a power grid failure as the result of a cyber attack. These sentiments are echoed by mainstream pundits, think tanks, and U.S. government officials who also warn that a devastating attack on America’s electric grid or food distribution systems is waiting on the horizon.
However, the major difference between these warnings is the belief that a cyber attack on America’s infrastructure will not come from foreign actors – such as the oft-cited “Russian hackers” – but from the actual individuals warning about threats of cyber terrorism. This “alternative” crowd believes that a cyber attack aimed at taking down the grid will be a sort of “false flag” operation designed to accelerate a push towards a digital dystopia under the guise of “The Great Reset” (more on that in a moment) and the so-called “Fourth Industrial Revolution”.
The merits of these claims and concerns have largely been ignored, scorned, or dismissed as paranoid conspiracy theory that only low IQ mouth-breathers would dare entertain. This article is an attempt to take an honest look at the concerns, so as to either stifle public hysteria or warn of a genuine threat.
The World Economic Forum & the Cyber Polygon Exercise
The warnings about cyber attacks are now beginning to seem prescient in the face of recent hacks of various international companies and government services. These include the alleged hacking of the Colonial Pipeline which temporarily resulted in higher gas prices; a ransomware attack on Ireland’s Health Service Executive (HSE); the attack on JBS, the world’s largest meat supplier and a partner of the World Economic Forum; and most recently, hacks on New York’s Metropolitan Transit Authority which are being blamed on Chinese hackers.
As the public is bombarded by these warnings from corporate media and government officials, they are also being told that non-profits, Non-Governmental Organizations, think tanks, and the private sector are working around the clock to strengthen infrastructure and protect the people from impending doom. This effort is being led by “the international organization for public-private cooperation”, the World Economic Forum. Informed readers will recognize the WEF as the force that is behind the international initiative known as The Great Reset.
The WEF is currently preparing for their annual online training exercise, known as Cyber Polygon, which is set to take place on July 9. The exercise simulates various cyber attacks and measures the efficiency of international organizations and private corporations to respond adequately. The first Cyber Polygon event took place in 2019. The WEF describes Cyber Polygon as a “unique cybersecurity event that combines the world’s largest technical training exercise for corporate teams and an online conference featuring senior officials from international organizations and leading corporations.”
According to the WEF, goals of the exercise include:
Why Are Theorists Concerned?
Now that we have a basic understanding of the reports of cyber attacks, warnings of future attacks, and attempts to defend against said attacks with training exercises like Cyber Polygon, let’s take a moment to ask – why are these “conspiracy theorists” so concerned about the WEF and their involvement in such activity?
Again, the theorists believe that the WEF and their partners are not simply warning the public out of the kindness of the heart. Rather, they believe that the individuals behind the push for public-private partnerships are actually the ones behind the attacks, or simply allowing them to happen in order to take advantage of the inevitable calls for resetting our digital infrastructure. In other words, they believe the recent hacks have either been faked or allowed to take place so governments and their corporate partners can implement their pre-existing agendas. Problem – Reaction – Solution. They believe that exercises and simulations like Cyber Polygon are actually a sign of things to come. These exercises are not simply meant to train cyber security officials and prepare corporations, but instead meant to simulate real world events that are being planned or expected to happen.
These theorists and independent media journos point to several statements made by officials with the WEF, including WEF Executive Director Klaus Schwab. In his opening remarks at Cyber Polygon 2020, Klaus Schwab warned that a coming “cyber pandemic” would be worse than the COVID-19 crisis.
“We all know, but still pay insufficient attention to, the frightening scenario of a comprehensive cyber attack, which would bring a complete halt to the power supply, transportation, hospital services, our society as a whole,” Schwab stated. “The COVID-19 crisis would be seen in this respect as a small disturbance in comparison to a major cyber attack.”
The WEF’s top official also claimed it was “important to use the COVID-19 crisis as a timely opportunity to reflect on the lessons of cybersecurity community to draw and improve our unpreparedness for a potential cyber pandemic.”
Also during Cyber Polygon 2020, WEF Chief Business Officer Jeremy Jurgens warned about “another crisis” that would be “more significant.”
“I would anticipate that when we do see this next crisis, it will be faster than what we’ve seen with COVID, the exponential growth rate will be much steeper, the impact will be greater, and as a result the economic and social implications will be even more significant,” Jurgens stated in 2020. “I think it’s really important that we don’t underestimate the severity of a crisis like this — the impact it could have. It’s going to take all sectors of society and the economy to come together to address that.”
To the theorists in independent media these warnings are not the words of individuals with insight sharing their genuine concerns, but individuals and institutions who are telegraphing what is to come in the near future. Of course, since the masses of people have never heard of Cyber Polygon or the WEF, the only people receiving this apparent warning are those “in the know”, those in attendance, and the internet sleuths who study their every move.
Additionally, the concerns regarding Cyber Polygon stem from a video released by the WEF on January 18th of this year. This video, which is now “unlisted” on the WEF YouTube channel, warns of a “cyber attack with COVID-like characteristics” that would “spread faster and further than any biological virus.” Theorists have seized upon the video as evidence that the WEF knows something is coming.
The WEF are not the only ones warning about a cyber pandemic. Journalist Whitney Webb has reported that Yigal Unna, the head of Israel’s National Cyber Directorate, warned last year that a “cyber winter” of cyberattacks “is coming and coming faster than even I suspected.”
Webb notes that Unna “works closely with Israeli intelligence agencies, including the infamous Unit 8200, which has a long history of electronic espionage targeting the US and other countries and which has been responsible for several devastating hacks, including the Stuxnet virus that damaged Iran’s nuclear program.” Considering the massive scale of Israeli intelligence and their hacking capabilities it is a bit unnerving to hear someone in Unna’s position warn of a “cyber winter”.
The overarching theme of these fears is that propaganda meant to inject the meme of a cyber hack or cyber pandemic into the minds of the masses is intended to create expectations of a hack by unknown hackers. This expectation of a hack – and the fear of the hack itself – is designed to push the public to accept whatever plans the governments of the world and their friends at the WEF dream up in response to a looming cyber pandemic. As with the international response to COVID-19, the response to a global hack would likely favor the plans and initiatives put forth by the World Economic Forum, specifically the call for a “Great Reset”.
In June 2020 I released an investigation into The Great Reset plan and confirmed that the WEF is attempting to use the COVID-19 panic to reshape, or reset, our world. From education to supply chains and travel, the last 12 months have seen a massive uptick in proposals for remaking nearly every industry around the world. The WEF has been embracing and promoting these changes because it fits their goal of a world run by “public-private partnerships” who manage the human population for profit and control in a scheme they like to call “stakeholder capitalism”. If a hack were to take place that truly rivals COVID-19 in its ability to upend normal life it would present the World Economic Forum and their partners in the financial elite another opportunity to accelerate their plans for The Great Reset.
The plans for The Great Reset have been openly discussed by the WEF and partner nations. As recently noted by Webb, the Biden administration sent its climate envoy, John Kerry, to the WEF “where Kerry underscored the US commitment to the Great Reset agenda and the associated Fourth Industrial Revolution that seeks to automate most jobs being currently performed by humans.”
The potential for a cyber attack that affects international supply chains or the power grid would absolutely play into the hands of the various operatives in government and the private sector who are working side by side with the WEF to create The Great Reset. Given this understanding, it’s not surprising to see that international banks and major financial institutions are partnering with the WEF on Cyber Polygon. These banks stand to benefit and remain powerful influences if they position themselves to lead the charge towards the new world.
In an April article for TLAV Webb wrote:
“Given that experts have been warning since the last global financial crisis that the collapse of the entire system was inevitable due to central bank mismanagement and rampant Wall Street corruption, a cyber attack would also provide the perfect scenario for dismantling the current, failing system as it would absolve central banks and corrupt financial institutions of any responsibility. It would also provide a justification for incredibly troubling policies promoted by the WEF-Carnegie report, such as a greater fusion of intelligence agencies and banks in order to better “protect” critical financial infrastructure.”
Is There A Precedent for Simulations Coinciding with Real World Events?
Beyond the creepy statements from Klaus Schwab and Jeremy Jurgens, is there any other evidence that the WEF possesses foreknowledge of upcoming attacks? Is there reason to suspect that Cyber Polygon is anything more than a training exercise by organizations that recognize the reality of hacking dangers?
The independent media often points to another exercise conducted by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security, and the World Economic Forum, on October 18, 2019. This exercise, known as Event 201, simulated how the world would respond to a coronavirus pandemic which swept around the planet. The simulation imagined 65 million people dying, mass lock downs, quarantines, censorship of alternative viewpoints under the guise of fighting “disinformation,” and even floated the idea of arresting people who question the pandemic narrative. Less than 6 months later the World Health Organization would declare the COVID-19 crisis a pandemic.
Coincidentally, many of the scenarios imagined during Event 201 (and reported on during fictional news broadcasts) became a reality in 2020. This includes government lockdowns, massive censorship, economic crashes, and general societal upheaval. The involvement of the WEF in this exercise has raised red flags to many spectators. Especially given that in June 2020 the World Economic Forum used the COVID-19 crisis to catapult their Great Reset agenda into the mainstream. Again, anyone suggesting that The Great Reset was even a real agenda was labeled a conspiracy theorist, far-right extremist.
Another exercise known as Crimson Contagion simulated an outbreak of a respiratory virus originating from China. From August 13 to August 16, 2019, Donald Trump’s Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), headed by Alex Azar, partnered with numerous national, state, and local organizations for the exercise. According to the results of the October 2019 draft report, the spread of the novel avian influenza (H7N9) resulted in 110 million infected Americans, 7.7 million hospitalizations, and 586,000 deaths.
A simulation known as Clade X took place on May 2018 and examined the response to a pandemic resulting from the release of a fictional virus known as Clade X. In the simulation, the virus was released by a terror group called A Brighter Dawn. As the outbreak spread through the United States, the participants asked what would be needed if the President issued a federal quarantine, noting that authorities would need to “Determine (the) level of force authorized to maintain quarantine.” The Clade X exercise also resulted in the federal government nationalizing the healthcare system.
I also wrote an investigation into a lesser known exercise called SPARS. In October 2017, the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security released their report, SPARS Pandemic, 2025-2028: A Futuristic Scenario for Public Health Risk Communicators. The report is written from the perspective of someone in 2030 who is looking back on a pandemic which swept around the world between 2025 and 2028. The document states that the creators identified major socioeconomic, demographic, technological, and environmental trends which they believe are likely to emerge during this period. The two trends they said are likely to influence public health emergencies are “varying degrees of access to information technology” and increased “fragmentation among populations along social, political, religious, ideological, and cultural lines.”
Alternative researchers point to Event 201, Crimson Contagion, Clade X, and the SPARS Scenario as a sign that there was foreknowledge of a viral outbreak. To the average person these simulations might simply seem like organizations well versed in the medical and health fields being prepared for the worst case scenario. The outlook one takes is largely dependent upon their understanding of the goals of the organizations involved, including the WEF and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.
Christian Westbrook, a farmer and researcher who produces content under the name Ice Age Farmer, has been warning about the potential for a cyber attack in relation to Cyber Polygon since at least November 2020. He says the average person should be paying attention to these exercises. “From 9/11 to Event 201 to Cyber polygon to the Food Chain Reaction Game, we see thinktanks and state actors running drills and simulations of major events to refine the script that will be followed, and suggest in advance the solutions to these ‘imagined’ problems which will in turn be rolled out in the wake of a real event,” Westbrook told TLAV.
“At a much deeper level, the ‘cryptocracy’ uses these tabletop exercises as well as Hollywood’s predictive programming to telegraph to the public what is coming, believing that in so doing, they transfer the karmic responsibility to us,” Westbrook continued. “That is, if they have told us the agenda, and we do nothing to stop it, in their book, we become complicit at an energetic level.”
Dan Dicks, an independent journalist based in Canada, also believes these simulations are important enough to warrant investigation. “It is important to pay attention to the Cyber Polygon simulation because there is a history of government (and secret government) led simulations that turned from “training exercise” to a real world deadly situation that can not be overlooked,” Dicks stated. “911 is a good example. On the morning of September 11th, 2001 training exercises that involved planes flying into building were being conducted when suddenly to the confusion of those involved the situation turned from an exercise to the real deal!”
Both Dicks and Westbrook mention exercises on September 11, 2001 as examples of training events mirroring real life. They are correct that a number of exercises were operating on the morning of the attacks. These include Northern Vigilance, Vigilant Guardian, and Vigilant Warrior. Journalist James Corbett has also done extensive work regarding the simulations taking place on 9/11. In his documentary 9/11 War Games, Corbett states:
“Vigilant Guardian 01 was a week-long war game described as a “simulated air war,” and, just two days before 9/11, it had involved a simulated terrorist hijacking of a civilian passenger jet by terrorists intending to blow the plane up with explosives over New York City. Even more remarkably, on the very morning of September 11th, they were planning to simulate another passenger jet hijacking just one hour after the attacks began to unfold.”
Corbett goes on to report that in the years leading up to the attacks the “precise scenario of a hijacked jet being flown into a high value target was drilled by NORAD not once or twice but five separate times in the run-up to September 11th.”
Dan Dicks also pointed to exercises taking place around the same time as the 7/7 attacks in London on July 7, 2005. Dicks says this exercise “involved a series of four coordinated suicide attacks that turned from a simulation to a real situation in real time.” He is correct that there was an exercise taking place when the bombings of the London subway system took place. On the day of the bombings, Peter Power of Visor Consultants told BBC Radio 5 Live that he was working on a crisis management simulation drill “based on simultaneous bombs going off precisely at the railway stations where it happened this morning”. He also gave an interview to the Manchester Evening News where he spoke of “an exercise involving mock broadcasts when it happened for real”.
“When considering the track record we’ve just looked at, it’s clear that the average person needs to pay close attention to these drills that often turn into real world events so that they can make all the necessary moves to protect themselves and their loved ones in the event that it happens again…and odds are, it will,” Dicks said.
Indeed, there are other examples of training exercises coinciding with real world events. The 2013 bombing of the Boston Marathon also involved exercises taking place which simulated situations very similar to the real world events. Shortly after the bombing, Boston 25 News reported that “the Massachusetts Emergency Management Agency trained for a potential bombing at the Boston Marathon one year prior to the April 15 attacks that killed three and injured hundreds more.” The drills happened at least twice before the bombing and one scenario involved a “bombing occurred at the finish line beneath a spectator grand stand.”
Although a spokesman for MEMA said the agency has been conducting these exercises every year since the 9/11 attacks, the independent research community sees the Boston Bombing marathon as yet another example of a simulation “going live”.
This brings us back to the recent reports of cyber attacks and ransomware hacks. While the public is being told that these hacks are genuine threats to stability, the independent research community believes we are being prepped for a “false flag” event where the actual source of the hack is obfuscated and anonymous hackers are blamed for catastrophic events. If this is the case, then perhaps we should be paying attention to the WEF’s Cyber Polygon exercise and similar event, including a recent training scenario conducted by the National Guard.
In June the National Guard simulated an attack on the power grid as part of the seventh Cyber Yankee, a training event focused on testing the responses of Guardsmen against simulated cyberattacks. According to The Drive, “this year’s exercises simulated a cyber attack that targeted utilities on the West Coast before spreading east across the United States towards New England.”
From Cyber Pandemic to Digital/Cyber 9/11
Are the Cyber Polygon and Cyber Yankee exercises a sign of things to come? The answer depends on whether or not you agree with researchers like Dan Dicks and Christian Westbrook. One undeniable reality is that these warnings about an impending attack on America’s digital homeland are not new.
As far back as 2012 I reported on U.S. government officials claiming that a digital or cyber 9/11 would happen very soon if the government was not granted more invasive powers to monitor online activity. At that time, John “Mike” McConnell, director of the National Security Agency under President Clinton, and then again as director of national intelligence under George W. Bush and President Obama, stated that, “We have had our 9/11 warning. Are we going to wait for the cyber equivalent of the collapse of the World Trade Centers?”
Shortly after McConnell’s statements, former Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano warned that a major cyber attack was an immediate threat. “We shouldn’t wait until there is a 9/11 in the cyber world. There are things we can and should be doing right now that, if not prevent, would mitigate the extent of damage,” said Napolitano. Speaking at the Wilson Center think tank in Washington D.C., Napolitano said a “cyber 9/11” could happen “imminently” and that critical infrastructure – including water, electricity and gas – were vulnerable to an attack.
The language may have changed over the last decade from Cyber 9/11 to Cyber Pandemic, but the message remains the same: The U.S. and the world are vulnerable to cyber hacks and the governments must be granted more powers in order to combat such threats. The difference between 2012 and 2021 is that many of the bills aimed at fighting a “cyber 9/11” failed due to privacy concerns. Now, in 2021, the public seems more willing to accept this narrative of endless cyber terrorism.
Interestingly, the report on Napolitano’s warning mentions that then-President Barack Obama was expected to issue an executive order that would “set up a voluntary system to help protect some critical infrastructure and offer incentives to companies that participate.” The classified order was known as Presidential Policy Directive 20 and it directly set the stage for breaking down the walls between government and private organizations, a goal that serves the World Economic Forum’s Great Reset agenda.
“Presidential Policy Directive 20 establishes a broad and strict set of standards to guide the operations of federal agencies in confronting threats in cyberspace, according to several U.S. officials who have seen the classified document and are not authorized to speak on the record. The president signed it in mid-October.”
It’s clear that the U.S. government and NGO’s have been promoting fears of cyber attacks for at least the last decade. Depending on how you interpret the information presented in this article you may or may not see these warnings as serious enough to deserve your attention. Some will see the warnings as legitimate while they hope and pray the governments and corporations are prepared to handle a devastating hack from dangerous cyber terrorists. Others, specifically those in the independent research community, see these warnings as a reason to get stocked up on fuel, solar panels, food, weapons, etc.
Whichever interpretation you choose, I encourage our readers not to be consumed by fear. The only way through the push for a “Great Reset” and the COVID-19 crisis is to remain centered and mentally prepared. What ever we may be facing in the near and long-term future, no matter how insurmountable or insane it may seem, we are the ones deciding how it all turns out. Regardless of whether a cyber hack comes to pass on July 9th, or in the weeks and months after, we, ultimately, choose the direction humanity will take. Technocratic Great Reset, or a People’s Reset? The choice is ours.