Today, Dan and Jordan experience what should have been the April Fools episode of the Alex Jones Show, but wasn't. In this installment, Alex explains Romeo and Juliet, and Dan explores Alex's newest "smoking gun of all smoking guns."
My bright spot today, Jordan, I had a realization that I've been listening to a fair amount of some podcasts for entertainment.
Sure.
Decompressing that high-stress week or so, and I realized that one of the things that I really gravitate towards, there's a through line through a lot of them, and that is Matt Gourley.
And I've been doing a lot of studying the last few weeks on a particular subject that Rob Doob brought to my attention and that the rest of the crew kept basically pestering me about.
And I finally, last night and today, read it.
And it is the smoking gun of smoking guns of smoking guns.
And I'm the type of guy that always gets on air and I tell you, next hour I'm going to cover this big story.
And then I'll start telling you what the big story is right away.
What if I told you I have the document from John Hopkins where they planned the whole attack, planned the SARS attack, planned the Ebola attack, planned the COVID-19 attack, and then have a plan through vaccines.
To brain damage you and give you Alzheimer's and sterilize you, and then how they're even going to blame the politicians and how they even set up President Trump to do it.
And then you'd ask, why would they write such a thing?
Well, I know why.
I can explain it.
But you know what?
I'm not going to cover it.
I'm going to put together graphics, and I'm going to put all the different pieces together, and I'm going to come in here Saturday, and I'm going to tape for one hour at noon, make sure it's all perfect, and then at 2 p.m. Central, we should have it ready.
We will stream it back to back, hour after hour, until I go live Sunday on Easter at 4 p.m. Central Standard Time, as I always do on Sundays.
So, the document that Alex is talking about is a 2017 scenario exercise called the Spars Pandemic 2025-2028, a futuristic scenario for public health risk communicators.
This document is essentially very similar in structure to the Rockefeller one Alex erroneously calls Operation Lockstep, in that the Johns Hopkins exercise began with the selection of two important variables that could dictate what challenges could arise in a possible future.
In this exercise, the two variables were, quote, varying degrees of access to information technology and, quote, varying levels of fragmentation among social, political, religious, ideological and cultural lines.
Whereas the Rockefeller document explored all four of the possible futures that were based on the variables they chose, this document focuses instead on just the one that the preparers thought would present the most challenge in terms of medical communication.
This was the possible future that they called the Echo Chamber, which represented a scenario where there was widespread access to information technology and, quote, isolated and highly fragmented communities.
Reading over this document, it's really fascinating how there are a number of similarities between the real world and the scenario that was laid out in this exercise.
The real world novel coronavirus was called SARS-CoV-2, whereas the scenario illness is called Spar's Cove.
Ultimately, these similarities are all things that make sense, given that the possible future was laid out by public health experts who would be trying to make as realistic a scenario as possible, so participants could best explore the communication challenges that could arise in the event of a public health emergency in a world where everyone was online and large segments of the population lived in a slightly different reality from each other.
One of the problems that we keep running into with these scenarios, like this document and the Rockefeller one, are that they're well-written and engaging.
They contain a ton of details that flesh out the world they're trying to depict, and as such, seem like more of a prediction than they intend to be.
This Johns Hopkins scenario relies on a template laid out by J. Ogilvie and Peter Schwartz in their 2004 paper titled Plotting Your Scenarios, published by the Global Business Network.
In this paper, Ogilvie and Schwartz try to help businesses and organizations understand how to best structure a scenario-based exercise in order to maximize its impact in terms of the participants being able to learn about how to deal with new circumstances and manage change.
This is what both the Johns Hopkins and Rockefeller exercises used, where the planners come up with a big list of key factors they think could affect the possible futures they want to explore, then that list is whittled down to two central factors.
These factors are plotted on a matrix, which could go in one of two directions, and that creates four distinct combinations of factors, each representing a scenario that can be explored.
Right.
unidentified
An example that's given in this paper is about looking at possible futures for education.
Hierarchical and exclusive, participatory and inclusive, and participatory and exclusive.
Each of these possible realities looks vastly different from the others, so it's not too hard to jump from there to scenario building and creating evocative narratives that characterize each of these so participants can more easily relate to the challenges that each possible future would present.
That's exactly what Ogilvie and Schwartz discuss in their introduction to this paper.
Quote, to be an effective planning tool, scenarios should be written in the form of absorbing, convincing stories that describe a broad range of alternative futures relevant to an organization's success.
Thoughtfully constructed, believable plots help managers to become deeply involved in the scenarios and perhaps gain new understanding of how their organization can manage change as a result of this experience.
The more involved managers get with scenarios, the more likely it becomes that they will recognize their important but less obvious implications.
Moreover, scenarios with engrossing plots can be swiftly communicated throughout the organization and will be more easily remembered by decision makers at organizations.
Ogilvy and Schwartz are business consultants, and this technique, using scenario-based exercises, is a very common one among organizations that want to explore how prepared they are to face potential challenges that could come up expectedly or unexpectedly.
Yeah, these scenarios work better if they're written as compelling and engrossing stories, and as we've learned, Alex has an incredibly hard time differentiating between reality and fiction.
To compound the problem, these guys, they recommend that people, quote, invent catchy names for the scenarios, saying, quote, when your managers feel the hot breath of crisis, they should be able to recall the appropriate scenario by name.
So this technique, though, creating these names that you remember, it's a good strategy for scenario-based planning, but the flip side, like you have pointed out, is that...
These names could be exploited very easily.
Lockstep is a perfect example of that.
It's just a catchy scenario name, which is apparently so catchy that Alex has built a gigantic conspiracy around it.
Anyway, the bottom line here is that this document is none of the things Alex claims that it is, and it doesn't prove any of the shit he's pretending it does.
Also, it's 89 pages long, so there's no way, I believe, for a second that Alex has read it.
Obviously, this is not a human intelligence running this, and I just go back to that over and over again, and I tell top generals that, top former head of intelligence agencies, senators, you name it, at secret meetings, and they nod their head and agree with me, because everybody knows.
Yeah, I would say that I am more convinced by the Loch Ness monster photo than I am by interdimensional beings are controlling the plan that's not even happening.
Quote, while the federal government appeared to have appropriately addressed concerns about the acute side effects of Corovax, that's the vaccine that comes up.
The long-term chronic effects of the vaccine were still largely unknown.
Nearing the end of 2027, reports of new neurological symptoms began to emerge.
After showing no adverse side effects for nearly a year, several vaccine recipients slowly began to experience symptoms such as blurry vision, headaches, and numbness in their extremities.
Due to the small number of these cases, the significance of their association with Corovax was never determined.
As of this writing in 2030, longitudinal studies initiated by the NIH at the beginning of the vaccination program have not reached the next round of data collection, so formal analysis of these symptoms has not yet been conducted.
Furthermore, these cases arose from the initial cohort of vaccine recipients, those in high-risk populations, including those with underlying health conditions, making it increasingly difficult to determine the extent to which these symptoms are associated with vaccination.
And it says the rich men will sit under the mountains in their fortresses, under the mountains, beating themselves in the head so angry that they serve Satan and begging God to forgive them.
So if the Bible did in fact say that rich people would live under mountains, that kind of does sound like Alex's whole thing about the elite globalists having underground bases.
Unfortunately, Alex is leaving out a very critical part of the verse that he's poorly referencing.
This is from Revelation 6, verse 15. Quote, Then the kings of the earth, the princes, the generals, the rich, the mighty, and everyone else, both slave and free, hid in caves and among the rocks of the mountains.
Roger Stone has talked a lot about trying to draft Flynn to get him ready to lead a national movement, to run for president, or to support Trump for running for president.
But regardless, instead of overthinking it, I agree with him.
Flynn's got to launch it now.
I'm going to leave it at that.
And obviously, I've been talking to Flynn, and I just need to...
We need to draft him here on this show.
We can't wait for Trump.
We can't wait for DeSantis.
We need General Flynn, who is a good man and a patriot, understand what's going on.
Yeah, it says, quote, Students who do not wear a mask when it is required or refuse to do so should first be re-educated on the importance of wearing a mask.
If after the re-education occurs they do not comply, the student's administrator should be contacted.
The word re-education is something that means a lot of different things in different contexts.
For Alex, the word means commies taking kids to camps and doing that thing from Clockwork Orange.
Naturally.
unidentified
In this context, it's really clear that what they mean is that if a student is refusing to wear a mask, they should be given a chance to better understand why a mask is important in a schoolroom setting before any kind of disciplinary action is even considered.
It's basically saying like the kids get a warning.
The right-wing blogs that are covering this story use this quote, but seem to leave off what comes immediately after it in the school's plan for the new academic year.
So this same document literally says that students who refuse to wear masks won't get in trouble, and if it's something that can't be resolved, then accommodation will be made to allow them to continue to go to class remotely.
That seems like going above and beyond to cater to people who refuse to wear masks in public gathering settings.
But of course they use the word re-education, so this is somehow about critical race theory or something.
Their plan is really well thought out and kind of considerate and perhaps overly sensitive, you know.
But it is better than my plan of if a kid decides not to wear a mask, you go to his house and scream in his parents' face until they leave you alone forever.
The entire interview is about how Alex wants General Flynn to announce that he's running for president, and Roger trying to explain to Alex that there's a game they need to play.
Roger is saying that if they're going to do this, the first thing they need to do is gather massive amounts of data about the people who would support Flynn, and then they need to somehow get around all the social media bans that all these shitheads like Alex have that limit their reach.
It's a farce of an interview, and it seems pretty clear to me that there's going to be some attempt coming down the line to try to replace Trump with Flynn as the figurehead of the Infowars idol cult.
Roger is trying to subtly implant the idea that Flynn is like Eisenhower.
He's a military hero who people need to coerce into running for office because it's his duty to the country.
See, Roger seems to realize that the only thing that's going to work for someone like Flynn is a fully realized storyline to push as a campaign, and his character works with that kind of archetype, regardless of how disconnected from reality it is.
It's the same thing they did with Trump, pretending that he was a successful businessman who had never had any interest in politics, who won the presidency on his first try.
When compared to reality, that's bullshit, but it's a compelling storyline for the base to enjoy.
Flynn, being a reluctant candidate, would have a similar, you know, complete bullshit narrative thing if it were I am wilded out by the idea that anyone would want anyone who had any command during the Iraq War.
And the amount of money he can raise is staggering.
And so he's going to run for president.
I'm drafting him right now, and so are the American people.
And as he does these quiet events to 10,000 people here, 10,000 people there, 1,000 there, everybody that goes to these things he quietly has that are packed out need to tell him, you're doing it.
And I'm not being presumptive here.
Listen, they want you and I in jail because they know we helped light the fire with Trump.
They know that we're not afraid, and they know we've got lightning in a bottle, and they know that lightning does strike the same place repeatedly.
That's how Will and Zeitgeist and Destiny is.
So, obviously, I could sell off of the sunset right now.
The globalists are ready to buy me off like that.
I could snap my fingers, $100 million, private jets, everything.
And back when I could have made a ton of money before we were censored, I would make enough money to fund the operation, and if I had extra money, I'd hire more people and expand, because my mission was to beat the New World Order.
I never cared about money.
But now I can tell you, going into the future, You'll be able to stave this off a little bit longer, but not longer if you do have money.
I mean, this is a world civilization ending event coming up.
And it's all right there.
I mean, man, they are talking about everyone vaccinated is going to have Alzheimer's, including children.
And society is going to collapse and they're going to have to have robots clean us all up off the streets.
We covered this back in the Endgame coverage, so I don't want to dwell too much on the subject, but in case Alex is listening, the history of the placement of highways is incredibly racist.
The fact that he's laughing at the idea and mocking it really only reveals that he has no idea about the history of that subject.
No one's calling for all highways to be gone, so there can't be business or travel anywhere.
The conversation is about how the ways that highways have been constructed in the past often has been done with absolutely no regard for minority communities, and often to their detriment.
There's tons of primary sources Alex could read up on if he's interested in the devastating impact that practices like redlining had on communities of color in this country in terms of social impacts and the destruction of economic power over generations.
And John Hopkins, I'll cover it tomorrow, has got it all laid out.
How the collapse is going to work.
How there are going to be so many brain damaged people from these vaccines.
The society will shut down.
We're just going to have big mass reclamation centers right out of Soylent Green where we're just killing people around the clock.
Young people, old people.
You just sign the paperwork, roll your son in, your daughter in, your mama, your daddy.
20 years old, 30 years old, 60 years old.
Because they could have just given them something that killed them right away.
That'd be too obvious.
You'd fight back.
Or something that kills you down the road, but instantly when you finally die.
No, they want it to be something that...
Wipes you out.
They want it to be something that weighs on everyone.
They want the sorrow and the pain and the breakdown and have the big medical system suck everything out of you, squeezing you dry before they blast you out into dust.
And, you know, this whole thing is about the legal fictions that Congress created through our birth certificates that were representing that all count.
So, like you said over and over, we're operating under color of law.
Color of law.
And until and unless we refute their presumptions and stop representing that all-capped name, now you can find an explanation of that at Addabon Red's article number 73. She really, really gets into it and has sent notices.
Sorry, I just got the image of, you know, just a regular post office driver just driving with the door open on the wrong side and you're like, isn't that cute you guys are driving?
They get out and then they're suddenly attacked by another post office guy.
Throws him into the open window of the car and lights it up on fire.
So I love the idea that Alex says the Johns Hopkins scenario depicts things exactly as they're happening in real life, just superimposed on a different date.
Also, nothing funnier than, it's not a little bit in the future, it's a few years.
First of all, one of the main tensions of the Hopkins exercise is messaging issues around a drug that was believed to be effective against spars called...
Calosevire.
There wasn't a drug that the government was trying to push for the treatment of COVID in the way that the medical community gets behind calosevir in this exercise.
It doesn't fit for this, and I don't think that remdesivir does either in terms of...
The way it's depicted in this exercise.
So that's, to me, this seems like one really big problem with the scenario matching real-world history.
Second, backlash to calosevir begins in February 2026, four months into the outbreak, when a video of a child projectile vomiting after taking a dose goes viral online.
This did not happen four months into COVID, even metaphorically.
Third, in May 2026, a made-up rapper named BZ suffers a public embarrassment when trying to promote spars treatments to his audience when he compares people who volunteer for vaccine trials to participants in the Tuskegee experiments.
There are plenty of examples of things like this that did not happen in the real world, but do in the scenario exercise, because the point of the events that happen in the scenario is to create situations where messaging challenges would arise that the exercise participants could reflect on how best to respond.
The inclusion of a situation like this rapper making a public gaffe in this scenario doesn't make sense out of context.
When you don't see this exercise within the context of why it exists, it seems really weird.
But when you understand that it's designed to assist medical communications professionals brainstorm the ways that they might need to respond to various events in a crisis, the picture makes far more sense.
At the same time that BZ makes his comments, the fictional former president Jacqueline Bennett gives a noncommittal answer about whether or not she would give her grandson calisivir, which creates a similar but slightly different messaging problem for the exercise participants to reflect on.
No, because in the context of the scenario exercise, BZ is one of the people who was enlisted to help get messaging out about the safety of the treatments.
Next, they say that within six months to a year of people being inoculated with these experimental GMO gene therapies, that you will have massive brain damage and spongiform encephalopathy, basically, or prion disease, mad cow disease.
So, in the exercise, there's this potential basis for a vaccine discovered in the form of an animal vaccine for hoofed mammal respiratory virus developed by a company called GMI.
This condition was similar in many ways to spars, so researchers began looking at whether or not it could be effective for humans.
One of the initial downsides was that, quote, Right.
Because Alex knows better and he's a psychic, he's realized that this is actually the globalists admitting that they're going to give everyone mad cow disease.
And the encephalitis is really just the animal vaccine that GMI created.
This claim that the COVID vaccine causes prion disease was based entirely on a non-peer-reviewed paper by a guy named J. Bart Klassen.
No one agrees with his conclusion, and he is not a prestigious scientist.
According to USA Today, quote, in 1999 he claimed the influenza vaccine caused type 1 diabetes, a claim disproven by Johns Hopkins University Institute for Vaccine Safety.
He's just an anti-vax weirdo who makes these claims pretty regularly whenever there's a vaccine that needs to be smeared.
Bennett is still actively involved in being an advisor, but was not up to seeking re-election, quote, due to health concerns.
This is the case in the scenario because it creates an interesting dynamic where there's a new president, but also a fully functioning and intact staff at the Department of Health and Human Services.
In terms of what the exercise is designed to explore, this makes total sense.
Essentially, former President Bennett exists as a prop, so she can be a character that makes a media gaffe where she gives that noncommittal answer about calisivir.
So the gaffe would carry so much weight that they would be influenced by it, while at the same time, you couldn't lose an election and have everybody be influenced in the same way.
emergency, so this power outage was added to the scenario so participants could consider what methods they might employ if they didn't have access to things like social media.
Sure.
unidentified
With a massive power outage, one of the main methods of communications is less effective.
But you need to continue helping the public through, so what do you do?
This is super clear from the exercise if you read it, but if you just want to make random connections, I guess you could do what Rob Dew is doing, and it's really embarrassing.
I mean, look, this is what it says in the text.
All communication about the vaccine rollout was published in electronic form, and consequently, many individuals in the affected areas were initially unable to access information provided by state, local, and federal health authorities regarding Corvax dispensing.
Immediately after this, there are study questions for the participants in the document, like, While greater use of electronic media opens new opportunities for broad outreach, what communications vulnerabilities exist that could impede communication efforts via electronic media?
In their paper about designing scenario-based exercises, Ogilvy and Schwartz discuss the need for stories that follow various plots, and one of the most common archetypes is crisis and response.
This plot element is about introducing a big problem, and then the participants get to respond.
The paper discusses an exercise they ran with Shell that followed basically this exact same path.
Quote, The playing field, the organizational operating environment, is suddenly dramatically altered.
The innovative firms that learn to make difficult changes in their business practices to avoid environmental degradation are now positioned to become market leaders.
In the Johns Hopkins exercise, the outbreak itself is the initial crisis.
Then things like the power outage in the Pacific Northwest or the video of the kid vomiting represent new crises that the participants have to deal with.
This is the context of what Alex and Rob are lying about, and it makes total sense.
There's no way to read that document and not understand that that's what it is.
That's so funny to me that they missed the most important question of having that kind of power outage a week before the vaccine rollout, which would just be simply be like...
What Mike is reading here, that's definitely from the document, but he's made a classic Infowars move here, and that he's taken two unrelated passages from the text and combined them, pretending they're about the same thing, in order to lie about this document.
The part about people experiencing side effects after a year is from Chapter 17. It's on page 60. The second part about government officials stepping down is Chapter 19. It's on page 67. It's completely unrelated to the previous chapter's conversation about possible side effects.
Here is the paragraph about the government officials in full.
After action reports, government hearings and agency reviews following the pandemic were too numerous to count.
Emergency funding appropriated by Congress to fight the disease became available partway through the course of the pandemic, but federal, state, and local public health agencies struggled to manage the procedural requirements to spend it.
These investigations that are causing these imaginary officials to step down are not related to possible drug side effects.
It's clearly about mismanagement of funds.
If this guy's read the document as he's presenting himself as having done, then he knows fully well that the two passages he just read as if they were one paragraph are actually two completely different sections of the document.
If this document actually said what he wanted it to, he wouldn't have to lie.
It's all still focused around this exercise that is how do medical communicators rise to various challenges.
Now, I...
I think that clip right there, where Mike is reading two different sections as if they were the same, because when he's talking about these side effects, he then says, as investigations grow in intensity.
So anyway, Mike gets to being weird some more about passage about vaccine distribution.
unidentified
Sure.
To determine how to best distribute limited doses of Corovax to members of priority groups across the country, the U.S. government resorted to new, controversial tactics, notably having health care providers access patients'electronic health records to determine the number of individuals in high-risk populations receiving care in particular areas.
This passage really undercuts the argument that this document represents the globalist plan because they didn't do that.
Also, while we're on the subject of things that didn't happen in real life that do happen in the scenario, we should look at chapter 10 and see one of the big, giant, gigantic...
I'm going to come up with more words.
One of the big public messaging crises that come up over the course of the exercise.
In chapter 10 of the scenario, there's a huge public backlash because doctors and nurses aren't included in the highest priority group for the distribution of the vaccine.
Also in the scenario, there's a groundswell of college activism taking place in the social media app that's created for this exercise called Unequal.
From the exercise, quote, Another group that was not generally affected by the government's Corovax promotion efforts were college students, especially those attending school on the east and west coasts.
Public health officials had no explanation for the lack of vaccine uptake among this population until protests began at several college campuses, including UC Berkeley, the University of Washington, Reed College, Harvard and the University of Chicago.
The focus of these protests was the lack of access to Corovax, particularly for populations in less developed countries like Haiti, Guatemala, and Cameroon.
The college students involved declared they would not accept Corovax until it was made available in terms of both access and expense to everyone in the world who wanted it.
This, too, did not happen in the real world.
The reason these events are included in the scenario is the same as anything that is in there.
They present an opportunity for the participants to wrestle with challenges in the field of medical messaging.
None of it's real, but it portrays situations that are close enough to seeming real for them to be effective in role-playing situations.
And that's enough for Alex to think that it's all secretly real.
Yeah, I mean, it seems fun whenever these studies predict events that Mm-hmm.
just based on the shit we've already seen that's going to almost certainly happen again because people don't learn lessons from things exactly like the thing that we're writing now so uh mike is a weirdo i've decided yeah and uh he he reads this passage and again like if normal people would Checked out already.
So what Mike is failing to mention here is the passage he's reading is about the side effects.
It's not for the Corvex human vaccine.
It's from the section about the vaccine for animals.
There's an added bit of comedy in that he's reading a quote from a fake email that the scenario created in order to depict an exchange of information about an animal vaccine, and then Mike's dumbass is pretending it's a document talking about human side effects.
Conspiracy theories also profilated across social media, suggesting the virus had been purposely created and introduced to the population by drug companies.
The infectious pathogen, medical countermeasures, characters, news media excerpts, social media posts, and government agency responses described herein are entirely fictional.
And now he's going to bring back up this power outage.
unidentified
Okay.
A week before Corovax was released for distribution in the United States, the power grid at the Grand Coulee Dam in eastern Washington state experienced a catastrophic failure.
While the event did not destroy any infrastructure or result in any deaths, it did cause widespread power outages in Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Montana, and British Columbia.
Though power was restored within a day of the initial outage, blackouts continued plaguing these areas over the next three weeks.
So, Mike seems so confused by why they would include something about a power outage in this document about a medical situation, but if he'd actually read it, he shouldn't be confused.
It's literally spelled out in the exercise.
This is very clearly to get participants to consider how to be effective in getting messaging out in a real, non-digital world.
From the scenario, quote, This extremely time-consuming effort exhausted the public health workforce already stretched thin by the epidemic response and several years of budget cuts, but it was ultimately successful.
Early vaccination rates in Washington, Oregon, and Idaho were very similar to other states, and in some cases above average.
In spite of the success, the incident underscored the shortcomings associated with relying solely on electronic communication strategies.
That, what I just read to you, is immediately after the part he was reading.
Yeah, I mean, this is not a generous interpretation, but the idea of these people reading a document that tells them what it says absolutely does confuse them.
It's almost like scientists aren't interested too much in different naming conventions when it comes to viruses, and instead it's almost a classification.
The inflated death estimates are in the scenario, but they're there for a few reasons.
The first is that this scenario is supposed to depict reality, and the reality of dealing with a completely new disease is that sometimes you get some things off.
One of the main reasons is actually spelled out in the document if you read it.
Quote, at the outset of the sparse outbreak, physicians'understanding of the disease stemmed primarily from extremely severe cases resulting in pneumonia or hypoxia, their required hospitalization and extensive medical treatment.
Mild cases of the disease, which produced symptoms including cough, fever, headaches, and malaise, were often perceived as the flu by people who had them and consequently often went untreated and undiagnosed by medical personnel.
As a result, early case fatality estimates were inflated.
This is a real dynamic that we've seen play out in the COVID-19 outbreak, but it's been true in other past outbreaks as well.
Yeah.
unidentified
The issue is that you can't always assume that it's going to be the case, or else you're putting yourself in a position to get blindsided by a super deadly condition that you happen to underestimate.
So the other reason that this is in the document is because it's made as an exercise for medical communicators.
And what could be a greater communication challenge than having been wrong initially?
The study question for this section is, quote, how can health authorities best meet public demands for critical information such as what is the health threat and what do I know about it when the crisis is still unfolding and not all the facts are known?
If you understand this in the context it was written and used, all the things that they're trying to create paranoia about just sound fucking stupid.
The people making the scenario were striving to fill it with realistic details, so they followed accepted conventions for naming the drug they made up in it.
Alex and Rob Du are so stupid and so addicted to thinking coincidences mean something that they take that as a sign that the document is mocking them.
I'd listened to over an hour of this Saturday thing that they were doing, and then Alex said that, and then Rob Du brought up, oh, also, they used some of the same hashtags and fake tweets that they have on there that people used in real life.
And it's nice because, you know, I think sometimes one of the things I enjoy the most about doing this show is the opportunity to understand something like this document that causes such fear for people.
And understand it for what it is, and understand some of the very interesting lessons that actually could have been learned, and that people are doing these kinds of exercises that probably did pay dividends.
But on a granular level, in terms of some people being able to better deal with the challenges that came up over the course of this pandemic, this probably helped a lot.