In light of the protesting around the world against the plandemic measures with various reactions from law enforcement, it may be helpful to briefly look at Strong Cities Network (SCN) at https://strongcitiesnetwork.org/en/. (I am not the first to mention SCN and this is not an in-depth investigation.)
At a glance, it looks like one of those goodie-two-shoes think tanks and/or activist organizations. So, what is SCN? Below is the part of the spiel found in the FAQ:
The Strong Cities Network is the first ever global network of mayors, policymakers and practitioners united in building social cohesion and resilience to counter violent extremism in all its forms.
We connect cities, towns and regions around the world to share their local best practice on an international scale and collaborate at the subnational level to prevent violent extremism and the conditions in which extremism and radicalisation can take hold in communities.
When I see the words “counter violent extremism in all its forms”, I am usually skeptical. Oh yes, it sounds very reasonable, and maybe it is for some things… except that it sounds like “war on terror”, “conspiracy theorists”, “anti-vaxxers”, “racism” or whatever slanted term one prefers, and one doesn’t have to look very hard to see where that usually goes.
Before continuing, consider the long list of cities (or even counties and states) that are part of this so-called network. It’s probably not a surprise to find Los Angeles, NYC, London, Berlin, and the entire state of Victoria on the list.
Although laws vary from country to country, I find it strange that a city/state government team up with foreign governments, as if bypassing the authority of their federal/national government.
Under the section “What We Do”, there is the usual seemingly harmless high-level corporate-wannabe spiel.
The SCN works to prevent the challenges of hate, polarisation and extremism by identifying and addressing the local drivers behind these global threats. Whether through intensive capacity-building projects or standalone research and analysis, we work on a diverse set of members’ needs to build evidence-based policy and globally informed local practice.
It then divides their activities into five areas: Design, Build, Train, Inform, Connect. Basically, it elaborates on the above. At a glance, it reads like governments hold group hugs with “experts” to help establish policy, training as well as the sharing of knowledge, skills and resources.
Of course, despite in effect admitting to that, it has a “Myth-busting” document that denies it.
For example, it stresses that SCN is merely a network and that “the policies that members accept are their own decisions and responsibilities”. It also states that SCN is for “sharing best practice on preventing and countering violent extremism through empowering and amplifying effective counter narratives” and does not share police tactics or intelligence.
Granted, those distinctions are important and all the statements within that document may actually be true. However, the kind of networking that shares “best practice on preventing and countering violent extremism through empowering and amplifying effective counter narratives” is nonetheless suspicious. Just because the network doesn’t actually enforce policies doesn’t mean the people involved don’t push certain policies in their respective governments anyway.
According to the FAQ, SCN is partly funded by the US Department of State. Well, nothing could go wrong with that one. Looking through the team that runs SCN, there are no glaring names. As expected, there’s a connection to the US State Department, Brookings Institute and Chatham House. Consistent to the FAQ, many of these individuals are linked to the think tank Institute for Strategic Dialogue (ISD) because SCN is basically run by ISD (https://www.isdglobal.org/). And, looking through the names on the board of ISD, some names one might recognize but nothing glaring there either. I would dig deeper if I had time.
Nevertheless, as an entity, it is the connection to ISD that makes SCN look more suspicious. The history of ISD is interesting, a product of the Anglo-Franco-German Club of Three. The latter looks like a mini-CFR but seemingly not secretive. And if one believes their reports, they just like their group hugs and waffle.
According to ISD in regards to SCN:
The Strong Cities Network (SCN) was launched in 2015 at the UN General Assembly to mount city-led responses against hate, polarisation and extremism in all its forms. We help our members partner with their communities to design and deploy local responses to these complex challenges, ensuring no city faces these threats alone.
The ISD’s approach to problems is what one expects. Take, for example, the study titled “Disinformation Overdose: A study of the Crisis of Trust among Vaccine Sceptics and Anti-Vaxxers”. Even with a quick read, one can see that it reads dismissively to say the least.
Anyway, what is telling are the partners and funders of ISD. Below are just a few notable entities.
Anti-Defamation League (ADL)
Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
Open Society Foundations
Department of Premier & Cabinet, Victoria, Australia
Public Safety Canada
US Department for Homeland Security (DHS)
US State Department
United Nations Counter Terrorism Executive Directorate (UNCTED)
And by the way, Open Society Foundations was founded and is chaired by George Soros.
In conclusion, even just on the surface of it, SCN looks like another globalist pseudo-intergovernmental entity that aims to influence or subvert cities (and in turn whole nations) whilst bypassing the members’ federal/national government. Of course, just because a city isn’t part of the SCN doesn’t mean it’s not run by total c— anyway.
Be sure to subscribe to our mailing list so you get each new Opinyun that comes out!