The planning is still occurring in plain sight

My surprise invitation from the WHO

I was recently on Maajid Nawaz’s Warrior Creed podcast where he asked me whether the World Health Organization (WHO) had an issue with the work I now do, promoting alternatives to the WHO’s top-down, dictatorial GPPP (Global Public Private Partnership) approach. My response was that I was not sure. The WHO is a behemoth of an institution with many different departments and people, and as such, one has the impression that the left-hand doesn’t know what the right is doing.

This impression was substantiated a couple of weeks ago when I received an invitation to apply for the role of Methodologist to provide none other than input into the WHO Guideline on Contact Tracing! In case you are unaware of my background, for the past decade, I have worked as an external consultant to the WHO in the area of guideline development.

I was somewhat astonished to receive the invitation, not least because of the guideline topic. Whoever sent it clearly knew nothing about my perspective on health and human rights or what constitutes evidence. The background for the brief went as follows:

“Historically, contact tracing has suffered from a lack of a real “home” in public health and relies on the work of professionals and citizens from diverse backgrounds, including public health and laboratory staff, digital experts, anthropologists, ethicists, risk communication and community engagement specialists, community leaders and community health workers. With its components dissipated across disciplines, it rarely receives sufficient attention in outbreak preparedness and response activities, yet it remains a critical component of public health response. Furthermore, the need for more guidance and standard operating procedures for the set-up and scaling contact tracing has been stressed at many forums, including during the June 2020 consultation organized by the Global Outbreak Alert and Response Network (GOARN).

To address this need, WHO is in the process of developing comprehensive guidance on contact tracing. The envisaged product will be the first global policy resource from WHO with an explicit focus on evidence-based methodology of contact tracing, with specific considerations for how it should be adapted in certain settings and epidemiological scenarios.”

The intention behind this guidance brief is clearly not to establish whether contact tracing is necessary, lawful or ethical; it is looking to establish how it can be done. I hadn’t heard of GOARN before, and when I searched, Wikipedia volunteered the following information.

“GOARN is a network composed of numerous technical and public health institutions, laboratories, NGOs, and other organizations that work to observe and respond to threatening epidemics. GOARN works closely with and under the World Health Organization (WHO), which is one of its most notable partners. Its goals are to: examine and study diseases, evaluate the risks that certain diseases pose, and improve international capability to deal with diseases.”

In other words, GOARN is a WHO facilitator of the burgeoning and lucrative supranational pandemic industry. With tentacles in many country institutions, it is likely that GOARN would inform the WHO’s global outbreak alert related to actual or potential public health emergencies of international concern (abbreviated as PHEIC) after case finding, like the WHO-declared monkey pox PHEIC, which was fake indeed.

As most people now know, contact tracing during Covid was futile from the start, being based as it was on the flawed concept of asymptomatic transmission.  Quoting Tony Fauci now, asymptomatic transmission “has never been the driver of any respiratory disease”. In addition, contact tracing during Covid also depended on the fraudulent use of the PCR test that is not fit for this purpose. According to Kary Mullis, its inventor, the PCR test is incapable of diagnosing anything; however, it is capable of manufacturing false positives for almost anything, simply by increasing the cycle threshold to overly high levels.

Contact tracing is therefore a key component of a corrupt WHO-GPPP system seeking to manipulate and control us based on fear and deception.

In the UK, the government has wasted some £20 billion on it to date, culminating in the detested “pingdemic” of the summer of 2021, which placed many millions of us into temporary house arrest. What an egregious waste of public funds that could have been completely avoided had governments worldwide simply maintained the principle of respecting inalienable rights to travel, work, bodily autonomy and remain private. But we know that Covid was never about a deadly pandemic – it was about how quickly a one-world government system could be ushered in, how they could get governments to sign its people’s rights away before its men and women woke up.

My WHO invitation to apply for the contact tracing job is a wake-up call, not just for me but for everyone. It does serve as a salutary reminder that the organisation that is currently seeking to have powers handed over to it, by virtually every country in the world, for the declaration of pandemic emergencies and its legally mandated responses is fully intent on getting member countries to implement a system of contact tracing, at least during its declared periods of PHEIC’s or, more likely, permanently. The powers that be are not backing down, they have their foot to the pedal and, in plain sight, are putting in place the framework by which they intend to enslave us. To quote Margaret Anna Alice’s poem: The planning is still occurring in plain sight.

A robust contact tracing system is essential for digital IDs, vaccine passports, Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDC) and implementing a permanent surveillance state much as they currently have in China. In that country, my understanding is that they already have up and running a full-blown Social Credit Score (SCS) system where each and every individual is given a score for virtually every action they take. This could be a financial transaction, some form of travel and its carbon footprint, how much energy they use, what they eat, what they buy, what they say, even what they think. 

Every aspect is rated, leading to an SCS with real-life consequences if your rating drops below certain thresholds. Such consequences could be the downgrade of your accommodation and where you are allowed to live. Your energy supply could be limited or switched off altogether. Access to your funds could be controlled and/or frozen. Travel rights may be restricted or withdrawn. These are the sorts of levels of control that are available and could be implemented across the world if we don’t firmly say ‘No’.

The limits of the power of the government need to be re-established and re-enshrined in law. Meanwhile, let’s not give any (more) of our rights away. A good place to start is by demanding that our governments reject the amendments to the 2005 International Health Regulations. If you live in the UK, you can do this by signing this parliamentary petition: https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/635904

You can also visit our law and activism committee webpage to find out more about the implications of these amendments and what you can do to raise awareness.

Thank you for standing up with me for health, freedom and sovereignty. There’s a better way. Needless to say, I will not be applying for the WHO role! Please do support our work at the World Council for Health. We are standing up for your right to health, freedom and sovereignty against great odds.