3. Final Preparations

Still in 2000, the vaccines had to be sold. Enticing populations always proved insufficient. From long before WW2, the CDC had tried to scare populations with viruses and epidemics, but had kept failing. Was therefore the creation of a pandemic thought to be the solution?

May 2005: The IHR were revised[1] and adopted by the World Health Assembly of the WHO. The differences with the initial IHR are critical. To begin with, it is no longer a matter of simply allowing countries to follow the WHO recommendations, but they are now obligated “to take all appropriate measures for furthering the purpose and eventual implementation of” these regulations, in particular by making any appropriate “legal and administrative” changes. Vaccination and measures no longer concern specific listed diseases, but any can be included: the IHR “also outline the criteria to determine whether or not a particular event constitutes a  `public health emergency of international concern’.” Still in this document, they include severity, notably large numbers of victims. Although these regulations stipulate that measures should not be “more restrictive of international traffic and trade”, nor “more intrusive to persons than reasonably available alternatives that would achieve the appropriate level of health protection”, they provide States with the legal right to:

review travel history in affected areas;

– review proof of medical examination and any laboratory analysis;

– require medical examinations;

– review proof of vaccination or other prophylaxis;

– require vaccination or other prophylaxis;

– place suspect persons under public health observation;

– implement quarantine or other health measures for suspect persons;

– implement isolation and treatment where necessary of affected persons;

– implement tracing of contacts of suspect or affected persons;

– refuse entry of suspect and affected persons;

– refuse entry of unaffected persons to affected areas; and

implement exit screening and/or restrictions on persons from affected areas.

In the above, “medical examination” means “the preliminary assessment of a person by an authorized health worker or by a person under the direct supervision of the competent authority, to determine the person’s health status and potential public health risk to others, and may include the scrutiny of health documents”.[2] Note that the vague expression “competent authority” leaves open their definition. Most importantly, the definition of “quarantine” has critically changed from what it was in the 1969 IHR. There, it is used only in the expression “in quarantine” defined to be a “state or condition during which measures are applied by a health authority to a … means of transport or container, to prevent the spread of disease, reservoirs of disease or vectors of disease from the object of quarantine”.[3] The 2005 revised IHR use the term by itself, and define it as “the restriction of activities and/or separation from others of suspect persons who are not ill or of suspect baggage, containers, conveyances or goods in such a manner as to prevent the possible spread of infection or contamination”. This represents a subtle but critical shift from protection of the community to restriction of individual liberties. The implementation of quarantine and other coercive measures on all, including surveillance and vaccination, is legalized: the expression “suspect persons” criminalizes every individual, both healthy and unhealthy. Indeed, it covers anyone “considered by a State Party as having been exposed, or possibly exposed, to a public health risk and that could be a possible source of spread of disease”. Of significance is the use of “possibly” and “possible”, hence not just anyone definitely known to be a factor of risk.

October 2005: The Universal Declaration of Bioethics and Human Rights were adopted by UNESCO’s General Conference. Article 6 states: “Any preventive, diagnostic and therapeutic medical intervention is only to be carried out with the prior, free and informed consent of the person concerned, based on adequate information.” However Article 27 leaves open the possibility of overturning Article 6: “If the application of the principles of this Declaration is to be limited, it should be by law, including laws in the interests of public safety, for the investigation, detection and prosecution of criminal offences, for the protection of public health or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others. Any such law needs to be consistent with international human rights law.”

2006: Dr Richard Hatchett, “an oncologist turned White House adviser” the previous year, and Dr Carter Mercher, “a Department of Veterans Affairs physician” proposed the idea of self-isolation and social distancing for future epidemics, and thus, to continue quoting the New York Times, to “turn back to an approach … first widely used in the Middle Ages”,[4] leaving conveniently aside the fact that an approach from a time that cannot be compared to our modern hygienic conditions is nonsensical. The evidence advanced was a model invented by a 14 year old, Laura Glass, for a school assignment. Her “name appears on the foundational paper arguing for lockdowns and forced human separation.”[5]

1 Feb. 2007: The CDC, whose non-profit Foundation is a client of Bridgespan, with which it continues to “collaborate closely”,[6] released an “Interim Pre-pandemic planning guidance”,[7] which apart from vaccination, proposes:


  • Voluntary isolation of the sick at home or in a hospital
  • Voluntary home quarantine of potentially exposed family members of the sick
  • Child social distancing, including dismissal of students from schools, closure of childcare programs, and reduced out-of-school social contacts and community mixing
  • Adult social distancing, including cancellation of large public gatherings and alteration of work environments and schedules.

This step should not be ignored as it entrenches the divinatory art on which the IHR is based, and further weakens the need of a pandemic to implement these measures. On the one hand a title referring to any period, since any period can be said to be prior to a hypothetical pandemic in the future, on the other, it specifies that the full or partial implementation of the measures will be based on a novel “Pandemic Severity Index (PSI)”. So does this imply that the severity of a future pandemic can be assessed beforehand or at least before it has sufficiently unfolded? And given that any future event is always hypothetical, does this enable the maintenance of the measures for an indeterminate period given that the term “interim” means the “intervening time”? For it can always be claimed that a pandemic will occur especially were the measures lifted.

This step also implicitly extends the IHR’s “suspect person” not just to family members, who may be neither contagious, nor ill, but to any child and adult, and makes official the recommendation of Drs Hatchett and Mercher, substantiated by a child of fourteen: reduced social contacts, notably via social distancing.

15 June 2007: The revised 2005 version of the IHR became an “instrument of international law that is legally-binding on 196 countries” regarding their “rights and obligations in handling public health events and emergencies that have the potential to cross borders”, “designed to prevent the international spread of disease”. Therefore, according to Article 27 of the Universal Declaration of Bioethics and Human Rights, Article 6 was no longer effective regarding vaccines or for that matter, any other prophylaxis.

The IHR became supported by the WHO’s “National Action Planning for Health Security (NAPHS)…a country owned, multi-year, planning process that can accelerate the implementation of IHR core capacities, and is based on a One Health for all-hazards, whole-of-government approach.”[8] It further ensures its standardization philosophy is applied in every single country.

2009: The WHO and other institutions tried to raise alarm for what they termed the swine flu. Only some governments bought massive doses of the rapidly developed vaccine, and most did not impose any of the above measures, possibly because it was then not possible to do so: the digitization process was not yet sufficiently advanced – 4G had only begun to be implemented in a handful of countries, the video-conferencing tools were not yet available, the healthcare apps were still being developed. A massive transfer of essential human activities via the internet was thus infeasible and without that populations would have rebelled against any forms of lockdowns, the economy would have come to a standstill, even government could not have functioned, nor any monitoring be done. Maybe the swine flu event, whose virality still remains uncorroborated,[9] was not meant to succeed, but only a step in the creation of fear, or merely a dress rehearsal.

Whatever the case may have been, it possibly highlighted that a severe pandemic is unrealistic under today’s hygienic conditions. That very same year, in May, the definition of a pandemic was altered by WHO, and the severity criteria removed: even one case was now legally sufficient, in view of the IHR, to trigger the entire gamut of measures.[10] [11] Was the aim henceforth to create the illusion of a pandemic?

2010: The British government set up a seven member Behavioural Insight Team, whose aim is “finding intelligent ways to encourage, support and enable people to make better choices for themselves”[12] or to quote its website, “improve people’s lives and communities”.[13] This it purports to do by changing their behaviour towards “the right direction using psychology”.[14] It “reports to key government figures” and among its first members can be found its Dr David Halpern, a former Cambridge University social psychology lecturer,[15] and Aix-Marseilles university Professor of Behavioral and Brain Sciences, Olivier Oullier, member of France’s Parliamentary Office for Science and Technology (OPECST) and High Council for Strategic Education and Research (CSFRS), former Head of Strategy in Global Health and Healthcare and Member of the Executive Committee of the World Economic Forum, and former director of the Neuroscience and Public Policy Program at the French Prime Minister’s Center for Strategic Analyses.[16]

2011: Conferencing tools were ready, Zoom Video Communications Inc was created. Among its principal owners can be found BlackRock Fund Advisors,[17] a minority owner of Halliburton Co.,[18] known for its closeness with the military, and whose former CEO was Dick Cheney.[19]

2012: The digitization of healthcare was nearing completion and being heralded by Bain and Company.[20] Alongside, the Rockefeller Foundation published a lockstep scenario with striking similarities with what the world has been living through since the winter of 2020. The report states: “scenario planning allows us to achieve impact more effectively. The results of our first scenario planning exercise demonstrate a provocative and engaging exploration of the role of technology and the future of globalization”.[21]

2014: The Behavioural Insight Team became a private-public partnership, “jointly owned by the UK Cabinet Office, innovation charity Nesta and its employees.”[22]

January 2015: The aim, namely “a fusion of technologies that are blurring the lines between the physical, digital, and biological spheres” was clearly announced by Schwab at the Davos meeting of WEF.[23]

2016: This fusion began to take form: digital inhalers consisting notably of nanoparticles,[24] whose effects on human health remain unknown,[25] were developed “for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD)”.[26]

The plan for 2030 is clearly stated by Ida Auken, Young Global Leader for the World Economic Forum, and Member of the Danish Parliament: “I own nothing, have no privacy, and life has never been better”.[27]

2017: The Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI), another “global partnership between public, private, philanthropic, and civil society organisations” was formed “to accelerate the development of vaccines”. Its CEO is Dr Hatchett.[28]

28 June 2017: The “World Bank Launches First-Ever Pandemic Bonds to Support $500 Million Pandemic Emergency Financing Facility”.[29]

April 2019: 5G coverage began to unfold. It is required for the virtualization of human activities and total surveillance, notably by enabling the interconnection and centralization of all the data on each individual now only available limitedly and disparately. This is the reason for the trillions of dollars invested,[30] certainly not the futile one of even “faster speeds and more reliable connections on smartphones and other devices”.[31] The founder[32] of a technology company[33] considered as one “pivotal” in this domain is also the chairman of a medical diagnostics company funded by the Bill and Melinda Gate Foundation,[34] and a major donator of the Salk Institute[35] opened by Jonas Salk, who had experimented an influenza vaccine on “mentally ill and retarded patients”, and later the Polio vaccine[36], which as seen previously, proved to be financially rewarding for the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research, but was itself a cause of paralysis.

13 June 2019: The United Nations and the World Economic Forum signed a partnership for a sustainable future focused on healthcare and digitization.

18 July 2019: The Commons Project, a nonprofit public trust, or rather its website is created (the snapshots of their 2019 pages on the wayback machine have been deleted).[37]  Their press release of supposedly 5 September 2019 has also been deleted.  What can be read is: “CommonHealth Will Enable Android™ Phone Users to Access and Share their Electronic Health Record Data with Trusted Apps and Partners”.[38]  One of their projects on their current site is the common pass for “travelers … to document their health status as they cross borders”[39] – a pass that was searched through google as early as 2015 by persons unknown.[40]

16 September 2019: A financial crisis situation came to a head due to soaring interest rates in short term interbank lending rates,[41] reflecting a dollar and credit shortage, thus high borrowing rates also for small businesses.

17 September 2019: The Fed began to inject liquidity, but according to most economists, the amount injected was very insufficient, raising questions: Why did “the Fed … keep[] conditions tight”? Why did “banks and companies with large cash reserves” stop lending? “The Fed has a long history of inflating bubbles using easy liquidity and then imploding those bubbles with the tightening of credit. It also has a long history of pretending like it is trying to save the economy from crisis when it is actually the source of the crisis. As Congressman Charles Lindbergh Sr. warned after the panic of 1920: ‘Under the Federal Reserve Act, panics are scientifically created; the present panic is the first scientifically created one, worked out as we figure a mathematical problem…’”[42]

18 September 2019: The “World at Risk” report by the Global Preparedness Monitor Board, co-convened by the World Bank and the WHO, which stipulates that by September 2020, countries should have “started to implement the plan”, namely the measures described in the 2005 revised version of the IHR containing the CDC’s notion of an “interim pre-pandemic”, thereby going beyond the requirement of a pandemic for its implementation, was published and detailed articles on it appeared in the media.[43] Hence it must have been in preparation long before that date.

Is it pure accident that the report release coincided with a financial crisis of unprecedented dimension? Or does this suggest that “the Fed … deliberately engineer[ed] an economic crisis” and is it further evidence that the pandemic too was deliberately engineered? Not only the increasing international focus and regulations over many a long year regarding a prospective pandemic, but every analysis of the biological and numerical data show that no new disease has been identified.[44] Its supposed clinical symptoms, including the loss of taste, are also those of the common cold or flu. In particular, “there is no proof that the particles named Sars-Cov-2 belong to a disease-causing virus”,[45] nor that there has been a detectable pandemic.[46]

It should also be pointed out that the governors of the Fed have close contact with “certain globalist organizations”.[47] In particular some of the big corporates that have largely profited from the creation of a pandemic and the measures implemented and are directly or indirectly involved in advising major governments in this domain, regularly have their senior partners sitting on the board of governors of the Fed.[48] The present head of the Fed is a former partner at the Carlyle group.[49]

October 2019: The “Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security in partnership with the World Economic Forum and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation host[ed] Event 201: a high-level simulation exercise for pandemic preparedness and response”, which brought “together business, government, security and public health leaders”.[50]

All was now in place for the next critical stage, the actual pandemic. Or should one say the endless pre-pandemic?

  1. https://www.who.int/health-topics/international-health-regulations#tab=tab_1
  2. https://www.who.int/csr/ihr/WHA58-en.pdf
  3. See 2
  4. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/22/us/politics/social-distancing-coronavirus.html
  5. https://www.aier.org/article/the-2006-origins-of-the-lockdown-idea/
  6. https://socialimpactatbain.com/bridgespan-high-impact-philanthropy.html
  7. https://www.centerforhealthsecurity.org/cbn/2007/cbnreport_02072007.html
  8. https://www.who.int/ihr/procedures/health-security-national-action-plan/en/
  9. See 14
  10. https://web.archive.org/web/20090504005605/http://www.who.int/csr/disease/influenza/pandemic/en/
  11. https://web.archive.org/web/20090507005246/http://www.who.int/csr/disease/influenza/pandemic/en/
  12. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/nudge-nudge-wink-wink-how-the-government-wants-to-change-the-way-we-think-2174655.html
  13. https://www.bi.team/about-us/
  14. See 1.
  15. See 1.
  16. https://www.weforum.org/people/olivier-oullier
  17. https://money.cnn.com/quote/shareholders/shareholders.html?symb=ZM&subView=institutional
  18. https://fintel.io/so/us/hal/blackrock
  19. https://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/28/us/a-closer-look-at-cheney-and-halliburton.html
  20. https://www.bain.com/insights/the-future-ofhealthcare/
  21. https://www.nommeraadio.ee/meedia/pdf/RRS/Rockefeller%20Foundation.pdf
  22. See 2.
  23. Klaus Schwab. The Fourth Industrial Revolution. World Economic Forum; 2015. Quoted in https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5171547/
  24. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/342978045_Estimation_of_cytotoxicity_and_genotoxicity_of_long_acting_bronchodilator_Salmeterol_Xinafoate_nanoparticles_Nanotoxicity_study
  25. Gatti, A.M. and S. Montanari 2008. Nanopathology: The Health Impact of Nanoparticles. Singapore: Pan Stanford.
  26. https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejmoa1516385
  27. https://www.forbes.com/sites/worldeconomicforum/2016/11/10/shopping-i-cant-really-remember-what-that-is-or-how-differently-well-live-in-2030/?sh=7f8d4b191735
  28. https://cepi.net/
  29. https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/press-release/2017/06/28/world-bank-launches-first-ever-pandemic-bonds-to-support-500-million-pandemic-emergency-financing-facility
  30. https://www.bitchute.com/video/Sj1ei2y9thJc/
  31. https://www.techradar.com/news/what-is-5g-everything-you-need-to-know
  32. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qualcomm
  33. https://www.cmcmarkets.com/en-gb/trading-guides/the-best-5g-stocks
  34. https://biologicaldynamics.com/infectious-disease-tb
  35. https://www.salk.edu/news-release/the-salk-institute-announces-10-million-challenge-gift-from-irwin-and-joan-jacobs/
  36. Hornblum, Allen M., Newman, Judith L., and Dober, Gregory G. 2013. “The Secret History of Medical Experimentation on Children in Cold War America”. New York: Palgrave Macmillan
  37. https://thefatemperor.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/Fascinating-investigation-on-WEF-Rockefeller-CommonPass-Vaccine-Passports.pdf
  38. https://thecommonsproject.org/newsroom/commonhealth-will-enable-android-phone-users-to-access-and-share-their-electronic-health-record-data-with-trusted-apps-and-partners
  39. https://thecommonsproject.org/commonpass
  40. https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&q=commonpass
  41. https://www.cadtm.org/spip.php?page=imprimer&id_article=17816#part_1_another_look_at_the_federal_reserve_s_panic_in_september_2019
  42. http://alt-market.com/index.php/articles/3941-the-fed-created-the-everything-bubble-and-a-liquidity-crisis-what-happens-next
  43. https://www.dw.com/en/world-unprepared-for-pandemic-panel-warns/a-50471785
  44. http://drug-dissolution-testing.com/blog/files/no-isolated-virus.pdf
  45. https://www.torstenengelbrecht.com/en/home/
  46. https://principia-scientific.com/a-pandemic-what-pandemic/
  47. http://alt-market.com/index.php/articles/3941-the-fed-created-the-everything-bubble-and-a-liquidity-crisis-what-happens-next
  48. https://principia-scientific.com/a-private-public-partnership-that-created-a-pandemic-part-1/
  49. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerome_Powell#Legal_and_investment_banking_(1979%E2%80%932012)
  50. https://www.weforum.org/press/2019/10/live-simulation-exercise-to-prepare-public-and-private-leaders-for-pandemic-response/