New cases of highly infectious disease that should be ‘consigned to the history books’ reported in Nigeria, the DRC, CAR and Angola
Global development is supported by
Bill and Melinda Gates FoundationAbout this content
Edna Mohamed
Thu 28 Nov 2019 13.04 GMT Last modified on Wed 18 Dec 2019 14.15 GMT
New cases of polio linked to the oral vaccine have been reported in four African countries and more children are now being paralysed by vaccine-derived viruses than those infected by viruses in the wild, according to global health numbers.
The World Health Organization (WHO) and partners identified nine new cases caused by the vaccine in Nigeria, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Central African Republic and Angola last week. Along with seven other African countries with outbreaks, cases have also been reported in Asia. In Afghanistan and Pakistan polio remains endemic, and in Pakistan officials have been accused of covering up vaccine-related cases.
The stage at the Reaching The Last Mile Forum on 19 November 2019, at which $2.6bn were pledged to eradicate polio.
$2.6bn was recently pledged to renew efforts to eradicate polio. Photograph: Jonathan Gibbons/AP
Polio, a highly infectious disease that spreads through contaminated water or food, usually affects children under five, with around one in 200 infections resulting in paralysis. Of those paralysed 5–10% die due to crippled breathing muscles.
Advertisement
The WHO reports that as long as a single child remains infected, all children are at risk of contracting the disease. More than 95% of the population needs to be immunised for polio to fully be eradicated.
In developing countries the oral vaccine is used due to its low cost and accessibility, needing only two drops per dose. In western countries, a more expensive, injectable version of the vaccine – which contains an inactivated virus incapable of causing the disease – is used as a preventative.
The onset has been caused by a type 2 virus contained in the vaccine. Type 2 is a wild virus that was eliminated years ago, but in rare cases the live virus in oral polio vaccines can mutate into a form capable of igniting new outbreaks of the disease.
Just last week donors pledged $2.6 bn (£2bn) to combat polio as part of the Global Polio Eradication Initiative (GPEI), which formed in 1988 with the goal of eradicating the disease by 2000. According to the WHO, wild poliovirus cases have fallen by more than 99% since 1988, from 350,000 in more than 125 endemic countries to 33 reported cases in 2018. But despite this progress, numerous deadlines have been missed since the 1988 pledge.
A report released earlier this month by the Independent Monitoring Board, which independently assesses the GPEI’s work and progress toward polio eradication, claimed that the vaccine-derived virus was causing an uncontrolled outbreak in west Africa. The report found “the strategy is already failing badly on the goal of reducing, and ultimately eliminating, vaccine-derived polioviruses” and argued that new strategies are needed to tackle the polio epidemic.
Dr Pascal Mkanda, head of the WHO’s Polio Eradication Programme, said the latest outbreak was directly linked to low vaccination rates. The rise in vaccine-derived polio cases is caused by a mutated form of the disease found in faecal matter that targets children who have not been vaccinated, he said.
A health worker gives a polio vaccination to a child in a Karachi railway station in Pakistan, 18 November 2019.
Pakistani health authorities started a vaccination campaign after new cases were reported in November. Photograph: Fareed Khan/AP
“What we must do is extend the coverage of immunisation so that polio can no longer continue to survive,” said Mkanda.
Dr Edward Parker at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine said efforts to develop more stable polio vaccines by scientists were progressing.
“If they prove to be safe and effective in regions still affected by polio, these vaccines could be a key breakthrough in finally consigning this disease to the history books.” _________________ --
'Suppression of truth, human spirit and the holy chord of justice never works long-term. Something the suppressors never get.' David Southwell
http://aangirfan.blogspot.com http://aanirfan.blogspot.com
Martin Van Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother."
Martin Van Creveld: I'll quote Henry Kissinger: "In campaigns like this the antiterror forces lose, because they don't win, and the rebels win by not losing."
Global development is supported by
Bill and Melinda Gates FoundationAbout this content
Fiona Harvey Environment correspondent
Thu 26 Mar 2020 06.00 GMT Last modified on Thu 26 Mar 2020 06.02 GMT
Protectionist measures by national governments during the coronavirus crisis could provoke food shortages around the world, the UN’s food body has warned.
Harvests have been good and the outlook for staple crops is promising, but a shortage of field workers brought on by the virus crisis and a move towards protectionism – tariffs and export bans – mean problems could quickly appear in the coming weeks, Maximo Torero, chief economist of the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation, told the Guardian.
“The worst that can happen is that governments restrict the flow of food,” he said. “All measures against free trade will be counterproductive. Now is not the time for restrictions or putting in place trade barriers. Now is the time to protect the flow of food around the world.”
Governments must resist calls from some quarters to protect their own food supply by restricting exports, he said, as some have begun to do.
Kazakhstan, for instance, according to a report from Bloomberg, has banned exports of wheat flour, of which it is one of the world’s biggest sources, as well as restrictions on buckwheat and vegetables including onions, carrots and potatoes. Vietnam, the world’s third biggest rice exporter, has temporarily suspended rice export contracts. Russia, the world’s biggest wheat exporter, may also threaten to restrict exports, as it has done before, and the position of the US is in doubt given Donald Trump’s eagerness for a trade war in other commodities.
Get Society Weekly: our newsletter for public service professionals
Read more
“Trade barriers will create extreme volatility,” warned Torero. “[They] will make the situation worse. That’s what we observe in food crises.”
While the supply of food is functioning well in most countries at present, problems could start to be seen within weeks and intensify over the following two months as key fruit and vegetables come into season. These types of produce often have short ripening times and are highly perishable, and need skilled pickers to work quickly at the right time.
“We need to be careful not to break the food value chain and the logistics or we will be looking at problems with fresh vegetables and fruits soon,” said Torero. “Fruit and vegetables are also very labour intensive, if the labour force is threatened because people can’t move then you have a problem.”
As governments impose lockdowns in countries across the world, recruiting seasonal workers will become impossible unless measures are taken to ensure vital workers can still move around, while preventing the virus from spreading.
“Coronavirus is affecting the labour force and the logistical problems are becoming very important,” said Torero. “We need to have policies in place so the labour force can keep doing their job. Protect people too, but we need the labour force. Major countries have yet to implement these sorts of policies to ensure that food can keep moving.”
Countries such as the UK, with a sinking currency and high level of imports, are also likely to see food price rises unless the government takes action or retailers absorb some of the costs, he said.
The most important role governments can play is to keep the food supply chain operating, intervene to ensure there are enough workers, and keep the global food markets from panicking, according to Torero.
“If traders start to become nervous, conditions will get difficult,” he said. “It just needs one big trader to make a decision [to disrupt the supply of staple crops] and that will affect everywhere. Governments must properly regulate, that is their biggest function in this situation. It’s very important to keep alive the food value chain: intervene to protect the value chain [including the supply of workers] but not to distort the market.”
Individuals can also play an important role, by avoiding panic buying and hoarding of food, and cutting down on food waste. Buying too much fresh farm produce that then goes off before it can be eaten will just exacerbate food supply problems, he said. “Individuals should only buy what they need to avoid food waste.”
Animal welfare is also an issue as border delays caused by the Covid-19 lockdown measures are meaning that livestock journeys are lengthened.
In the UK, some farming leaders have called for a “land army” of workers to replace a shortfall of workers that could reach 80,000, according to one estimate, if the 60,000 seasonal workers recruited from abroad in normal years are prevented from coming, and if some British workers fall ill.
Organisations representing both wealthy landowners and agricultural workers have urged the government to intervene. The Landworkers’ Alliance, representing more than 1,000 small and medium farmers and landworkers across the UK, wrote to the chancellor of the exchequer asking for a £9.3m package of support to pay a “land army” of workers to increase domestic fruit and vegetable production as the Covid-19 crisis bites.
The Country Land and Business Association (CLA), representing more than 30,000 UK landowners and rural firms, made a similar call last week, for the government to make it easier for people thrown out of work by the lockdown to find seasonal work on farms. Mark Bridgeman, president of the CLA, said: “We need urgent government assistance to help source workers and advertise positions. Time is of the essence as many farmers will soon begin, or have already begun, planting or harvesting.”
The Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs has said its officials and ministers are in regular communication with representatives of the food industry to ensure the food supply chain remains resilient.
Andre Laperriere, executive director of Global Open Data for Agriculture and Nutrition, which provides data on food and agriculture, said the government must make plans to ensure the food supply chain functioned smoothly.
“Empty shelves in supermarkets should not be much of a concern,” he said. “It is not a supply problem – it is a logistics problem. There is enough supply for all, as long as everyone stays calm and stops hoarding. We may tend to waste food if we hoard more than required, and hoarding would also artificially increase food prices because of the pressure on the supply chain.”
He called for borders between the UK and other countries to remain open for imports and exports, and for farm workers to be supplied with protective equipment to enable them to carry on with their jobs safely amid the coronavirus lockdown. “The food sector comes under the critical infrastructure sector, along with healthcare and emergency services,” he said. _________________ --
'Suppression of truth, human spirit and the holy chord of justice never works long-term. Something the suppressors never get.' David Southwell
http://aangirfan.blogspot.com http://aanirfan.blogspot.com
Martin Van Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother."
Martin Van Creveld: I'll quote Henry Kissinger: "In campaigns like this the antiterror forces lose, because they don't win, and the rebels win by not losing."
Truth Will Out Online
IMPORTANT UPDATE: Syrian Girl's clip of Donald Trump talking about requiring an ID for shopping was taken out of context. POTUS was talking about the need for Voter ID and why it should not be a big thing since you need an ID for all sorts of things such as buying alcohol, so why not for voting.
The other day Syrian Girl, who by now probably long finished her PhD in chemistry in Australia, posted the following video summing up what we know about the history of the coronavirus. We know it but the Corporate Media does not. They skipped over the fact that this virus has CRISPR cutting marks where the HIV virus was spliced into it.
Pentagon briefing 13/04/05: Removing the God gene through vaccine  wogboym8 Subscribe185 Add to Share More 44,939 views 339 116 Published on 20 Apr 2020 This is messed up, especially with all that is happening in 2020. The video details a "plan to create a flu-like respiratory virus" to "get exposure to the largest amount of the population, to get satisfactory results" in removing the God gene from humans through vaccines. Uploading this copy as others have been taken down. This is not a hoax and you can find plenty of other information to back this up. Lots worse is happening, but I'm trusting God.
Pentagon briefing 13/04/05: Removing the God gene through vaccine
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j940md2Mqeg _________________ --
'Suppression of truth, human spirit and the holy chord of justice never works long-term. Something the suppressors never get.' David Southwell
http://aangirfan.blogspot.com http://aanirfan.blogspot.com
Martin Van Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother."
Martin Van Creveld: I'll quote Henry Kissinger: "In campaigns like this the antiterror forces lose, because they don't win, and the rebels win by not losing."
LAST YEAR, A GOVERNMENT COMMISSION CALLED FOR THE US TO ADOPT AN AI-DRIVEN MASS SURVEILLANCE SYSTEM FAR BEYOND THAT USED IN ANY OTHER COUNTRY IN ORDER TO ENSURE AMERICAN HEGEMONY IN ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE. NOW, MANY OF THE “OBSTACLES” THEY HAD CITED AS PREVENTING ITS IMPLEMENTATION ARE RAPIDLY BEING REMOVED UNDER THE GUISE OF COMBATING THE CORONAVIRUS CRISIS.
Last year, a U.S. government body dedicated to examining how artificial intelligence can “address the national security and defense needs of the United States” discussed in detail the “structural” changes that the American economy and society must undergo in order to ensure a technological advantage over China, according to a recent document acquired through a FOIA request. This document suggests that the U.S. follow China’s lead and even surpass them in many aspects related to AI-driven technologies, particularly their use of mass surveillance. This perspective clearly clashes with the public rhetoric of prominent U.S. government officials and politicians on China, who have labeled the Chinese government’s technology investments and export of its surveillance systems and other technologies as a major “threat” to Americans’ “way of life.”
In addition, many of the steps for the implementation of such a program in the U.S., as laid out in this newly available document, are currently being promoted and implemented as part of the government’s response to the current coronavirus (Covid-19) crisis. This likely due to the fact that many members of this same body have considerable overlap with the taskforces and advisors currently guiding the government’s plans to “re-open the economy” and efforts to use technology to respond to the current crisis.
The FOIA document, obtained by the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC), was produced by a little-known U.S. government organization called the National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence (NSCAI). It was created by the 2018 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) and its official purpose is “to consider the methods and means necessary to advance the development of artificial intelligence (AI), machine learning, and associated technologies to comprehensively address the national security and defense needs of the United States.”
The NSCAI is a key part of the government’s response to what is often referred to as the coming “fourth industrial revolution,” which has been described as “a revolution characterized by discontinuous technological development in areas like artificial intelligence (AI), big data, fifth-generation telecommunications networking (5G), nanotechnology and biotechnology, robotics, the Internet of Things (IoT), and quantum computing.”
However, their main focus is ensuring that “the United States … maintain a technological advantage in artificial intelligence, machine learning, and other associated technologies related to national security and defense.” The vice-chair of NSCAI, Robert Work – former Deputy Secretary of Defense and senior fellow at the hawkish Center for a New American Security (CNAS), described the commission’s purpose as determining “how the U.S. national security apparatus should approach artificial intelligence, including a focus on how the government can work with industry to compete with China’s ‘civil-military fusion’ concept.”
The recently released NSCAI document is a May 2019 presentation entitled “Chinese Tech Landscape Overview.” Throughout the presentation, the NSCAI promotes the overhaul of the U.S. economy and way of life as necessary for allowing the U.S. to ensure it holds a considerable technological advantage over China, as losing this advantage is currently deemed a major “national security” issue by the U.S. national security apparatus. This concern about maintaining a technological advantage can be seen in several other U.S. military documents and think tank reports, several of which have warned that the U.S.’ technological advantage is quickly eroding.
The U.S. government and establishment media outlets often blame alleged Chinese espionage or the Chinese government’s more explicit partnerships with private technology companies in support of their claim that the U.S. is losing this advantage over China. For instance, Chris Darby, the current CEO of the CIA’s In-Q-Tel, who is also on the NSCAI, told CBS News last year that China is the U.S.’ main competitor in terms of technology and that U.S. privacy laws were hampering the U.S.’ capacity to counter China in this regard, stating that:
“[D]ata is the new oil. And China is just awash with data. And they don’t have the same restraints that we do around collecting it and using it, because of the privacy difference between our countries. This notion that they have the largest labeled data set in the world is going to be a huge strength for them.”
In another example, Michael Dempsey – former acting Director of National Intelligence and currently a government-funded fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations – argued in The Hill that:
“It’s quite clear, though, that China is determined to erase our technological advantage, and is committing hundreds of billions of dollars to this effort. In particular, China is determined to be a world leader in such areas as artificial intelligence, high performance computing, and synthetic biology. These are the industries that will shape life on the planet and the military balance of power for the next several decades.”
In fact, the national security apparatus of the United States is so concerned about losing a technological edge over China that the Pentagon recently decided to join forces directly with the U.S. intelligence community in order “to get in front of Chinese advances in artificial intelligence.” This union resulted in the creation of the Joint Artificial Intelligence Center (JAIC), which ties together “the military’s efforts with those of the Intelligence Community, allowing them to combine efforts in a breakneck push to move government’s AI initiatives forward.” It also coordinates with other government agencies, industry, academics, and U.S. allies. Robert Work, who subsequently became the NSCAI vice-chair, said at the time that JAIC’s creation was a “welcome first step in response to Chinese, and to a lesser extent, Russian, plans to dominate these technologies.”
Similar concerns about “losing” technological advantage to China have also been voiced by the NSCAI chairman, Eric Schmidt, the former head of Alphabet – Google’s parent company, who argued in February in the New York Times that Silicon Valley could soon lose “the technology wars” to China if the U.S. government doesn’t take action. Thus, the three main groups represented within the NSCAI – the intelligence community, the Pentagon and Silicon Valley – all view China’s advancements in AI as a major national security threat (and in Silicon Valley’s case, threat to their bottom lines and market shares) that must be tackled quickly.
TARGETING CHINA’S “ADOPTION ADVANTAGE”
In the May 2019 “Chinese Tech Landscape Overview” presentation, the NSCAI discusses that, while the U.S. still leads in the “creation” stage of AI and related technologies, it lags behind China in the “adoption” stage due to “structural factors.” It says that “creation”, followed by “adoption” and “iteration” are the three phases of the “life cycle of new tech” and asserts that failing to dominate in the “adoption” stage will allow China to “leapfrog” the U.S. and dominate AI for the foreseeable future.
The presentation also argues that, in order to “leapfrog” competitors in emerging markets, what is needed is not “individual brilliance” but instead specific “structural conditions that exist within certain markets.” It cites several case studies where China is considered to be “leapfrogging” the U.S. due to major differences in these “structural factors.” Thus, the insinuation of the document (though not directly stated) is that the U.S. must alter the “structural factors” that are currently responsible for its lagging behind China in the “adoption” phase of AI-driven technologies.
Chief among the troublesome “structural factors” highlighted in this presentation are so-called “legacy systems” that are common in the U.S. but much less so in China. The NSCAI document states that examples of “legacy systems” include a financial system that still utilizes cash and card payments, individual car ownership and even receiving medical attention from a human doctor. It states that, while these “legacy systems” in the US are “good enough,” too many “good enough” systems “hinder the adoption of new things,” specifically AI-driven systems.
Another structural factor deemed by the NSCAI to be an obstacle to the U.S.’ ability to maintain a technological advantage over China is the “scale of the consumer market,” arguing that “extreme urban density = on-demand service adoption.” In other words, extreme urbanization results in more people using online or mobile-based “on-demand” services, ranging from ride-sharing to online shopping. It also cites the use of mass surveillance on China’s “huge population base” is an example of how China’s “scale of consumer market” advantage allowing “China to leap ahead” in the fields of related technologies, like facial recognition.
In addition to the alleged shortcomings of the U.S.’ “legacy systems” and lack of “extreme urban density,” the NSCAI also calls for more “explicit government support and involvement” as a means to speed up the adoption of these systems in the U.S. This includes the government lending its stores of data on civilians to train AI, specifically citing facial recognition databases, and mandating that cities be “re-architected around AVs [autonomous vehicles],” among others. Other examples given include the government investing large amounts of money in AI start-ups and adding tech behemoths to a national, public-private AI taskforce focused on smart city-implementation (among other things).
With regards to the latter, the document says “this level of public-private cooperation” in China is “outwardly embraced” by the parties involved, with this “serving as a stark contrast to the controversy around Silicon Valley selling to the U.S. government.” Examples of such controversy, from the NSCAI’s perspective, likely include Google employees petitioning to end the Google-Pentagon “Project Maven,” which uses Google’s AI software to analyze footage captured by drones. Google eventually chose not to renew its Maven contract as a result of the controversy, even though top Google executives viewed the project as a “golden opportunity” to collaborate more closely with the military and intelligence communities.
The document also defines another aspect of government support as the “clearing of regulatory barriers.” This term is used in the document specifically with respect to U.S. privacy laws, despite the fact that the U.S. national security state has long violated these laws with near complete impunity. However, the document seems to suggest that privacy laws in the U.S. should be altered so that what the U.S. government has done “in secret” with private citizen data can be done more openly and more extensively. The NSCAI document also discusses the removal of “regulatory barriers” in order to speed up the adoption of self-driving cars, even though autonomous driving technology has resulted in several deadly and horrific car accidents and presents other safety concerns.
Also discussed is how China’s “adoption advantage” will “allow it to leapfrog the U.S.” in several new fields, including “AI medical diagnosis” and “smart cities.” It then asserts that “the future will be decided at the intersection of private enterprise and policy leaders between China and the U.S.” If this coordination over the global AI market does not occur, the document warns that “we [the U.S.] risk being left out of the discussions where norms around AI are set for the rest of our lifetimes.”
The presentation also dwells considerably on how “the main battleground [in technology] are not the domestic Chinese and US markets,” but what it refers to as the NBU (next billion users) markets, where it states that “Chinese players will aggressively challenge Silicon Valley.” In order to challenge them more successfully, the presentation argues that, “just like we [view] the market of teenagers as a harbinger for new trends, we should look at China.”
The document also expresses concerns about China exporting AI more extensively and intensively than the U.S., saying that China is “already crossing borders” by helping to build facial databases in Zimbabwe and selling image recognition and smart city systems to Malaysia. If allowed to become “the unambiguous leader in AI,” it says that “China could end up writing much of the rulebook of international norms around the deployment of AI” and that it would “broaden China’s sphere of influence amongst an international community that increasingly looks to the pragmatic authoritarianism of China and Singapore as an alternative to Western liberal democracy.”
WHAT WILL REPLACE THE US’ “LEGACY SYSTEMS”?
Given that the document makes it quite clear that “legacy systems” in the U.S. are impeding its ability to prevent China from “leapfrogging” ahead in AI and then dominating it for the foreseeable future, it is also important to examine what the document suggests should replace these “legacy systems” in the U.S.
As previously mentioned, one “legacy system” cited early on in the presentation is the main means of payment for most Americans, cash and credit/debit cards. The presentation asserts, in contrast to these “legacy systems” that the best and most advanced system is moving entirely to smartphone-based digital wallets.
It notes specifically the main mobile wallet provider in India, PayTM, is majority owned by Chinese companies. It quotes an article, which states that “a big break came [in 2016] when India canceled 86% of currency in circulation in an effort to cut corruption and bring more people into the tax net by forcing them to use less cash.” At the time, claims that India’s 2016 “currency reform” would be used as a stepping stone towards a cashless society were dismissed by some as “conspiracy theory.” However, last year, a committee convened by India’s central bank (and led by an Indian tech oligarch who also created India’s massive civilian biometric database) resulted in the Indian government’s “Cashless India” program.
Regarding India’s 2016 “currency reform,” the NSCAI document then asserts that “this would be unfathomable in the West. And unsurprisingly, when 86% of the cash got cancelled and nobody had a credit card, mobile wallets in India exploded, laying the groundwork for a far more advanced payments ecosystem in India than the US.” However, it has become increasingly less unfathomable in light of the current coronavirus crisis, which has seen efforts to reduce the amount of cash used because paper bills may carry the virus as well as efforts to introduce a Federal Reserve-backed “digital dollar.”
In addition, the NSCAI document from last May calls for the end of in-person shopping and promotes moving towards all shopping being performed online. It argues that “American companies have a lot to gain by adopting ideas from Chinese companies” by shifting towards exclusive e-commerce purchasing options. It states that only shopping online provides a “great experience” and also adds that “when buying online is literally the only way to get what you want, consumers go online.”
Another “legacy system” that the NSCAI seeks to overhaul is car ownership, as it promotes autonomous, or self-driving vehicles and further asserts that “fleet ownership > individual ownership.” It specifically points to a need for “a centralized ride-sharing network,” which it says “is needed to coordinate cars to achieve near 100% utilization rates.” However, it warns against ride-sharing networks that “need a human operator paired with each vehicle” and also asserts that “fleet ownership makes more sense” than individual car ownership. It also specifically calls for these fleets to not only be composed of self-driving cars, but electric cars and cites reports that China “has the world’s most aggressive electric vehicle goals….and seek[s] the lead in an emerging industry.”
The document states that China leads in ride-sharing today even though ride-sharing was pioneered first in the U.S. It asserts once again that the U.S. “legacy system” of individual car ownership and lack of “extreme urban density” are responsible for China’s dominance in this area. It also predicts that China will “achieve mass autonomous [vehicle] adoption before the U.S.,” largely because “the lack of mass car ownership [in China] leads to far more consumer receptiveness to AVs [autonomous vehicles].” It then notes that “earlier mass adoption leads to a virtuous cycle that allows Chinese core self-driving tech to accelerate beyond [its] Western counterparts.”
In addition to their vision for a future financial system and future self-driving transport system, the NSCAI has a similarly dystopian vision for surveillance. The document calls mass surveillance “one of the ‘first-and-best customers’ for AI” and “a killer application for deep learning.” It also states that “having streets carpeted with cameras is good infrastructure.”
It then discusses how “an entire generation of AI unicorn” companies are “collecting the bulk of their early revenue from government security contracts” and praises the use of AI in facilitating policing activities. For instance, it lauds reports that “police are making convictions based on phone calls monitored with iFlyTek’s voice-recognition technology” and that “police departments are using [AI] facial recognition tech to assist in everything from catching traffic law violators to resolving murder cases.”
On the point of facial recognition technology specifically, the NSCAI document asserts that China has “leapt ahead” of the US on facial recognition, even though “breakthroughs in using machine learning for image recognition initially occurred in the US.” It claims that China’s advantage in this instance is because they have government-implemented mass surveillance (“clearing of regulatory barriers”), enormous government-provided stores of data (“explicit government support”) combined with private sector databases on a huge population base (“scale of consumer market”). As a consequence of this, the NSCAI argues, China is also set to leap ahead of the U.S. in both image/facial recognition and biometrics.
The document also points to another glaring difference between the U.S. and its rival, stating that: “In the press and politics of America and Europe, Al is painted as something to be feared that is eroding privacy and stealing jobs. Conversely, China views it as both a tool for solving major macroeconomic challenges in order to sustain their economic miracle, and an opportunity to take technological leadership on the global stage.”
The NSCAI document also touches on the area of healthcare, calling for the implementation of a system that seems to be becoming reality thanks to the current coronavirus crisis. In discussing the use of AI in healthcare (almost a year before the current crisis began), it states that “China could lead the world in this sector” and “this could lead to them exporting their tech and setting international norms.” One reason for this is also that China has “far too few doctors for the population” and calls having enough doctors for in-person visits a “legacy system.” It also cited U.S. regulatory measures such as “HIPPA compliance and FDA approval” as obstacles that don’t constrain Chinese authorities.
More troubling, it argues that “the potential impact of government supplied data is even more significant in biology and healthcare,” and says it is likely that “the Chinese government [will] require every single citizen to have their DNA sequenced and stored in government databases, something nearly impossible to imagine in places as privacy conscious as the U.S. and Europe.” It continues by saying that “the Chinese apparatus is well-equipped to take advantage” and calls these civilian DNA databases a “logical next step.”
WHO ARE THE NSCAI?
Given the sweeping changes to the U.S. that the NSCAI promoted in this presentation last May, it becomes important to examine who makes up the commission and to consider their influence over U.S. policy on these matters, particularly during the current crisis. As previously mentioned, the chairman of the NSCAI is Eric Schmidt, the former head of Alphabet (Google’s parent company) who has also invested heavily in Israeli intelligence-linked tech companies including the controversial start-up “incubator” Team8. In addition, the committee’s vice-chair is Robert Work, is not only a former top Pentagon official, but is currently working with the think tank CNAS, which is run by John McCain’s long-time foreign policy adviser and Joe Biden’s former national security adviser.
Other members of the NSCAI are as follows:
Safra Catz, CEO of Oracle, with close ties to Trump’s top donor Sheldon Adelson
Steve Chien, supervisor of the Artificial Intelligence Group at Caltech’s Jet Propulsion Lab
Mignon Clyburn, Open Society Foundation fellow and former FCC commissioner
Chris Darby, CEO of In-Q-Tel (CIA’s venture capital arm)
Ken Ford, CEO of the Florida Institute for Human and Machine Cognition
Jose-Marie Griffiths, president of Dakota State University and former National Science Board member
Eric Horvitz, director of Microsoft Research Labs
Andy Jassy, CEO of Amazon Web Services (CIA contractor)
Gilman Louie, partner at Alsop Louie Partners and former CEO of In-Q-Tel
William Mark, director of SRI International and former Lockheed Martin director
Jason Matheny, director of the Center for Security and Emerging Technology, former Assistant director of National Intelligence and former director of IARPA (Intelligence Advanced Research Project Agency)
Katharina McFarland, consultant at Cypress International and former Assistant Secretary of Defense for Acquisition
Andrew Moore, head of Google Cloud AI
As can be seen in the list above, there is a considerable amount of overlap between the NSCAI and the companies currently advising the White House on “re-opening” the economy (Microsoft, Amazon, Google, Lockheed Martin, Oracle) and one NSCAI member, Oracle’s Safra Katz, is on the White House’s “economic revival” taskforce. Also, there is also overlap between the NSCAI and the companies that are intimately involved in the implementation of the “contact tracing” “coronavirus surveillance system,” a mass surveillance system promoted by the Jared Kushner-led, private-sector coronavirus task force. That surveillance system is set to be constructed by companies with deep ties to Google and the U.S. national security state, and both Google and Apple, who create the operating systems for the vast majority of smartphones used in the U.S., have said they will now build that surveillance system directly into their smartphone operating systems.
Also notable is the fact that In-Q-Tel and the U.S. intelligence community has considerable representation on the NSCAI and that they also boast close ties with Google, Palantir and other Silicon Valley giants, having been early investors in those companies. Both Google and Palantir, as well as Amazon (also on the NSCAI) are also major contractors for U.S. intelligence agencies. In-Q-Tel’s involvement on the NSCAI is also significant because they have been heavily promoting mass surveillance of consumer electronic devices for use in pandemics for the past several years. Much of that push has come from In-Q-Tel’s current Executive Vice President Tara O’Toole, who was previously the director of the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security and also co-authored several controversial biowarfare/pandemic simulations, such as Dark Winter.
In addition, since at least January, the U.S. intelligence community and the Pentagon have been at the forefront of developing the U.S. government’s still-classified “9/11-style” response plans for the coronavirus crisis, alongside the National Security Council. Few news organizations have noted that these classified response plans, which are set to be triggered if and when the U.S. reaches a certain number of coronavirus cases, has been created largely by elements of the national security state (i.e. the NSC, Pentagon, and intelligence), as opposed to civilian agencies or those focused on public health issues.
Furthermore, it has been reported that the U.S. intelligence community as well as U.S. military intelligence knew by at least January (though recent reports have said as early as last November) that the coronavirus crisis would reach “pandemic proportions” by March. The American public were not warned, but elite members of the business and political classes were apparently informed, given the record numbers of CEO resignations in January and several high-profile insider trading allegations that preceded the current crisis by a matter of weeks.
Perhaps even more disconcerting is the added fact that the U.S. government not only participated in the eerily prescient pandemic simulation last October known as Event 201, it also led a series of pandemic response simulations last year. Crimson Contagion was a series of four simulations that involved 19 U.S. federal agencies, including intelligence and the military, as well as 12 different states and a host of private sector companies that simulated a devastating pandemic influenza outbreak that had originated in China. It was led by the current HHS Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response, Robert Kadlec, who is a former lobbyist for military and intelligence contractors and a Bush-era homeland security “bioterrorism” advisor.
In addition, both Kadlec and the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security, which was intimately involved in Event 201, have direct ties to the controversial June 2001 biowarfare exercise “Dark Winter,” which predicted the 2001 anthrax attacks that transpired just months later in disturbing ways. Though efforts by media and government were made to blame the anthrax attacks on a foreign source, the anthrax was later found to have originated at a U.S. bioweapons lab and the FBI investigation into the case has been widely regarded as a cover-up, including by the FBI’s once-lead investigator on that case.
Given the above, it is worth asking if those who share the NSCAI’s vision saw the coronavirus pandemic early on as an opportunity to make the “structural changes” it had deemed essential to countering China’s lead in the mass adoption of AI-driven technologies, especially considering that many of the changes in the May 2019 document are now quickly taking place under the guise of combatting the coronavirus crisis.
THE NSCAI’S VISION TAKES SHAPE
Though the May 2019 NSCAI document was authored nearly a year ago, the coronavirus crisis has resulted in the implementation of many of the changes and the removal of many of the “structural” obstacles that the commission argued needed to be drastically altered in order to ensure a technological advantage over China in the field of AI. The aforementioned move away from cash, which is taking place not just in the U.S. but internationally, is just one example of many.
For instance, earlier this week CNN reported that grocery stores are now considering banning in-person shopping and that the U.S. Department of Labor has recommended that retailers nationwide start “‘using a drive-through window or offering curbside pick-up’ to protect workers for exposure to coronavirus.” In addition, last week, the state of Florida approved an online-purchase plan for low income families using the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). Other reports have argued that social distancing inside grocery stores is ineffective and endangering people’s lives. As previously mentioned, the May 2019 NSCAI document argues that moving away from in-person shopping is necessary to mitigate China’s “adoption advantage” and also argued that “when buying online is literally the only way to get what you want, consumers go online.”
Reports have also argued that these changes in shopping will last far beyond coronavirus, such as an article by Business Insider entitled “The coronavirus pandemic is pushing more people online and will forever change how Americans shop for groceries, experts say.” Those cited in the piece argue that this shift away from in-person shopping will be “permanent” and also states that “More people are trying these services than otherwise would have without this catalyst and gives online players a greater chance to acquire and keep a new customer base.” A similar article in Yahoo! News argues that, thanks to the current crisis, “our dependence on online shopping will only rise because no one wants to catch a virus at a shop.”
In addition, the push towards the mass use of self-driving cars has also gotten a boost thanks to coronavirus, with driverless cars now making on-demand deliveries in California. Two companies, one Chinese-owned and the other backed by Japan’s SoftBank, have since been approved to have their self-driving cars used on California roads and that approval was expedited due to the coronavirus crisis. The CPO of Nuro Inc., the SoftBank-backed company, was quoted in Bloomberg as saying that “The Covid-19 pandemic has expedited the public need for contactless delivery services. Our R2 fleet is custom-designed to change the very nature of driving and the movement of goods by allowing people to remain safely at home while their groceries, medicines, and packages are brought to them.” Notably, the May 2019 NSCAI document references the inter-connected web of SoftBank-backed companies, particularly those backed by its largely Saudi-funded “Vision Fund,” as forming “the connective tissue for a global federation of tech companies” set to dominate AI.
California isn’t the only state to start using self-driving cars, as the Mayo Clinic of Florida is now also using them. “Using artificial intelligence enables us to protect staff from exposure to this contagious virus by using cutting-edge autonomous vehicle technology and frees up staff time that can be dedicated to direct treatment and care for patients,” Kent Thielen, M.D., CEO of Mayo Clinic in Florida stated in a recent press release cited by Mic.
Like the changes to in-person shopping in the age of coronavirus, other reports assert that self-driving vehicles are here to stay. One report published by Mashable is entitled “It took a coronavirus outbreak for self-driving cars to become more appealing,” and opens by stating “Suddenly, a future full of self-driving cars isn’t just a sci-fi pipe dream. What used to be considered a scary, uncertain technology for many Americans looks more like an effective tool to protect ourselves from a fast-spreading, infectious disease.” It further argues that this is hardly a “fleeting shift” in driving habits and one tech CEO cited in the piece, Anuja Sonalker of Steer Tech, claims that “There has been a distinct warming up to human-less, contactless technology. Humans are biohazards, machines are not.”
Another focus of the NSCAI presentation, AI medicine, has also seen its star rise in recent weeks. For instance, several reports have touted how AI-driven drug discovery platforms have been able to identify potential treatments for coronavirus. Microsoft, whose research lab director is on the NSCAI, recently put $20 million into its “AI for health” program to speed up the use of AI in analyzing coronavirus data. In addition, “telemedicine”– a form of remote medical care – has also become widely adopted due to the coronavirus crisis.
Several other AI-driven technologies have similarly become more widely adopted thanks to coronavirus, including the use of mass surveillance for “contact tracing” as well as facial recognition technology and biometrics. A recent Wall Street Journal report stated that the government is seriously considering both contact tracing via phone geolocation data and facial recognition technology in order to track those who might have coronavirus. In addition, private businesses – like grocery stores and restaurants – are using sensors and facial recognition to see how many people and which people are entering their stores.
As far as biometrics go, university researchers are now working to determine if “smartphones and biometric wearables already contain the data we need to know if we have become infected with the novel coronavirus.” Those efforts seek to detect coronavirus infections early by analyzing “sleep schedules, oxygen levels, activity levels and heart rate” based on smartphone apps like FitBit and smartwatches. In countries outside the U.S., biometric IDs are being touted as a way to track those who have and lack immunity to coronavirus.
In addition, one report in The Edge argued that the current crisis is changing what types of biometrics should be used, asserting that a shift towards thermal scanning and facial recognition is necessary:
“At this critical juncture of the crisis, any integrated facial recognition and thermal scanning solution must be implemented easily, rapidly and in a cost-effective manner. Workers returning to offices or factories must not have to scramble to learn a new process or fumble with declaration forms. They must feel safe and healthy for them to work productively. They just have to look at the camera and smile. Cameras and thermal scanners, supported by a cloud-based solution and the appropriate software protocols, will do the rest.”
Also benefiting from the coronavirus crisis is the concept of “smart cities,” with Forbes recently writing that “Smart cities can help us combat the coronavirus pandemic.” That article states that “Governments and local authorities are using smart city technology, sensors and data to trace the contacts of people infected with the coronavirus. At the same time, smart cities are also helping in efforts to determine whether social distancing rules are being followed.”
That article in Forbes also contains the following passage:
“…[T]he use of masses of connected sensors makes it clear that the coronavirus pandemic is–intentionally or not–being used as a testbed for new surveillance technologies that may threaten privacy and civil liberties. So aside from being a global health crisis, the coronavirus has effectively become an experiment in how to monitor and control people at scale.”
Another report in The Guardian states that “If one of the government takeaways from coronavirus is that ‘smart cities’ including Songdo or Shenzhen are safer cities from a public health perspective, then we can expect greater efforts to digitally capture and record our behaviour in urban areas – and fiercer debates over the power such surveillance hands to corporations and states.” There have also been reports that assert that typical cities are “woefully unprepared” to face pandemics compared to “smart cities.”
Yet, beyond many of the NSCAI’s specific concerns regarding mass AI adoption being conveniently resolved by the current crisis, there has also been a concerted effort to change the public’s perception of AI in general. As previously mentioned, the NSCAI had pointed out last year that:
“In the press and politics of America and Europe, Al is painted as something to be feared that is eroding privacy and stealing jobs. Conversely, China views it as both a tool for solving major macroeconomic challenges in order to sustain their economic miracle, and an opportunity to take technological leadership on the global stage.”
Now, less than a year later, the coronavirus crisis has helped spawn a slew of headlines in just the last few weeks that paint AI very differently, including “How Artificial Intelligence Can Help Fight Coronavirus,” “How AI May Prevent the Next Coronavirus Outbreak,” “AI Becomes an Ally in the Fight Against COVID-19,” “Coronavirus: AI steps up in battle against COVID-19,” and “Here’s How AI Can Help Africa Fight the Coronavirus,” among numerous others.
It is indeed striking how the coronavirus crisis has seemingly fulfilled the NSCAI’s entire wishlist and removed many of the obstacles to the mass adoption of AI technologies in the United States. Like major crises of the past, the national security state appears to be using the chaos and fear to promote and implement initiatives that would be normally rejected by Americans and, if history is any indicator, these new changes will remain long after the coronavirus crisis fades from the news cycle. It is essential that these so-called “solutions” be recognized for what they are and that we consider what type of world they will end up creating – an authoritarian technocracy. We ignore the rapid advance of these NSCAI-promoted initiatives and the phasing out of so-called “legacy systems” (and with them, many long-cherished freedoms) at our own peril.
Question Everything, Come To Your Own Conclusions.
SHARE THIS:
FacebookTwitterRedditLinkedInEmailPrintMore
RELATED
Meet The Companies Poised To Build The Kushner-Backed “Coronavirus Surveillance System”
Meet The Companies Poised To Build The Kushner-Backed “Coronavirus Surveillance System”
April 11, 2020
In "Business"
Here’s How The Government Is Working To Erode Constitutional Privacy Protections
Here’s How The Government Is Working To Erode Constitutional Privacy Protections
December 24, 2016
In "Article Revival"
Trump Quietly Nominates Mass Surveillance Advocate To “Protect” Your Privacy Rights
Trump Quietly Nominates Mass Surveillance Advocate To “Protect” Your Privacy Rights
September 2, 2017
By NATALIE HUET AND CARMEN PAUN 5/4/17, 12:00 PM CET Updated 5/8/17, 11:52 AM CET
Microsoft co-founder and philanthropist Bill Gates | Stephen Voss/REDUX
Some billionaires are satisfied with buying themselves an island. Bill Gates got a United Nations health agency in Geneva.
Over the past decade, the world’s richest man has become the World Health Organization’s second biggest donor, second only to the United States and just above the United Kingdom. This largesse gives him outsized influence over its agenda, one that could grow as the U.S. and the U.K. threaten to cut funding if the agency doesn’t make a better investment case.
The result, say his critics, is that Gates’ priorities have become the WHO’s. Rather than focusing on strengthening health care in poor countries — that would help, in their view, to contain future outbreaks like the Ebola epidemic — the agency spends a disproportionate amount of its resources on projects with the measurable outcomes Gates prefers, such as the effort to eradicate polio.
Concerns about the software billionaire’s sway — roughly a quarter of WHO’s budget goes toward polio eradication — has led to an effort to rein him in. But he remains a force to be reckoned with, as WHO prepares to elect one of three finalists to lead the organization.
“All of the candidates are going to have to ally with him in some way,” said Sophie Harman, associate professor of international politics at Queen Mary University of London. “You can’t ignore him.”
Evidence of Gates’ unprecedented influence abounds in ways subtle and showy.
“He is treated liked a head of state, not only at the WHO, but also at the G20” — Geneva-based NGO representative
Already a decade ago, when Gates started throwing money into malaria eradication, top officials — including the chief of the WHO’s malaria program — raised concerns that the foundation was distorting research priorities. “The term often used was ‘monopolistic philanthropy’, the idea that Gates was taking his approach to computers and applying it to the Gates Foundation,” said a source close to the WHO board.
ALSO ON POLITICO
Three candidates from three continents vie to be next global health chief
NATALIE HUET
ALSO ON POLITICO
Oxfam: 8 billionaires have amassed half world’s wealth
MARION SOLLETTY
ALSO ON POLITICO
Why Europe should lead on fight against disease
RENATE BAEHR
The billionaire was the first private individual to keynote WHO’s general assembly of member countries, and academics have coined a term for his sway in global health: the Bill Chill. Few people dare to openly criticize what he does. Most of 16 people interviewed on the topic would only do so on the condition of anonymity.
“He is treated liked a head of state, not only at the WHO, but also at the G20,” a Geneva-based NGO representative said, calling Gates one of the most influential men in global health.
The member country delegates POLITICO spoke to did not voice particular concern over Gates’ influence and were confident he is well intentioned.
However, his sway has NGOs and academics worried. Some health advocates fear that because the Gates Foundation’s money comes from investments in big business, it could serve as a Trojan horse for corporate interests to undermine WHO’s role in setting standards and shaping health policies.
Others simply fear the U.N. body relies too much on Gates’ money, and that the entrepreneur could one day change his mind and move it elsewhere.
Gates and his foundation team have heard the criticism, but they are convinced that the impact of their work and money is positive.
The opening of the World Health Assembly in 2016 in Geneva | Fabrice Coffrini/AFP via Getty Images
The opening of the World Health Assembly in 2016 in Geneva | Fabrice Coffrini/AFP via Getty Images
“It’s always a fair question to ask whether a large philanthropy has a disproportionate influence,” said Bryan Callahan, deputy director for executive engagement at the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. “When it comes to the priorities that the foundation has identified and that we choose to invest in, we hope that we are helping to create an enabling environment,” he said.
Steve Landry, the Gates Foundation’s director of multilateral partnerships, said the foundation provides “significant funds” to program teams that then decide how to use them best.
Strings attached
The Gates Foundation has pumped more than $2.4 billion into the WHO since 2000, as countries have grown reluctant to put more of their own money into the agency, especially after the 2008 global financial crisis.
Dues paid by member states now account for less than a quarter of WHO’s $4.5 billion biennial budget. The rest comes from what governments, Gates, other foundations and companies volunteer to chip in. Since these funds are usually earmarked for specific projects or diseases, WHO can’t freely decide how to use them.
Polio eradication is by far WHO’s best-funded program, with at least $6 billion allocated to it between 2013 and 2019, in great part because around 60 percent of the Gates Foundation’s contributions are earmarked for the cause. Gates wants tangible results, and wiping out a crippling disease like polio would be one.
But the focus on polio has effectively left WHO begging for funding for other programs, particularly to prop up poor countries’ health systems before the next epidemic hits.
The Ebola crisis of 2014, which killed 11,000 people in West Africa, was a particularly bruising experience for WHO. An emergency program drawn up in the wake of the epidemic has so far received just around 60 percent of the $485 million needed for 2016-2017.
Gates’ influence over the WHO was called into question once again during the race to succeed Chan as its director general.
Outgoing WHO boss Margaret Chan has also had to scale back her attempt to get countries to increase mandatory contributions for the first time in a decade. Chan initially hoped for a 10 percent hike, but WHO will end up asking for just 3 percent more this month after some countries objected.
That makes the Gates Foundation’s input all the more important. “They come with a checkbook, and with some smart ideas,” said Laurie Garrett, a senior fellow for global health at the Council on Foreign Relations.
Most of the Gates Foundation’s influence in the WHO is very discreet, she said, adding that it can also decide to take initiatives outside of the organization, as it did with GAVI, which helps the poorest countries buy vaccines in bulk at a discount, or with a recently launched Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, an alliance to develop vaccines for emerging infectious diseases.
But the foundation’s focus on delivering vaccines and medicines, rather than on building resilient health systems, has drawn criticism. And some NGOs worry it may be too close to industry.
In January, 30 health advocacy groups penned an open letter to WHO’s executive board protesting against making the Gates Foundation an official partner of the agency because its revenue comes from investments in companies that are at odds with public health goals, such as Coca-Cola.
The Gates Foundation says it operates as a separate entity from the trust, thanks to a “strict firewall,” and that it remains independent from its investments, which strictly exclude the tobacco, alcohol or arms industries.
Fencing off big money
Worries about the growing role of private money led member nations to agree, after several years of negotiations, on a new policy governing how it engages with entities such as private foundations, companies and NGOs. It is currently being rolled out across the agency.
Despite the criticism, WHO’s board granted the Gates Foundation "official relations" status. In practice, several sources said it does not change much to the relations WHO already had with the foundation.
Gaudenz Silberschmidt, WHO’s director for partnerships, said the new status is based on a three-year collaboration plan: “That means we have a solid planning and we and member states know what we are doing with them.”
The U.N. body also changed four years ago the way its budget is approved, to ensure member countries set its priorities. That means Gates can only put money into projects the 194 members support; the foundation cannot pitch a new one out of the blue and ask WHO to work on it right away just because it is providing the money.
Candidate for the WHO director general position Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus | Fabrice Coffrini/AFP via Getty Images
Candidate for the WHO director general position Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus | Fabrice Coffrini/AFP via Getty Images
These changes have calmed some criticism of its growing influence over the health body, Silberschmidt and two sources close to the WHO board said.
The foundation also seems to have got the message. Its representatives meet five to six times a year with other major donors to discuss the WHO’s priorities, and how it can support them, Landry said.
Two representatives of major donor countries confirmed the foundation’s envoys had been very cooperative in recent years. “They’re much more inclusive. They bring in other stakeholders, talk to member states to really try to build consensus,” said one delegate.
With the best intentions
Gates’ influence over the WHO was called into question once again during the race to succeed Chan as its director general.
The final three candidates include Sania Nishtar, a cardiologist from Pakistan who has pledged to take the agency “back to its former glory”; David Nabarro, a British physician and former U.N. special envoy for Ebola; and Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, who has served as health minister and foreign minister in the Ethiopian government.
“I don’t think they have any bad intentions. They are just such a big player that as immediately as they put money down they can disrupt things” — Geneva-based diplomat
Tedros, who like many in Ethiopia goes by his first name, is supported by the African Union. He has promised to reform the organization to better deal with crises like Ebola and to push for universal access to health care all over the world.
Last year, a French diplomat suggested that Gates also supports Tedros, having funded health programs in his country when he was health minister. Several foundation officials have denied this, saying that the foundation cannot take a position given that it is not a voting member country and thus has to remain neutral.
The new WHO boss will be selected by the member countries who have paid their membership fees on May 23, at an annual meeting in Geneva.
Still, most country representatives who agreed to speak anonymously on the topic said they were not particularly concerned with the Gates Foundation’s influence on WHO.
“I don’t think they have any bad intentions. They are just such a big player that as immediately as they put money down they can disrupt things,” said one Geneva-based diplomat.
Outgoing WHO chief Margaret Chan | Fabrice Coffrini/AFP via Getty Images
Outgoing WHO chief Margaret Chan | Fabrice Coffrini/AFP via Getty Images
“As far as I can tell, people are really happy with anyone who is giving money,” said another.
One big unknown is what will happen with the foundation’s money once it meets its target of eradicating polio, which started in the late 1980s and now appears to be nearing its goal. Chan has warned that if the polio money dries up in 2019, the global health body will be on the lookout for even more money.
The Gates Foundation’s Landry said his colleagues were working with WHO and its polio team on a “transition plan” to ensure the programs currently funded by the polio effort don’t run into trouble once the money stops flowing. WHO is due to present a report on it to member countries in May.
Brave Browser: Open source and built by a team of privacy focused, performance oriented pioneers of the web.
https://truthinmedia.com/brave _________________ --
'Suppression of truth, human spirit and the holy chord of justice never works long-term. Something the suppressors never get.' David Southwell
http://aangirfan.blogspot.com http://aanirfan.blogspot.com
Martin Van Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother."
Martin Van Creveld: I'll quote Henry Kissinger: "In campaigns like this the antiterror forces lose, because they don't win, and the rebels win by not losing."
A Gilead Sciences drug being tested as a potential treatment for Covid-19 may reduce the sperm count in mice, according to preliminary findings in a study by Chinese researchers https://t.co/WJaeF1WiWi
_________________ --
'Suppression of truth, human spirit and the holy chord of justice never works long-term. Something the suppressors never get.' David Southwell
http://aangirfan.blogspot.com http://aanirfan.blogspot.com
Martin Van Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother."
Martin Van Creveld: I'll quote Henry Kissinger: "In campaigns like this the antiterror forces lose, because they don't win, and the rebels win by not losing."
Trust WHO
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DhW6x6A1Bcg _________________ --
'Suppression of truth, human spirit and the holy chord of justice never works long-term. Something the suppressors never get.' David Southwell
http://aangirfan.blogspot.com http://aanirfan.blogspot.com
Martin Van Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother."
Martin Van Creveld: I'll quote Henry Kissinger: "In campaigns like this the antiterror forces lose, because they don't win, and the rebels win by not losing."
Neil Ferguson of Imperial College in Britain is ground zero for this world lockdown. He even testified before the British Parliament and nobody really interrogated him. He projected that the death rates would be 20% of the population and then had to admit he made a mistake. While many have focused on the sex scandal between Oxford and Imperial, behind the curtain lurks Bill Gates. Yes, you have it. Even on the Gates Foundation site, they admit they provide funding to Imperial College.
Generation Investment Management LLP, a sustainable investment firm chaired by Al Gore with $25 billion assets under management as of Dec. 31, 2019, has been working with Breakthrough Energy Ventures chaired by Bill Gates, with a $1 billion fund that invests in companies combating climate change. Gore and Greenpeace’s Jeniffer Morgan have been using Greta to try to further their agenda. The movies done by Gore and on Bill Gates are by the same director.
If Gates represents a net negative force in world politics, why does he receive such good press? For starters, he makes sizeable donations to a host of mainstream corporate media outlets.
by Alan Macleod December 06th, 2019 By Alan Macleod
Last month Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates surpassed Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos to once again become the world’s richest individual, according to the Bloomberg Billionaires Index. Buoyed by an enormous 48 percent increase in Microsoft’s share price this year, Gates has retaken the title he last held in 2017.
That outcome is partially owed to the whims of Donald J. Trump. Microsoft recently surprisingly defeated Amazon’s bid for an extremely lucrative $10 billion Pentagon cloud computing contract that sees the company instantly become one of the world’s most important military and security contractors. This decision, Amazon alleges, was due to interference from the president who holds a personal grudge against Bezos, whose Washington Post has maintained a campaign of “resistance” against him.
Gates was also recently in the news attacking the wealth tax that Democratic presidential nomination candidates Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders have proposed. “I’m all for super-progressive tax systems but when you say I should pay $100 billion, then I’m starting to do a little math about what I have left over,” the Seattle native said. (For the record, he would still have over $6 billion).
In response, Warren was apologetic, asking for an opportunity to meet with Gates to explain how much he would pay under the plan. “I promise it’s not $100 billion,” she said. But Sanders has been far more forthright in his opposition to the super-wealthy, categorically stating, “billionaires should not exist.”
Across the media, Gates is presented as one of the “good billionaires”: a warm-hearted philanthropist dedicated to giving away his entire fortune to needy causes. His charitable organization, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, is the largest of its sort in the world, holding over $50 billion in assets. His insight and generosity are constantly emphasized in headlines, as the following examples demonstrate.
“Bill Gates: Philanthropist,” BBC, (2/1/10).
“Why Bill Gates Thinks Ending Polio Is Worth It,” NPR, (5/8/13).
“How Bill Gates aims to Clean Up the Planet,” The Guardian, (2/4/1.
“What Einstein and Bill Gates Teach Us About Time Travel,” NBC News, (5/10/17).
“Bill Gates And Other Billionaires Pledge To Take On Climate Change,” NPR, (11/30/15).
“Bill Gates on ending disease, saving lives: ‘Time is on our side,’” Al-Jazeera, (4/27/19).
“Bill Gates gives $4.6bn to charity in biggest donation since 2000,” The Guardian, (8/15/17).
There are a few problems with that narrative. Firstly, if Gates is so committed to giving his money away, why does he keep getting richer? This is not a trivial question: his net worth has increased from $75 billion in March 2016 to a staggering $106 billion today, according to Forbes Magazine, an over 40 percent increase in three years alone.
Lee Camp, a political comedian who covers topics like rampant inequality on his show, Redacted Tonight, told MintPress News:
It is a sickness of our system that billionaires even exist. The UN estimates it would take 30 billion dollars to end world hunger per year. Gates or Bezos could end world hunger for multiple years. We can’t even comprehend that level of wealth. It’s sociopathic. So I’m not saying Gates doesn’t do good things sometimes, but he should not be viewed as a hero. All billionaires should be viewed as sick in the head. They need mental health professionals to work on them before it’s too late for humankind.”
No Such Thing as a Free GiftLinsey McGoey, Professor of Sociology at the University of Essex, UK, and author of No Such Thing as a Free Gift: The Gates Foundation and the Price of Philanthropy, is profoundly skeptical of philanthropy as a whole, claiming it can actually sometimes harm democracy in the long run: “Philanthropy can and is being used deliberately to divert attention away from different forms of economic exploitation that underpin global inequality today” she told MintPress News,
The new ‘philanthrocapitalism’ threatens democracy by increasing the power of the corporate sector at the expense of the public sector organizations, which increasingly face budget squeezes, in part by excessively remunerating for-profit organizations to deliver public services that could be delivered more cheaply without private sector involvement.”
Thus, huge donations give Gates enormous power over the education, health and social policies of entire countries.
Where do Bill’s billions go?
As Foreign Affairs noted, “few policy initiatives or normative standards set by the World Health Organization are announced before they have been casually, unofficially vetted by Gates Foundation staff.” In this sense, his wealth is extraordinarily anti-democratic, giving him veto power over the decisions and directions of organizations that should be collectively made by the highest representatives of the world’s population, not by one very rich man. And Gates is far from omnipotent, holding many of the patronizing assumptions about developing countries and how best to organize the world that one would expect a rich American tech geek to hold.
McGoey spells out the problem with this corporate attitude to development:
The Gates Foundation has spent twenty years relentlessly championing ‘business solutions’ to inequality and poverty. Through this corporate approach, Mr. Gates personally and the Gates Foundation more generally have enhanced the power and clout of corporations at every level of decision-making, at the regional, national and international level. The Gates Foundation has helped make philanthropy a handmaiden to corporate power rather than helped to empower the non-profit sector to act as a check on corporate profiteering and abuses of power.”
One example of the Foundation enhancing corporate power is its close relationship with highly controversial pharmaceutical and chemical giant Monsanto Corporation, whom it helped gain a stronger foothold in Africa. It also oversaw a flawed clinical trial of the HPV vaccine in India in 2009, where 23,000 impoverished girls aged 9-15 were exposed to potentially lethal drugs without even their parents’ consent, leading to seven deaths. He is also preoccupied with controlling Africa’s population through family planning, fearing a population boom. As such, he appears almost more interested in eliminating the people who are suffering than the source of the suffering itself.
Gates is also one of the most important individuals leading the assault on the American public education network in the form of charter schools. Charter schools effectively privatize the public school system, where the public continues to foot the bill for the school, but has no influence or say in how it is run. They have not been found to increase test scores, but are very popular with both the private sector and the religious right, whereas the vast majority of unionized public school teachers oppose them. But, as the Associated Press stated, there is “no bigger champion [of charter schools] than Bill Gates,” who has plowed enormous amounts of money into the movement, even funding the pro-charter school documentary Waiting For Superman.
Buying power and influence
If Gates represents a net negative force in world politics, why does he receive such good press? One reason may be his sizeable donations to a host of mainstream corporate media outlets. For example, the Gates Foundation underwrites the entire Global Development section of the Guardian, and has given the British newspaper over $9 million. Studying its donation database, it transpires it has also contributed over $3 million to NBC Universal, over $4 million to the influential French newspaper, Le Monde, over $4.5 million to NPR, $1 million to Al-Jazeera, and an astonishing $49 million to the BBC’s Media Action program, to name only a few. He who pays the piper, it is said, calls the tune. McGoey claims that the motive of billionaires giving to media organizations is primarily “to help legitimate the spurious idea that large corporate actors can rectify the economic harms and economic inequality that their practices have often compounded.”
Gates himself is the head of a gigantic media empire. We already rely on Microsoft for social media (LinkedIn), entertainment (Xbox), hardware and software like the Windows Phone and Windows OS. The company also owns stakes in media giants like Comcast and AT&T. And the “MS” in “MSNBC” stands for “Microsoft.”
Bill Gates | Hollywood studio execs
Bill Gates, second left, poses with Hollywood studio execs in March 1995 ahead of the unveiling of cable TV channel MSNBC. Dave Weaver | AP
It is a similar story for Jeff Bezos, who, in addition to Amazon’s myriad media ventures, owns the Washington Post, which media watchdog group Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting has constantly shown often descends into little more than a propaganda outlet for its boss’s interests. It appears that once billionaires have purchased every worldly material good possible, the only things left to buy are power and influence.
While the media may be full of stories singing Gates’ praises, presenting him as a good billionaire (as opposed to the current president), the reality is that one man with that amount of power, be it political (like Trump) or economic (like Gates and Bezos) has a highly corrosive effect on democracy and society more generally.
While they are portrayed as visionaries, multi-billionaires are often blinkered in other, very important ways. Just as reports about Amazon workers’ poor pay and shocking working conditions were surfacing, Bezos declared that the only way he could see to spend the financial resources he accrued was to explore the solar system and beyond. Sharing the profit with his beleaguered workforce appears to genuinely not have occurred to him.
If we are to move towards a better society, the philanthropy of the super-wealthy must be scrutinized, as all too often, what appears to be a generous gift is actually a calculated action intended to increase their power, image or influence. As former British Prime Minister Clement Attlee said, “Charity is a cold grey loveless thing. If a rich man wants to help the poor, he should pay his taxes gladly, not dole out money at a whim.” Bill Gates is not just some rich guy who is unsure about paying more tax: he’s a menace to society.
Feature photo | Former Microsoft CEO and co-founder Bill Gates attends the World Health Summit & Grand Challenges Annual Meeting in Berlin, Oct. 16, 2018. Markus Schreiber | AP
Alan MacLeod is a MintPress Staff Writer as well as an academic and writer for Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting. His book, Bad News From Venezuela: Twenty Years of Fake News and Misreporting was published in April.
Republish our stories! MintPress News is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 International License.
BILL AND MELINDA GATES FOUNDATION BILL GATES INFLUENCE MEDIA PHILANTHROPY
You Might Also Like
Joe Biden Feature photo
The Media’s Loudest #MeToo Champions Are Ignoring Biden Sexual Assault Accuser Tara Reade
The Corporate Media Celebrates After Handing Joe Biden Another Win
27 Comments
SIGN UP FOR THE BEST OF MINTPRESS, DELIVERED TO YOUR DAILY INBOX.
TOPICS:Bill GatesDARPADNANanotechnologyRyan CristiánSpiro SkourasThe Last American VagabondVaccinesWhitney Webb
MAY 1, 2020 By Spiro Skouras
In this powerful interview, Spiro is joined by Whitney Webb and Ryan Cristián from The Last American Vagabond, as they discuss the rollout of a new system of control the likes of which the world has never seen.
Bill Gates Partners With DARPA & Department of Defense For New DNA Nanotech COVID19 Vaccine!
It has been said to never let a good crisis go to waste, and it appears the ones pulling the strings are taking full advantage of the current crisis as more and more evidence emerges contradicting the official story that suggests this crisis is no accident.
The fact that Bill Gates has teamed up with the Department of Defense and DARPA, which is the special project research and development arm of the Pentagon, to develop a brand new type of vaccine which is being rushed into production is alarming to say the least.
Especially considering this new kind of DNA / RNA vaccine would normally take 15-20 years to roll out, while this one is being rolled out in a matter of months and is already undergoing human clinical trials. The urgency and rolled back regulations to streamline this new vaccine is, of course, justified by the crisis.
The Last American Vagabond Website
https://www.thelastamericanvagabond.com _________________ --
'Suppression of truth, human spirit and the holy chord of justice never works long-term. Something the suppressors never get.' David Southwell
http://aangirfan.blogspot.com http://aanirfan.blogspot.com
Martin Van Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother."
Martin Van Creveld: I'll quote Henry Kissinger: "In campaigns like this the antiterror forces lose, because they don't win, and the rebels win by not losing."
An Italian lawmaker has managed to bring the conspiracy blame-game to an entirely new level, exercising her parliamentary privilege to blast Bill Gates as a “vaccine criminal” and globalist tool.
Bill Gates and his latest anti-coronavirus efforts have been at the center of the wildest theories that explore possible sinister motives behind the billionaire’s activities. In arguably the most high-profile outcry last week, an Italian MP for Rome Sara Cunial delivered a speech rarely (if ever at all) heard in any parliament.
In her passionate address, Cunial called upon fellow lawmakers to defy any plans for compulsory vaccination against Covid-19. Such endeavours are being pushed by the corrupt elites – the Deep State – she claimed, pointing the finger at Bill Gates as one of the main culprits behind the vaccination drive, if not the pandemic itself.
For decades, Gates has been working on depopulation policy and dictatorial control plans on global politics, aiming to obtain the primacy on agriculture, technology and energy.
ALSO ON RT.COM
FDA orders Bill Gates-funded program to HALT at-home Covid-19 self-testing
Being a well-known anti-vax activist, Cunial singled-out Gates as the villain primarily because of the vaccination campaigns that his foundation has been conducting for years in less-developed countries. But while boldly accusing the billionaire of sterilizing millions of women in Africa and paralyzing hundreds of thousands of children in India, she also added a good pinch of GMOs and 5G tech to the dense conspiracy mix of his ‘sins.’
The Italian politician also harshly criticized the anti-coronavirus lockdown measures that her country was among the first to impose. According to Cunial, the isolation serves the globalist agenda too, while the Italians have been subjected to a “holy inquisition of false science.”
“It is our children who will lose more, who are ‘raped souls,’” Cunial said. “In this way, the right to school will be granted only with a bracelet to get them used to probation, to get them used to slavery and involuntary treatment.”
The real goal of all of this is total control. Absolute domination of human beings, transformed into guinea pigs and slaves, violating sovereignty and free will.
When hecklers attempted to interrupt her, the president of the chamber called to order – because in a “free parliament anyone has the right to express their opinion” – and scored a round of applause.
‘Bill Gates seeks to microchip humanity!’ Russian Oscar-winning director pushes vaccine conspiracy… loosely-based on REAL patent
Allowed to finish her speech, Cunial raised the stakes even further, pleading with the Italian PM to submit Gates to international justice – unless of course Giuseppe Conte is himself part of the global Deep State conspiracy.
Next time you receive a phone call from the philanthropist Bill Gates, forward it directly to the International Criminal Court for crimes against humanity.
While Bill Gates has often been a target of assorted conspiracy theories in the past, the ongoing coronavirus pandemic has ramped up interest in his persona. His quest for a vaccine against the Covid-19, as well as a recent Microsoft patent vaguely describing a device that tracks ‘body activity,’ caused a lot of fuss.
Despite the fact that Bill Gates has technically stepped down from Microsoft’s board and is no longer associated with the corporation, while the ‘sinister’ patent WO/2020/060606 never mentioned any implants, some deduced the billionaire might be planning to sneakily microchip humanity under the guise of coronavirus vaccination… for reasons.
While Cunial’s tirade might sound unprecedented, it’s not particularly shocking coming from a fierce anti-vax activist who was expelled from the 5-Star Movement party last year over her dissenting views.
She also wouldn't be the first high-profile figure to scapegoat Gates. Russian Oscar-winning director Nikita Mikhalkov made headlines earlier this month after he, just like Cunial, sounded the alarm on national TV about an alleged plot to decimate and control the population of the planet.
A report published by the European Commission in late 2019 reveals that the EU has been looking to increase the scope and power of vaccination programmes since well before the current “pandemic”.
The endpoint of the Roadmap is, among many other things, to introduce a “common vaccination card/passport” for all EU citizens.
This proposal will be appearing before the commission in 2022, with a “feasibility study” set to run from 2019 through 2021 (meaning, as of now, it’s about halfway through).
To underline the point: The “vaccination roadmap” is not an improvised response to the Covid19 pandemic, but rather an ongoing plan with roots going back to 2018, when the EU released a survey of the public’s attitude toward vaccines titled “2018 State of Vaccine Confidence”
On the back of this research, the EU then commissioned a technical report titled “Designing and implementing an immunisation information system”, on – among other things – the plausibility of an EU-wide vaccination monitoring system.
In the 3rd quarter of 2019 these reports were all combined into the latest version of the the “Vaccination Roadmap”, a long-term policy plan to spread vaccine “awareness and understanding” whilst counteracting “vaccine myths” and combatting “vaccine hesitancy”.
You can read the entire report here, but below are some of the more concerning highlights [emphasis throughout is ours]:
“Examine the feasibility of developing a common vaccinationcard/passport for EU citizens“
“Develop EU guidance for establishing comprehensive electronic immunization information systems for effective monitoring of immunization programmes.”
“overcome the legal and technical barriers impeding the interoperability of national immunisation information systems”
On the 12th September 2019, at the joint EU-WHO “Global Vaccination Summit”, they announced the “10 Actions Towards Vaccination for All”, which cover much of the same ground.
One month later, in October 2019, Event 201 was held.
You'll Never Think About Solar Panels Again After Seeing This (Watch)
Smart Investors Zone
Ad by Revcontent
Find Out More >
68,973
- Advertisement -
For those who don’t know, Event 201 was a simulated pandemic exercise focusing on a zoonotic novel coronavirus originating in bats. It was sponsored by Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security, the World Economic Forum, and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.
The result of the simulation was seven key suggestions.
In November of 2019, these suggestions were published as a “call to action”.
One month later, China reported the first cases of Covid19.
To be clear here (and forestall any below-the-line arguments): this is not about vaccines, their effectiveness, safety or lack thereof.
The point is that proposed COVID countermeasures, which have been presented to the public as emergency measures thought up on the fly by panicking institutions, have in fact existed since before the emergence the disease.
They already wanted to monitor your vaccination records and tie that to your passport, introduce mandatory vaccinations and clampdown on “misinformation”. They just didn’t have a reason yet.
This was a situation which required a crisis and, fortuitously, it got one.
The exact ratio of contrivance to happenstance will never be known. What we DO know, at this point, is that Sars-Cov-2 is nothing like the threat originally reported, they admit as much themselves.
We also know they keep churning out the fear anyway.
Prince William spoke to the founder of the Microsoft empire yesterday, according to the Court Circular, the official register detailing every official engagement carried out by members of the Royal Family. The Duke of Cambridge held this meeting as joint patron of the Royal Foundation he created in 2009 with Prince Harry.
Royal history rewritten: Charles’ ‘knock ‘em dead’ note to Diana exposed
While officials remain tight-lipped on the content of his phone call, the fact the Duke called Mr Gates as patron of the Royal Foundation suggest their meeting had to do with a charitable project, possibly linked to the current coronavirus pandemic.
The entry, dated May 21, read: "His Royal Highness, Joint Patron, the Royal
Foundation of The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, this evening held a Meeting with Mr William Gates (Co-Chairman and Trustee of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation) via telephone."
Mr Gates is at the forefront of funding efforts to find a vaccine for COVID-19.
Prince William said the mental wellbeing of key workers is going to be his top priority during the pandemic (Image: OUR FRONTLINE)
The Gates Foundation pledged to spend more than $100million in March to fight the pandemic.
Earlier this month, the Gates further raised the bar and said their foundation would spend $245million in this fight.
This meeting comes after Prime Minister Boris Johnson also held a remote call with Bill and his wife Melinda Gates.
Royal fans hail Kate and William for their ‘commitment’ to the UK
As confirmed by Downing Street, on May 19 Mr Johnson spoke to the Gates via video link to discuss the UK's contribution towards helping countries around the world tackle coronavirus.
They also spoke about the efforts to find a vaccine able to free the world of the COVID-19 threat.
The video call between Mr Johnson and the Gates took place in the run-up to the Global Vaccine Summit, which is being hosted by the UK on June 4.
DON'T MISS
Kate Middleton news: One of the only moments Kate lost her composure [INSIGHT]
Kate and William's 'critical' mission hailed as forge 'important' path [INSIGHT]
Kate Middleton did this to 'prove herself' to the Royal Family [INSIGHT]
prince William news bill gates covid 19 vaccine gates foundation coronavirus news
Prince William and Kate continue to work from home (Image: GETTY)
prince William news bill gates covid 19 vaccine gates foundation coronavirus news
Prince William and Kate are self isolating in Norfolk (Image: GETTY)
Attendees hope the summit will help raise at least £6billion for a vaccine.
Kate and Prince William continue to work from home, getting in touch with patronages and working at initiatives close to their hearts.
On the same day the call with Mr Gates took place, Prince William also helped another meeting.
prince William news bill gates covid 19 vaccine gates foundation coronavirus news
Prince William is second-in-line to the throne (Image: EXPRESS)
The Court Circular read: "The Duke of Cambridge this morning held a Meeting about marine conservation with people in Wester Ross, Northwest Highlands, via video link."
The day before, the prince also held a video conference call with representatives from Lifelines Scotland and emergency responders across Scotland.
Later in the day, he was joined by Kate to talk to staff and residents from Shire Hall Care Home, Cardiff, via video link.
Part of this heartfelt meeting was recorded and shared on social media.
prince William news bill gates covid 19 vaccine gates foundation coronavirus news
Prince William and Kate taking part in the Clap for Our Carers initiative (Image: GETTY)
RELATED ARTICLES
Royal Family praised for giving fans 'intimate and personal' insight
Kate and William HAVE stepped up after Harry & Meghan Markle's walkout
In the clip, the Duke and Duchess can be heard thanking the staff working at the Shire Hall.
Prince William also said he truly hopes this pandemic will raise awareness on just how important the work done by nurses and staff at care homes is.
CATEGORIES Biometrics News | Civil / National ID | Healthcare Biometrics
ID2020 and partners launch program to provide digital ID with vaccines
The ID2020 Alliance has launched a new digital identity program at its annual summit in New York, in collaboration with the Government of Bangladesh, vaccine alliance Gavi, and new partners in government, academia, and humanitarian relief.
The program to leverage immunization as an opportunity to establish digital identity was unveiled by ID2020 in partnership with the Bangladesh Government’s Access to Information (a2i) Program, the Directorate General of Health Services, and Gavi, according to the announcement.
Digital identity is a computerized record of who a person is, stored in a registry. It is used, in this case, to keep track of who has received vaccination.
“We are implementing a forward-looking approach to digital identity that gives individuals control over their own personal information, while still building off existing systems and programs,” says Anir Chowdhury, policy advisor at a2i. “The Government of Bangladesh recognizes that the design of digital identity systems carries far-reaching implications for individuals’ access to services and livelihoods, and we are eager to pioneer this approach.”
Gavi CEO Seth Berkley says that 89 percent of children and adolescents who do not have identification live in countries where the organization is active. “We are enthusiastic about the potential impact of this program not just in Bangladesh, but as something we can replicate across Gavi-eligible countries, providing a viable route to closing the identity gap,” he says.
A partnership was also formed earlier this year between Gavi, NEC, and Simprints to use biometrics to improve vaccine coverage in developing nations.
“Digital ID is being defined and implemented today, and we recognize the importance of swift action to close the identity gap,” comments ID2020 Executive Director Dakota Gruener. “Now is the time for bold commitments to ensure that we respond both quickly and responsibly. We and our ID2020 Alliance partners, both present and future, are committed to rising to this challenge.”
ID2020 also announced new partnerships and provided progress reports on initiatives launched last year. Since last year’s summit, the ID2020 Alliance has been joined by the City of Austin, UC Berkeley’s CITRIS Policy Lab and Care USA.
The City of Austin, ID2020, and several other partners are working together with homeless people and the service providers who engage with them to develop a blockchain-enabled digital identity platform called MyPass to empower homeless people with their own identity data.
A pair of inaugural pilot programs launched last year in partnership with iRespond and Everest have each made progress, ID2020 says. The iRespond program has improved continuity of care for more than 3,000 refugees receiving treatment for chronic conditions from the International Rescue Committee in Thailand, according to the announcement, while Everest has assisted with the provision of access to critical energy subsidies and a range of additional services with secure and user-centric digital identities without relying on a smartphone.
This post was updated at 4:58pm on March 26, 2020 to clarify that the program is intended to allow people to receive vaccination and prove they have received it, not to track individuals, as claimed by some conspiracy theorists.
May 25, 2020 Introducing: C0VI Pass, the New Enslavement Tool
COVI-PASS™ Uses State-Of-The-Art, Patented VCode® Technology. Click Play To Watch The COVI-PASS™ Explainer Video.
EM Bio-Tech is at the forefront of Global Health-Tech and has developed COVI-PASS™️, to revolutionise the Health Industry with its Digital Health Passport.
https://www.covipass.com/
COVI-PASS™️ can manage the end-to-end (including product tagging) process from test to secure Digital Health Passport. COVI-PASS™️ is agnostic to any Covid-19 test brand or source, and can integrate with all global COVID test manufacturers.
During this global Covid-19 pandemic, the world is searching for a secure solution, to hold test, immunoresponse information, and vaccination details for now and into the future. COVI-PASS™️ has been developed to be the world’s most secure Digital Health Passport solution.
Through unique biometric access, users are allowed access to their health and immunoresponse information. COVI-PASS™️ safely facilitates safe return to work and life.
COVI-PASS™️ is equipped with military grade encryption and has more than 2.2 Quintillion variations of codes, which securely corresponds to certified tests, all of which can do something different based on the details of the scanner: user ID, time & date, device type and how many times they have scanned.
TECHNOLOGY SUPERIORITY
The VCode® can be scanned at distance (in some uses over 100meters), applied at sizes down to 100 microns, scanned within 170-degree angles and features error correction where the code still works when partially damaged.
In scan rate efficiency, VCode® is up to 10 seconds faster than other technologies, which could save hours for Healthcare, Businesses and social requirements, when reaching a high volume scan rate. The uses of VCode®️ span all Industries from payments, traceability / anti-counterfeiting measures to identity provisioning.
WHAT IS COVI-PASS™
COVI-PASS™ is a secure Digital Health Passport which displays your Covid-19 test history and immunoresponse and other relevant health information.
COVI-PASS™ can be used as an authenticated gateway for Public Services, Businesses and their key employees to assist in managing a safe workplace.
While onboarding a new Healthcare organisation could typically take months, COVI-PASS™ reduces the time to two minutes by enabling instant validation of staff identity details, PPE training and Fit Test assessments.
MORE
USING
COVI-PASS™
COVI-PASS™ provides a Digital Health Passport in a scannable app that can be included in existing healthcare apps along with having Covid-19 testing kits integrating the VCode® technology to be used for ongoing monitoring and reporting. Healthcare workers can have the app on their smartphones or via an RFID card to show the latest test results.
COVI-PASS™ can be scanned from up to 3 metres away, securely ensuring social distancing measures are adhered to.
COVI-PASS™ provides a full end-to-end solution; from Covid-19 test procedure to recording the result in a secure Digital Health Passport, using innovative technologies.
MORE
ABOUT US
COVI-PASS™ is a global bio-science and technology company that has developed a certified return to work protocol in collaboration with global corporations and governments.
What truly separates COVI-PASS™ from any other company is the patented VCode® technology from VST Enterprises that is equipped with military-grade encryption. VCode® has more than 2.2 Quintillion variations of codes to secure a number of scans performed and user login, time, facial recognition, touch ID, geo-fences and handset brand.
VST Enterprises technology enables COVI-PASS™ to be used with tests for Ebola, Sars and Mers, and to confirm information related to underlying health issues, ICE details, medication and PPE authorised to the key worker.
MORE
previous arrownext arrow
Theresa May - Former Prime Minister of the United Kingdom
“I know VSTE prides itself on its ‘infinite Possibilities’ - and it is exactly that sort of optimism this country needs to power its economy. Manchester’s exciting tech industry is already sparking new ideas and new businesses and VSTE will be able to spread the word.”
Dr. Anas Nader - CEO and co-founder of Patchwork.Health
“The importance of allowing hospitals to seamlessly call upon a vast network of trained healthcare workers for immediate service cannot be overstated – delays of several days are no longer sustainable and could make a life-changing difference to patients.”
Claire McCloughlin - Head of Interactive Technology, BBC
“Vcode® leads the way for next generation engagement with consumers. The accuracy of the codes, the sophistication of smartphone handsets, dynamic flexible content and the low cost of deployment make this technology ideal for visual media and outdoor promotion. The BBC is proud to support a UK company which is pushing the boundaries and can see the benefit of using VCode for a wide range of campaigns”
Jill Young - CEO, NHS Golden Jubilee Foundation
“The foundation is excited to be partnering VST Enterprises to support their innovative VDonate Application. We believe VDonate will significantly drive Golden Jubilee Foundations fundraising efforts.”
Mike Farnan - CEO, Redstrike
"We are already talking to Government, we are already talking to the Department of Health, we are already in those conversations at the highest level. The Government are desperate to find a mechanism and we have just given them one. It can work across all areas of life and sport is one of those areas." *DailyMail - Apr 16th 2020
previous arrownext arrow
COVI-PASS™
OBJECTIVE
In order to safely return to work and social interactions, up-to-date and authenticated health information is vital. COVI-PASS™ is a secure, patented and trusted solution that can successfully deliver on this objective.
SOLUTION
COVI-PASS™ is able to display past and current Covid-19 test results to confirm your immunoresponse. This ensures confident return to work and life.
VALIDATION
COVI-PASS™ connects your personal biometric ID + Covid-19 test result + unique VCode identifier = Health Authenticated
PARTNERSHIPS & STRATEGIC ALLIANCES
COVI-PASS™ endeavors to create a sustainable and effective network of value-added Partnerships and Alliances to combat the novel Covid-19 pandemic by assisting Governments, International Corporations, Public and Private enterprises to optimise Public Health management.
When signing up with COVI-PASS™ you become an important participant in managing Public Health within your organisation, community and country.
GOVERNMENTS
COVI-PASS™ technology is certified by the United Nations and bears an European Union Commission Seal of Excellence. COVI-PASS™ is committed to support Governments, Sports Bodies and Health Services to comply with statutory regulations to improve Public Health management.
VCODE,
RELIABLEVERSATILEINNOVATIVEBE PART OF THE FUTURE
The versatile technology allows genuine users to authorise themselves and authenticate a product (such as Covid-19 Test) in real-time using a smart device or RFID reader.
INTERNATIONAL CORPORATIONS
COVI-PASS™ empowers International Corporations, Companies and Businesses to enable employees back to work.
COVI-PASS™ coordinates the combined respective efforts of Governments, International Corporations and Businesses to overcome the daily work challenges posed by the Covid-19 pandemic.
COMMENTARY By Ronald Cohen April 18, 2020 10:55 am ET
BARRON'S NEWSLETTERS
Review & Preview
Every weekday evening we highlight the consequential market news of the day and explain what's likely to matter tomorrow.
Enter your email address
SIGN UP
Text size
Ab testing kits AFIAS Covid-19 used in diagnosing the coronavirus (COVID-19) sit at the Boditech Med Inc. headquarters on April 17, 2020 in Chuncheon, South Korea.
Photograph by Chung Sung-Jun/Getty Images
If our objective is to stop the Covid-19 pandemic and restart the world’s economies, we urgently need entrepreneurial innovation to deliver vast quantities of effective tests as soon as humanly possible.
Containment, which has helped our developed economies to slow the spread of the virus, is hugely costly and, in any case, will not be realistic in emerging countries where overcrowding is a common feature of daily life. If there are no reliable tests for the virus and its antibodies, the virus is likely to continue spreading and could well return to advanced countries.
Containment has huge economic costs. An estimated $350 billion is lost in production each month in the U.S. alone, as economist and Nobel Laureate Paul Romer and President of the Rockefeller Foundation Rajiv Shah recently wrote in the Wall Street Journal. The quickest and most effective method to shorten the duration of containment is through the regular testing of a large part of our population on a daily basis. If done in the right way, there is a good possibility that such tests can be developed and supplied within a matter of months. For health regulatory reasons, tests are likely to become available well ahead of effective medication and vaccines. According to Romer and Shah, $100 billion spent on testing would be equivalent to just ten days’ cost of containment in the U.S.
Mobilizing a massive and urgent effort is necessary in order to boost innovation, create the appropriate number of Covid-19 tests, and finance this supply in huge quantities.
One way to achieve this is through a Pay-for-Success Covid-19 initiative. Building on the advance market commitment successfully used to supply pneumococcal vaccines in 2009 and taking a leaf out of the impact investing playbook, private investment can be attracted to fund much-needed innovation, while remunerating investors only when effective tests have been supplied.
Achieving international coordination at this crucial time faces great difficulties. It makes sense, therefore, for the European Union, the U.S., and individual countries across the world to announce separate advance market commitments aimed at providing a combined $10 billion to purchase tests at a preagreed rate. Appropriate government agencies would sign contracts with interested companies. Prices would rise with more proximate delivery, greater quantity supplied, and the speed and accuracy of the tests. Governments could purchase all available production at the prices agreed, within a maximum time frame and quantity. Surplus tests available in any country would be sold across the world.
Innovative companies currently working to develop tests, both young and established, will enter into these contracts and race to ramp up their activity. The investment they require will be funded by $10 billion-worth of Covid-19 Innovation Bonds, guaranteed by the relevant governments and supplied by private investors on a nonrecourse basis, with a return that would rise from zero to 10% a year according to the number of government-purchased tests. Recipient companies would repay this investment with a variable return out of payments received.
Aside from bringing containment and the pandemic to an earlier end, with the consequent reduction in pain and economic cost, such a measure would provide economic stimulus as young and established companies engage deeply in our efforts to solve the crisis. The ensuing boost to innovation and manufacturing will bring benefits, not just during the crisis, but also after it.
Contracts should be priced at very attractive levels for companies. Demand for these tests is huge across the world, and to the extent that governments overpay in providing strong incentives for innovation, this overpayment would be shared through exports to other countries. In any case, the cost of overpayment would be insignificant compared with the longer duration of containment and its corresponding stimulus packages. By getting our economies going sooner, we will avoid much human suffering, save trillions of dollars in unemployment benefits, and halt the loss of economic output.
Such a Pay-for-Success initiative would provide very powerful incentives for companies and investors to join in the fight against Covid-19, dramatically boosting the effort to provide the tests we need. Similar initiatives could be extended to drive innovation in medication, vaccines, and personal protective equipment.
There is no reason why governments should not vigorously embrace this approach. The alternative is to run the risk of losing even more lives, forgoing even more economic output, and condemning many more companies to bankruptcy – making ourselves weaker and less able to reap the full benefit of a recovery when it finally comes.
Sir Ronald Cohen is chair, Global Steering Group for Impact Investment; author of IMPACT, to be published July 2; and investor, Click Diagnostics in Silicon Valley, which is developing a Covid-19 test. From 2013 to 2015 he chaired the G8 Social Impact Investment Taskforce.
TonyGosling wrote:
May 25, 2020 Introducing: C0VI Pass, the New Enslavement Tool
COVI-PASS™ Uses State-Of-The-Art, Patented VCode® Technology. Click Play To Watch The COVI-PASS™ Explainer Video.
EM Bio-Tech is at the forefront of Global Health-Tech and has developed COVI-PASS™️, to revolutionise the Health Industry with its Digital Health Passport.
https://www.covipass.com/
COVI-PASS™️ can manage the end-to-end (including product tagging) process from test to secure Digital Health Passport. COVI-PASS™️ is agnostic to any Covid-19 test brand or source, and can integrate with all global COVID test manufacturers.
During this global Covid-19 pandemic, the world is searching for a secure solution, to hold test, immunoresponse information, and vaccination details for now and into the future. COVI-PASS™️ has been developed to be the world’s most secure Digital Health Passport solution.
Through unique biometric access, users are allowed access to their health and immunoresponse information. COVI-PASS™️ safely facilitates safe return to work and life.
COVI-PASS™️ is equipped with military grade encryption and has more than 2.2 Quintillion variations of codes, which securely corresponds to certified tests, all of which can do something different based on the details of the scanner: user ID, time & date, device type and how many times they have scanned.
TECHNOLOGY SUPERIORITY
The VCode® can be scanned at distance (in some uses over 100meters), applied at sizes down to 100 microns, scanned within 170-degree angles and features error correction where the code still works when partially damaged.
In scan rate efficiency, VCode® is up to 10 seconds faster than other technologies, which could save hours for Healthcare, Businesses and social requirements, when reaching a high volume scan rate. The uses of VCode®️ span all Industries from payments, traceability / anti-counterfeiting measures to identity provisioning.
WHAT IS COVI-PASS™
COVI-PASS™ is a secure Digital Health Passport which displays your Covid-19 test history and immunoresponse and other relevant health information.
COVI-PASS™ can be used as an authenticated gateway for Public Services, Businesses and their key employees to assist in managing a safe workplace.
While onboarding a new Healthcare organisation could typically take months, COVI-PASS™ reduces the time to two minutes by enabling instant validation of staff identity details, PPE training and Fit Test assessments.
MORE
USING
COVI-PASS™
COVI-PASS™ provides a Digital Health Passport in a scannable app that can be included in existing healthcare apps along with having Covid-19 testing kits integrating the VCode® technology to be used for ongoing monitoring and reporting. Healthcare workers can have the app on their smartphones or via an RFID card to show the latest test results.
COVI-PASS™ can be scanned from up to 3 metres away, securely ensuring social distancing measures are adhered to.
COVI-PASS™ provides a full end-to-end solution; from Covid-19 test procedure to recording the result in a secure Digital Health Passport, using innovative technologies.
MORE
ABOUT US
COVI-PASS™ is a global bio-science and technology company that has developed a certified return to work protocol in collaboration with global corporations and governments.
What truly separates COVI-PASS™ from any other company is the patented VCode® technology from VST Enterprises that is equipped with military-grade encryption. VCode® has more than 2.2 Quintillion variations of codes to secure a number of scans performed and user login, time, facial recognition, touch ID, geo-fences and handset brand.
VST Enterprises technology enables COVI-PASS™ to be used with tests for Ebola, Sars and Mers, and to confirm information related to underlying health issues, ICE details, medication and PPE authorised to the key worker.
MORE
previous arrownext arrow
Theresa May - Former Prime Minister of the United Kingdom
“I know VSTE prides itself on its ‘infinite Possibilities’ - and it is exactly that sort of optimism this country needs to power its economy. Manchester’s exciting tech industry is already sparking new ideas and new businesses and VSTE will be able to spread the word.”
Dr. Anas Nader - CEO and co-founder of Patchwork.Health
“The importance of allowing hospitals to seamlessly call upon a vast network of trained healthcare workers for immediate service cannot be overstated – delays of several days are no longer sustainable and could make a life-changing difference to patients.”
Claire McCloughlin - Head of Interactive Technology, BBC
“Vcode® leads the way for next generation engagement with consumers. The accuracy of the codes, the sophistication of smartphone handsets, dynamic flexible content and the low cost of deployment make this technology ideal for visual media and outdoor promotion. The BBC is proud to support a UK company which is pushing the boundaries and can see the benefit of using VCode for a wide range of campaigns”
Jill Young - CEO, NHS Golden Jubilee Foundation
“The foundation is excited to be partnering VST Enterprises to support their innovative VDonate Application. We believe VDonate will significantly drive Golden Jubilee Foundations fundraising efforts.”
Mike Farnan - CEO, Redstrike
"We are already talking to Government, we are already talking to the Department of Health, we are already in those conversations at the highest level. The Government are desperate to find a mechanism and we have just given them one. It can work across all areas of life and sport is one of those areas." *DailyMail - Apr 16th 2020
previous arrownext arrow
COVI-PASS™
OBJECTIVE
In order to safely return to work and social interactions, up-to-date and authenticated health information is vital. COVI-PASS™ is a secure, patented and trusted solution that can successfully deliver on this objective.
SOLUTION
COVI-PASS™ is able to display past and current Covid-19 test results to confirm your immunoresponse. This ensures confident return to work and life.
VALIDATION
COVI-PASS™ connects your personal biometric ID + Covid-19 test result + unique VCode identifier = Health Authenticated
PARTNERSHIPS & STRATEGIC ALLIANCES
COVI-PASS™ endeavors to create a sustainable and effective network of value-added Partnerships and Alliances to combat the novel Covid-19 pandemic by assisting Governments, International Corporations, Public and Private enterprises to optimise Public Health management.
When signing up with COVI-PASS™ you become an important participant in managing Public Health within your organisation, community and country.
GOVERNMENTS
COVI-PASS™ technology is certified by the United Nations and bears an European Union Commission Seal of Excellence. COVI-PASS™ is committed to support Governments, Sports Bodies and Health Services to comply with statutory regulations to improve Public Health management.
VCODE,
RELIABLEVERSATILEINNOVATIVEBE PART OF THE FUTURE
The versatile technology allows genuine users to authorise themselves and authenticate a product (such as Covid-19 Test) in real-time using a smart device or RFID reader.
INTERNATIONAL CORPORATIONS
COVI-PASS™ empowers International Corporations, Companies and Businesses to enable employees back to work.
COVI-PASS™ coordinates the combined respective efforts of Governments, International Corporations and Businesses to overcome the daily work challenges posed by the Covid-19 pandemic.
previous arrownext arrow
TAKE A DEEPER DIVE INTO EXPLORING COVI-PASS™
_________________ --
'Suppression of truth, human spirit and the holy chord of justice never works long-term. Something the suppressors never get.' David Southwell
http://aangirfan.blogspot.com http://aanirfan.blogspot.com
Martin Van Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother."
Martin Van Creveld: I'll quote Henry Kissinger: "In campaigns like this the antiterror forces lose, because they don't win, and the rebels win by not losing."
I don't like Corbett much, because I don't like his voice and also he has no idea of the spiritual picture
But he's been brilliant on exposing Bill Gates, usually amplifying or borrowing from the work of others like Truth Stream Media
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=avE-HzMWa3I _________________ --
'Suppression of truth, human spirit and the holy chord of justice never works long-term. Something the suppressors never get.' David Southwell
http://aangirfan.blogspot.com http://aanirfan.blogspot.com
Martin Van Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother."
Martin Van Creveld: I'll quote Henry Kissinger: "In campaigns like this the antiterror forces lose, because they don't win, and the rebels win by not losing."
Joined: 25 Jul 2005 Posts: 18335 Location: St. Pauls, Bristol, England
Posted: Tue Jun 23, 2020 11:37 pm Post subject: The CIA Foundations: Rockefeller, Ford, Carnegie
Le Samouraï • 1 week ago
Good Question. Or What about protesting George Soros and Open Society, with Soros being major contributor to the White Helmets, a CIA covert counterinsurgency group fronting as a paramedic force that worked alongside both AL-Nusra (Al-Quaeda in Syria) and exploited Afhgani Proxi forces the US sent to Syria. They also participated in Organ Trafficking. You'd think they'd think twice before taking money from an organization like this. Also, why in their criticisms of law inforcement have the worst problems i.e. the privatization of police, such as what has happened with the DEA, causing the massive recruitment of informants, the tearing apart of poor communities, the tying of law enforcement to organized crime, and most importantly the law enforcement - asset forfeiture industrial complex - the using of informants to sell drugs, turn the profits to law enforcement, rat out their buyers, then steal their buyers property, where the police turn the profits, which is literally where both the police and the DEA get most of their money. No talk of this whatsoever. Lastly, important that the Ford Foundation is one of the 'Big Three' mentioned in the Church hearings in the late 70s, the big three (Ford, Carnegie, Rockefeller foundations) that intelligence uses to launder money into fake social movements for regime change and counterinsurgency operations. These three organizations have been involved in so many racist operations, it is straight racist the BLM would take money from either of their primary funders. Here's a quote about them from a 1976 congressional Church Committee hearing:
"During the 1950s and 1960s, the CIA turned increasingly to covert action in the area of student and labor matters, cultural affairs, and community developments. ... The CIA subsidized, advised, and even helped develop "private" organizations that would compete with the communists around the world. ... [Many] were U.S.-based student, labor, cultural, or philanthropic organizations whose international activities the CIA subsidized. ...
"The philanthropic [CIA] fronts used prior to 1967 funded a seemingly limitless range of covert action programs affecting youth groups, labor unions, universities, publishing houses, and other private institutions in the United States and abroad. ... Support [was provided to, for instance] an international organization of veterans and an international foundation for developing countries [as well as] an organization of journalists and an international women's association. ... Agency funds were used to host foreign visitors [and] provide scholarships to an international cooperative training center at a United States university... The CIA assisted in the establishment in 1951 and the funding for over a decade of a research institute at a major American university. ...
"By 1967, when public disclosure of NSA [National Student Association]'s funding ... caused a major curtailment of these activities, interest in the major covert action efforts in these areas was already waning.
"There appear to be two reasons for this. First, there was considerable skepticism within the CIA as to the effectiveness of this approach. ... Richard Helms [explained], "The clandestine operator ... is trained to believe that you really can't count on the honesty of your agent to do exactly what you want or to report accurately unless you own him body and soul."
"Second, it became increasingly difficult to conceal the CIA funds that supported these activities as the scale of the operations grew. By fiscal year 1967, for example, over $3 million [$22.5 million in 2018] was budgeted for youth and student programs and $6 million [$45 million in 2018] for labor. Most of the funds were transmitted through legitimate or "devised" foundations -- that is, fictitious entities established by the CIA.
"The use of philanthropic organizations was a convenient way to pass funds, in that large amounts could be transferred rapidly, and in a form that need not alert unwitting officers of the recipient organizations to their source. In addition, foundation grants bestowed upon the recipient the apparent "blessing" of the foundation. The funding pattern involved a mixture of bona fide charitable foundations, devised foundations and funds, [CIA] "front men" drawn from a list of America's most prominent citizens, and lawyers representing undisclosed clients.
"The CIA's intrusion into the foundation field in the 1960s can only be described as massive. Excluding grants from the "Big Three" -- Ford, Rockefeller, and Carnegie -- of the 700 grants over $10,000 given by 164 other foundations during the period 1963-1966, at least 108 involved partial or complete CIA funding. More importantly, CIA funding was involved in nearly half the grants the non-"Big Three" foundations made during this period in the field of international activities. In the same period more than one-third of the grants awarded by non-"Big Three" in the physical, life and social sciences also involved CIA funds.
"Bona fide foundations, rather than those controlled by the CIA, were considered the best and most plausible kind of funding cover for certain kinds of operations. A 1966 CIA study explained the use of legitimate foundations was the most effective way of concealing the CIA's hand as well as reassuring members of funded organizations that the organization was in fact supported by private funds."
First here's a brief version of the post summed up quickly:-
1. Decades ago a highly credible investigator, Norman Dodd, discovered that the tax-exempt foundations e.g. Rockefeller Foundation etc, wanted to make changes to society, and their tool of choice (at that time) was war.
2. The tax-exempt foundations said they would continue to use war until they had other effective methods for making major societal changes.
3. 10 years ago, a high-level Rockefeller document described details of other methods for influencing how the world evolves, one such scenario which was suggested in the document was a pandemic.
4. What societal changes do the Rockefellers desire? A former Rockefeller family friend blew the whistle on the plans the Rockefellers had for the future. He was told they want everyone chipped for tracking and to buy/sell. If they don't like you they will turn off your chip to make it incredibly difficult for you to function in society.
Conclusion:- The Rockefellers no longer rely on war to make changes in the world, now they have other tools at their disposal, such as pandemics. Their goal is take away our freedoms, then if we want them back we'll be forced to receive vaccines to gain a digital certificate of movement which allows us to be tracked on 5G control grids. Over time it will be placed onto a chip, which will be hard to avoid. By then society will be cashless, making life without a chip a struggle, almost impossible.
Chief suspects for causing this pandemic = Rockefeller family and their many proxies.
Longer version with more detail:-
Norman Dodd - Tax exempt foundations - Manipulating politics and culture
This interview with the late Norman Dodd was already viewed as one of the most important on the Internet. If you haven't seen it before, you really must add it to your list. Dodd was the chief investigator of the Reece Committee, his job was to look into the tax-exempt founds e.g. Rockefeller Foundation, and to find out what they were actually up to. In the interview he explains that the foundations are really there to make changes in the world, and that the only way they know how to make changes is through war, so their job is really to start wars. Since war was the only effective method they knew for making major changes, they would continue to use it until they had other equivalently effective methods.
10 years ago the Rockefeller Foundation released a scenario document, Page 18, where they looked into different scenarios which could influence the way in which our world evolves, one of the scenarios analyzed was a pandemic. So what we're seeing here, is that over the decades the Rockefeller Foundation has moved on, they no longer rely on war as a tool to make changes, now they have new tools at their disposal, like pandemics, making them the chief suspects as to who has placed the world into the current pandemic scenario.
Now, you may be wondering what kinds of changes the Rockefellers want to make to society, well one of their former friends blew the whistle in a video of similar importance to the Norman Dodd interview. Aaron Russo was a filmmaker and a close friend with one of the Rockefellers. Aaron was told their secret plans for the world, which included everyone being micro-chipped in a cashless society, where one requires an implanted micro-chip for buying and selling. If TPTB didn't like what you were doing they could switch off your chip, making it almost impossible for you to function in society.
So, as Bill Gates (who is allied with the Rockefellers) recently admitted on Reddit, the plan is for people to have digital certificates of movement, Germany is calling them antibody certificates. It's very easy to see how these digital certificates of movement, initially on your smart phone, will eventually be installed on implanted micro-chips, in case you lose your phone and for your convenience, they will say. You won't be allowed in society without one, as they will claim you may spread a virus, for you to be allowed out in public they will force you to have this, which also means receiving the vaccines and whatever ingredients eugenics enthusiasts Gates and the Rockefellers decide to put in them.
Last but not least, the 5G control grid which is being rapidly rolled out is there to track your movement by connecting with the digital certificate/chip, this is why 5G is being prioritized despite there being so much public resistance and unknown health risks. While 4G was similar, it is nowhere near as fast and cannot make as many connections, with 5G they can track us in real time.
How can the Rockefellers be stopped?
The perfect thing about their plan is that they can keep on attacking us with wave after wave of pandemic until we give in. That means to stop them we need high level people in the world to get onboard, deciding enough is enough. There needs to be arrests and all their essentially terrorist operations must be shut down once and for all, the Rockefellers and Mr Gates can no longer be tolerated as being above the law.
Joined: 30 Jul 2006 Posts: 6060 Location: East London
Posted: Tue Jun 30, 2020 11:12 pm Post subject:
Hopefully the wheels are falling off Faust's (sorry, Fauci's) and Gates' wagon. Take a decko at this short video:
'IS COVID MUTATING?': https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fTDe8YsQDu8
IS COVID MUTATING? As COVID-19 cases continue to rise across the country, many worry that hospitals will be overrun with patients. However, new data suggests that COVID mortality has dropped over 90%, leaving scientists to wonder if the virus has mutated into a less virulent strain. #CovidMutating #TheGreatPanicdemic
www.youtube.com
It is extremely enlightening, and needs spreading around.
Del Bigtree has a far more likely cause for the drop, whilst acknowledging the virus may be becoming less virulent.
The high mortality rate was generated by the panic spread by the authorities and MSM, and by the actions taken to 'combat' it.
Only problem is the 'Fiends' have plenty more tricks up their sleeves where that one came from. Even with the current virus, they can devastate Africa, Latin America and parts of Asia and the Middle East, especially if they hit them with their 'vaccine'. _________________ 'And he (the devil) said to him: To thee will I give all this power, and the glory of them; for to me they are delivered, and to whom I will, I give them'. Luke IV 5-7.
Joined: 30 Jul 2006 Posts: 6060 Location: East London
Posted: Fri Jul 03, 2020 1:42 pm Post subject:
Whitehall_Bin_Men wrote:
I don't like Corbett much, because I don't like his voice and also he has no idea of the spiritual picture
But he's been brilliant on exposing Bill Gates, usually amplifying or borrowing from the work of others like Truth Stream Media
Here is the full 4-part series on Gates (including 'Bill Gates and the Population Control Grid' above):
'Who Is Bill Gates?': https://www.corbettreport.com/gates/ _________________ 'And he (the devil) said to him: To thee will I give all this power, and the glory of them; for to me they are delivered, and to whom I will, I give them'. Luke IV 5-7.
SUBSCRIBE
Premiered on 21 May 2020
In this video, I talk about how Starbucks, Beyond Meat, Impossible Foods, Microsoft, and the Gates family are all tied to an elite, shadowy consulting firm.
*These mini-documentaries are always completely sourced. Every fact or claim made is from what is considered a "reputable source", and the links are always pinned as the top comment under video
reallygraceful
https://www.youtube.com/reallygraceful _________________ --
'Suppression of truth, human spirit and the holy chord of justice never works long-term. Something the suppressors never get.' David Southwell
http://aangirfan.blogspot.com http://aanirfan.blogspot.com
Martin Van Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother."
Martin Van Creveld: I'll quote Henry Kissinger: "In campaigns like this the antiterror forces lose, because they don't win, and the rebels win by not losing."
While some Americans believed we’d never see it in our lifetime’s, 10’s of millions of Americans and hundreds of millions more across the world are already witnessing it this very moment with much of life being shuttered and shut in, businesses closed ‘en mass’ with a boatload of unemployed soon to follow.
And while this TEOTWAWKI may look much differently than many thought it would, with President Trump and the White House just unveiling their ’15 Days To Slow The Spread’ strategy outlining their recommendations to Americans on how to get this beast under control, they also warned that new guidelines may be issued in 15 days if the spread of the virus hasn’t yet been controlled and we can do a lot more than only imagine what those ‘new guidelines’ might be.
As we’ll explore in the next section of this story and the 1st video at the bottom of this story, a Rockefeller Foundation paper published back in 2010 predicted a pandemic could be used as an excuse to establish an authoritarian global government with their ‘Lock Step’ scenario unfolding nearly exactly as we’re witnessing with the coronavirus pandemic now. Predicting mass shutdowns across America and the world, that Rockefeller paper, which we’ve also embedded for you to read at the bottom of this story, also predicted a scenario eerily similar to ‘Event 201‘, the pandemic simulation staged last October by Johns Hopkins University with the World Economic Forum, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and Johnson & Johnson.
So with the spread of the number of cases of COVID-19 doubling every few days according to this story over at Forbes, undergoing exponential growth that will continue as long as long as there is at least one infected person within a population who is exposed to others, it’s easy to understand why some are now warning this crisis and the resulting ‘lockdowns’ could last for 2 years or more as reported in this new Daily Mail story. And interestingly, the ‘lockdowns’ are happening in ‘lock step’ from one nation to the next.
Yet with ‘Kid Rock’ refusing to close down his Nashville, Tennessee bar, arguing that the mandate from the Nashville mayor to close all bars and restaurants was ‘unconstitutional’, showing that not everybody will be going along with government mandates, this Sacramento Bee story saved at archive titled “Coronavirus vs Constitution: What Can Government Stop You From Doing During A Pandemic” offers us an interesting look at what will likely be unfolding all across America until this killer disease is eradicated or America transformed into a ‘medical police state’.
Public closures, a ban on gatherings, quarantine notices and orders for isolation have become increasingly common as the coronavirus continues to spread across the United States.
Officials in Washington state and San Francisco are limiting the number of people allowed to attend public gatherings. The governor of California joined them on Thursday in urging the cancellation of all events with more than 250 people in attendance. The governor of Kentucky, a Bible belt state, has asked churches and other religious institutions to temporarily cancel services.
But if it seems these actions are infringing on individual freedoms guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution, think again.
“You don’t have a right to assemble against the backdrop of known public health risk,” James G. Hodge told McClatchy News.
Officials typically have to go through legal processes to close an establishment or shut down public gatherings, Hodge said. But under a state of emergency, everything is expedited.
“It’s not that we don’t have time for First Amendment interests, it’s that we must act fast,” he said. “What was opened today can be closed tomorrow.”
Rockefeller Foundation Paper Published in 2010 Predicted How a Pandemic Can be Used as an Excuse to Establish Global Authoritarian Power
March 16, 2020 F. William Engdahl
The Rockefeller Foundation published a report in May 2010 in cooperation with the Global Business Network of futurologist Peter Schwartz. It was called Scenarios for the Future of Technology and International Development. The first scenario, titled, “Lock Step”, describes a world of total government control and authoritarian leadership. It envisions a future where a pandemic would allow national leaders to flex their authority and impose airtight rules and restrictions that would remain after the pandemic faded. The first half of this scenario already has unfolded. Will it continue as predicted? The information on Lock Step begins at about the two-thirds point of the article. The Rockefeller report in its entirety can be downloaded here. [The importance of this document cannot be overstated.] -GEG
Every day world mainstream news reports more people in more countries diagnosed “positive” for the coronavirus illness, now called COVID-19. As the reported numbers grow, so does widespread nervousness, often in the form of panic shopping for masks, disinfections, toilet paper, canned goods. We are told to accept the testing results as science-based. While it is next to impossible to get a full picture of what is taking place in China, the center of the novel virus storm, there is a process, being fed by mainstream media accounts and genuine panic in populations unclear what the real dangers are, that has alarming implications for the post-pandemic future.
During the last week of January the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) ordered an unprecedented lock down of an entire city of 11 million, Wuhan, in an attempt to contain a public health situation that had clearly gotten out of control. Never before in the history of modern public health had a government placed an entire city in quarantine by imposing a cordon sanitaire around it. That lock down was quickly extended to other China cities to the extent that, for the past weeks, a major part of the world’s second largest national economy has shut down. That in turn is impacting the global economy.
At this point, as cases and the first deaths are being reported in countries outside of China, especially in South Korea, Japan, Iran and Italy, the prime question everyone has is how dangerous this virus is. The fiasco with the US CDC, where the putative tests for the novel virus were shown defective, underscores the fact that the testing for the now-named virus, SARS-CoV-2, said to cause the disease called COVID-19, is anything but 100% reliable. Despite this, influenced by a steady stream of mainstream media images of empty shop shelves in Italy, of police cordons around Washington State nursing homes said to house several presumed Coronavirus patients, of pictures of Iranian hospitals filled with body bags, millions of citizens are understandably becoming alarmed and fearful.
What is being done in city after city and country after country is cancellation of major events where many people come together. This has included the Venice Carnival, major sports events, trade shows in Switzerland and elsewhere being canceled. Major airlines are being financially devastated as people around the world cancel holiday flights, as are cruise ship lines. China orders burning of cash notes claiming they might be contaminated. The French Louvre reopens but does not accept cash, only cards, as paper might be contaminated. WHO warns about paper money contagion risk. Countries are introducing laws such as in the UK allowing legal detention of citizens who might have a virus. Growing media promotion in the West of shop shelves bare of everyday essentials such as rice, pasta, toilet paper is feeding panic buying everywhere.
Questions on Death Rate
It is important to have a perspective on the apparent deaths provably due to COVID-19. Here facts become very imprecise.
As of March 3, 2020 according to WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom, worldwide there were a total of 90,893 cases of COVID-19, with 3,110 resulting in death. He then called this a 3.4% mortality rate, a figure highly disputed by other health experts. Tedros stated, “Globally, about 3.4% of reported COVID-19 cases have died. By comparison, seasonal flu generally kills far fewer than 1% of those infected.”
The problem is that no one can say precisely what the true death rate is. That’s because globally we have not tested all who might have mild cases of the virus and the accuracy of those tests are anything but 100% certain. But a statement about a death rate more than three times that of seasonal flu is a real panic-maker if true.
The reality is very likely a far lower true mortality according to epidemic experts. “We do not report all the cases,” says Professor John Edmunds of the Centre for the Mathematical Modelling of Infectious Diseases at the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine. “In fact, we only usually report a small proportion of them. If there are many more cases in reality, then the case fatality ratio will be lower.” Edmunds went on to say, “What you can safely say […] is that if you divide the number of reported deaths by the number of reported cases [to get the case fatality ratio], you will almost certainly get the wrong answer.” The WHO under Tedros seems to be erring on the side of spreading panic.
The WHO and the USA CDC some years ago changed the definition of deaths from seasonal flu to “deaths of flu or pneumonia.” The CDC calculates only an approximate flu death count by totaling death certificates processed that list “pneumonia or influenza” as the underlying or contributing cause of death. The CDC estimates 45 Million Flu Cases, and 61,000 what they deftly call “Flu-Associated” Deaths in 2017-2018 US Flu Season. How many were elderly with pneumonia or other lung diseases is unclear. Naturally the numbers help spread fear and sell seasonal flu vaccines whose positive effect is anything but proven. Worldwide, the CDC estimated in a study in 2017 that, “between 291,000 and 646,000 people worldwide die from seasonal influenza-related respiratory illnesses each year.”
In China alone the estimate for seasonal influenza-associated (including pneumonia) deaths was about 300,000 in 2018. Note that 3,000 corona-attributed deaths, as tragic as it is, is but 1% of the “normal” annual deaths from lung-related illnesses in China, and because of the mixed or changing China accounting, it is not clear how many of the 3,000 China deaths are even from seasonal pneumonia. But owing to dramatic videos, not verifiable, of people allegedly dropping dead on the streets in China, with no proof, or of Wuhan hospitals filled in the corridors with body bags apparently of dead from COVID-19, much of the world is understandably anxious about this strange exogenous invader.
Amid what is clearly confusion among many well-meaning health officials and likely opportunism by Western vaccine makers like GlaxoSmithKline or Gilead and others, with alarming speed our world is being transformed in ways just months ago we could not have imagined.
‘LOCK STEP’
Whatever has occurred inside China at this point it is almost impossible to say owing to conflicting reactions of the Beijing authorities and several changes in ways of counting COVID-19 cases. The question now is how the relevant authorities in the West will use this crisis. Here it is useful to go back to a highly relevant report published a decade ago by the Rockefeller Foundation, one of the world’s leading backers of eugenics, and creators of GMO among other things.
The report in question has the bland title, “Scenarios for the Future of Technology and International Development.” It was published in May 2010 in cooperation with the Global Business Network of futurologist Peter Schwartz. The report contains various futurist scenarios developed by Schwartz and company. One scenario carries the intriguing title, “LOCK STEP: A world of tighter top-down government control and more authoritarian leadership, with limited innovation and growing citizen pushback.” Here it gets interesting as in what some term predictive programming.
The Schwartz scenario states, “In 2012, the pandemic that the world had been anticipating for years finally hit. Unlike 2009’s H1N1, this new influenza strain — originating from wild geese — was extremely virulent and deadly. Even the most pandemic-prepared nations were quickly overwhelmed when the virus streaked around the world, infecting nearly 20 percent of the global population and killing 8 million in just seven months…” He continues, “The pandemic also had a deadly effect on economies: international mobility of both people and goods screeched to a halt, debilitating industries like tourism and breaking global supply chains. Even locally, normally bustling shops and office buildings sat empty for months, devoid of both employees and customers.” This sounds eerily familiar.
Then the scenario gets very interesting: “During the pandemic, national leaders around the world flexed their authority and imposed airtight rules and restrictions, from the mandatory wearing of face masks to body-temperature checks at the entries to communal spaces like train stations and supermarkets. Even after the pandemic faded, this more authoritarian control and oversight of citizens and their activities stuck and even intensified. In order to protect themselves from the spread of increasingly global problems — from pandemics and transnational terrorism to environmental crises and rising poverty — leaders around the world took a firmer grip on power.”
A relevant question is whether certain bad actors, and there are some in this world, are opportunistically using the widespread fears around the COVID-19 to advance an agenda of “lock step” top down social control, one that would include stark limits on travel, perhaps replacing of cash by “sanitary” electronic cash, mandatory vaccination even though the long term side effects are not proven safe, unlimited surveillance and the curtailing of personal freedoms such as political protests on the excuse it will allow “identification of people who refuse to be tested or vaccinated,” and countless other restrictions. Much of the Rockefeller 2010 scenario is already evident. Fear is never a good guide to sound reason.
F. William Engdahl is strategic risk consultant and lecturer, he holds a degree in politics from Princeton University and is a best-selling author on oil and geopolitics, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook.”
While some Americans believed we’d never see it in our lifetime’s, 10’s of millions of Americans and hundreds of millions more across the world are already witnessing it this very moment with much of life being shuttered and shut in, businesses closed ‘en mass’ with a boatload of unemployed soon to follow.
And while this TEOTWAWKI may look much differently than many thought it would, with President Trump and the White House just unveiling their ’15 Days To Slow The Spread’ strategy outlining their recommendations to Americans on how to get this beast under control, they also warned that new guidelines may be issued in 15 days if the spread of the virus hasn’t yet been controlled and we can do a lot more than only imagine what those ‘new guidelines’ might be.
As we’ll explore in the next section of this story and the 1st video at the bottom of this story, a Rockefeller Foundation paper published back in 2010 predicted a pandemic could be used as an excuse to establish an authoritarian global government with their ‘Lock Step’ scenario unfolding nearly exactly as we’re witnessing with the coronavirus pandemic now. Predicting mass shutdowns across America and the world, that Rockefeller paper, which we’ve also embedded for you to read at the bottom of this story, also predicted a scenario eerily similar to ‘Event 201‘, the pandemic simulation staged last October by Johns Hopkins University with the World Economic Forum, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and Johnson & Johnson.
So with the spread of the number of cases of COVID-19 doubling every few days according to this story over at Forbes, undergoing exponential growth that will continue as long as long as there is at least one infected person within a population who is exposed to others, it’s easy to understand why some are now warning this crisis and the resulting ‘lockdowns’ could last for 2 years or more as reported in this new Daily Mail story. And interestingly, the ‘lockdowns’ are happening in ‘lock step’ from one nation to the next.
Yet with ‘Kid Rock’ refusing to close down his Nashville, Tennessee bar, arguing that the mandate from the Nashville mayor to close all bars and restaurants was ‘unconstitutional’, showing that not everybody will be going along with government mandates, this Sacramento Bee story saved at archive titled “Coronavirus vs Constitution: What Can Government Stop You From Doing During A Pandemic” offers us an interesting look at what will likely be unfolding all across America until this killer disease is eradicated or America transformed into a ‘medical police state’.
Public closures, a ban on gatherings, quarantine notices and orders for isolation have become increasingly common as the coronavirus continues to spread across the United States.
Officials in Washington state and San Francisco are limiting the number of people allowed to attend public gatherings. The governor of California joined them on Thursday in urging the cancellation of all events with more than 250 people in attendance. The governor of Kentucky, a Bible belt state, has asked churches and other religious institutions to temporarily cancel services.
But if it seems these actions are infringing on individual freedoms guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution, think again.
“You don’t have a right to assemble against the backdrop of known public health risk,” James G. Hodge told McClatchy News.
Officials typically have to go through legal processes to close an establishment or shut down public gatherings, Hodge said. But under a state of emergency, everything is expedited.
“It’s not that we don’t have time for First Amendment interests, it’s that we must act fast,” he said. “What was opened today can be closed tomorrow.”
That doesn’t mean communities in the U.S. will see the kind of large-scale lock-downs happening in Italy and China, Hodge added. But there are circumstances under which a voluntary recommendation can become involuntary.
Self-guided tabletop training experience challenges public health communicators and risk communication researchers to consider the complex messaging dilemmas of a future outbreak that requires development of a new vaccine
By Nick Alexopulos | Oct. 23, 2017
SPARS pandemic scenario book
SPARS Pandemic scenario book (PDF)
The Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security has released a self-guided exercise scenario for public health communicators and risk communication researchers eager to deepen their understanding of the communication dilemmas that could arise when medical countermeasures are developed and distributed during a pandemic.
The SPARS Scenario features an outbreak of the novel SPARS coronavirus first identified in a major US city in 2025. Over a 3-year period, the virus spreads to every US state and more than 40 countries, where case fatality rates vary depending on the capabilities of local health systems. In the United States, an existing drug is repurposed to treat SPARS symptoms while federal regulators work with a pharmaceutical company to fast-track the production of a SPARS vaccine. The response differs in other nations. What follows is a nationwide vaccination effort and lingering strains on the US healthcare sector from a steady stream of patients seeking treatment for serious post-SPARS complications.
Scenario participants are challenged with a raft of communication dilemmas that stem from this storyline. Action items cover risk communications, rumor control, interagency message coordination and consistency, issue management, proactive and reactive media relations, cultural competency, and ethical concerns.
“This rigorous, simulated health emergency affords practitioners and scholars the opportunity to mentally rehearse responses while also weighing the implications of their actions,” said Monica Schoch-Spana, PhD, senior associate at the Center and SPARS project lead. “At the same time, readers have a chance to discern what potential measures implemented in today’s environment might avert comparable communication dilemmas or classes of dilemmas in the future.”
Schoch-Spana’s team included scenario lead authors Matthew Shearer, MPH, senior analyst at the Center, and Emily Brunson, PhD, associate professor of anthropology at Texas State University, along with contributing Center authors Sanjana Ravi, MPH, senior analyst; senior associates Tara Kirk Sell, PhD, MA, and Gigi Kwik Gronvall, PhD; and Hannah Chandler, research assistant.
To ensure that the scenario accounts for rapid technological innovation and exceeds the expectations of participants, the Center’s project team gleaned information from subject matter experts, historical accounts of past medical countermeasure crises, contemporary media reports, and scholarly literature in sociology, emergency preparedness, health education, and risk and crisis communication.
“We are thrilled to make this valuable tool available to anyone committed to strengthening crisis and risk communications strategies in the public health field,” said Schoch-Spana.
The scenario concludes with a brief section on the communication dilemmas likely to emerge during incident recovery.
About the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security:
The Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security works to protect people from epidemics and disasters and build resilient communities through innovative scholarship, engagement, and research that strengthens the organizations, systems, policies, and programs essential to preventing and responding to public health crises. The Center is part of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health and is located in Baltimore, MD.
twitter
YouTube
JOHNS HOPKINS
CENTER FOR HEALTH SECURITY
621 E. Pratt Street
Suite 210
Baltimore, MD 21202
centerhealthsecurity@jhu.edu _________________ --
'Suppression of truth, human spirit and the holy chord of justice never works long-term. Something the suppressors never get.' David Southwell
http://aangirfan.blogspot.com http://aanirfan.blogspot.com
Martin Van Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: "Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother."
Martin Van Creveld: I'll quote Henry Kissinger: "In campaigns like this the antiterror forces lose, because they don't win, and the rebels win by not losing."
Is this THE final goal of this crisis, to impose a compulsory vaccination on everyone, with a biometric health passport and without it, the impossibility to move, to buy, to eat?
The near future will tell.
With time, the accumulation of side effects, the testimonies of more and more doctors, vaccination has become a subject of controversy, often passionate, sometimes violent.
This is not just a question of being for or against vaccination in general.
It is about being vigilant in the face of enormous pressure from companies and governments to inject billions of healthy people with a hastily manufactured product, using immature technologies such as DNA manipulation, with as yet unknown side effects.
The cure should not be worse than the disease.
Given the fear, the terror in people’s minds, given the enthusiasm of certain leaders and given the power of the vaccine companies and manufacturers, will we, as ordinary citizens, be able to resist, keep our cool and prevent these people from playing with our health?
Do you know what the marketing of vaccines brings to the pharmaceutical companies?
References on the Statista website, figures for the year 2019 [1] :
GSK (GlaxoSmithKline): more than 8 billion euros.
Merck: €7.3 billion
Pfizer: €5.9 billion
Sanofi: €5.8 billion
Billions, in a single year!
Do you think that the conservation of such gains would not motivate the transgression of limits by sweeping away everything in its path, all scientific ethics, all moral values?
As Emma Kahn [2] stated to the AIMSIB (International Association for Scientific, Independent and Benevolent Medicine) website, May 3, 2020:
“Strangely enough, the three vaccines in clinical trials in the West (excluding China) against COVID-19 are being developed by start-ups and not by Big Pharma (the nickname of the pharmaceutical industry). Why haven’t the big companies (Merck, GSK, Sanofi, Pfizer) launched any clinical studies? A first reason is worrying: … industry experts already know that coronavirus vaccines are too risky, they induce facilitation and immunopathological phenomena. The phenomenon of facilitation of infection by antibodies” is crucial to understand.
Vaccines too risky!
Facilitation and immunopathological phenomena!
This is not conspiracy, nor the elucubrations of a quidam [dictionary]. It is published data, well known to scientists, virologists and published in many journals.
These facts are particularly relevant to the coronavirus family and SARS [3].
With vaccines,
“the biggest problem is the fear of an ADE (antibody dependant enhancement, facilitation of infection by the vaccine, mediated by antibodies induced by vaccination): facilitation of the penetration of the virus into cells by the receptor for the Fc fragment of immunoglobulins” [4].
On March 5, 2020, Peter Hotez [5] (vaccine expert) warned the U.S. Congress about the facilitation of antibody infection and its relationship to vaccination [6] :
“We must be very careful and go slowly with clinical trials, animal trials have shown facilitation”!
So Big Pharma is cautious. This confirms the credibility of this information.
Not only will this vaccine not protect you at all or not enough, but it can make things worse by facilitating your infection with COVID-19!
The phenomenon of facilitating viral infection by antibodies (ADE or antibody dependent enhancement) has been known for a long time and exists for many viruses.
Antibodies of this type have been demonstrated in vitro in the case of SARS-CoV-2 and candidate vaccines would only aggravate this immunopathological effect!
This is even more likely if we skip the steps.
Journalist Céline Deluzarche, in an article on Futura Sciences (Futura Santé) of March 19, 2020 reviewed on June 15, said :
“Coronavirus: the dangers of a hastily developed vaccine.
Faced with the urgency, scientists call for speeding up testing procedures and dispensing with the usual animal tests. A laudable strategy, but one that could prove to be at best counterproductive and at worst cause deaths” [7].
“Normally, it takes between 15 and 20 years to obtain an effective, non-toxic and usable vaccine. The first step is to develop a formulation with the chemical and pharmaceutical prerequisites, conduct immunogenicity studies [8] in animals, evaluate the toxicity of the vaccine [9] in animals, then in humans, and finally test its effectiveness on a large scale.”
Yet some people are putting pressure on, invoking urgency.
Why do they do that?
They exploit fear to get reach their goal. It’s never good to decide anything out of fear.
What dangerous game are these people playing?
The Europe Union (EU) in particular, and its new president, Ursula von der Leyen, after organising a world telethon to fund research for a vaccine [10], is trying to impose the idea that only a vaccine can save us.
“… in the face of urgency and pressure from governments and health authorities, some are calling for the procedures to be speeded up. The president of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen said Tuesday that she hoped for a vaccine against the new coronavirus before the autumn.” [7].
One has the feeling that all this was planned in advance, when one knows that Brussels, today, has been working for a long time on a “vaccine” passport in order to put the population under total surveillance and control [11].
Is COVID-19 just a pretext for imposing totalitarian measures which would otherwise have been impossible to accept?
I ask the question.
We find Peter Hotez [5], who advises us to be very careful:
“A vaccine is not insignificant: it is most often a deactivated or weakened virus, and in some cases it can aggravate the disease it is supposed to prevent. Peter Hotez, dean of the National School of Tropical Medicine at Baylor College of Medicine, who worked on the SARS outbreak in 2003, found that some vaccinated animals developed even more severe symptoms when exposed to the virus because of a weakened immune system. This is called “antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE)” [7].
The work and research on vaccines against CVDO 19 in Cambridge, Oxford, sponsored by the NIH (National Institute of Health in the United States, Anthony Fauci, Donald Trump’s anti-COVID czar) does not reassure me at all, and should not reassure you either [12]!
These same people are behind one of the worst vaccine and medical scandals of the last ten years by wanting already, in 2009-2010, to vaccinate the entire population for a fake pandemic (H1N1) [13-14-15].
A survey in France reports that nearly a quarter (25%) of the French population do not intend to accept the vaccine against COVID-19 [16].
I understand them and even find it surprising that this figure is not higher.
These vaccines are a race for profits [17], huge amounts of money!
Even independently of plausible and frightening ideas such as the association of the vaccine with GMOs [18], with a puçage and tracing of the population [19], the inherent danger of any vaccine and the specific danger of an anti-coronavirus vaccine (facilitation of viral infection by antibodies – ADE or antibody dependent enhancement) should make all citizens think about accepting such a measure without flinching!
Through the fear instilled by our mainstream media, fear maintained by the experts of our own governments, people would be ready to accept remedies as dangerous as they are ineffective.
Like Tony Carlucci says:
“While Covid-19 may be a true pathogen, evidence suggests it does not justify the overreactions we’ve seen around the world. Covid-19 hysteria has – by far – a far more devastating impact on humanity than the virus itself. In the midst of this hysteria, the greatest real threat to human health – a corrupt pharmaceutical industry and its partners in government – are on the verge of increasing both their profits at the expense of the public and their power over the public.” [20]
Citizens should no longer take everything they are told at face value, even, or even more so, if it comes from the official media or governments [21].
Their health, mental and physical, is at stake.
As for the vaccine, the mere fact that it can itself facilitate coronavirus infection and aggravate symptoms should put a stop to any craze for it.
The loss of time and money in the search for this vaccine prevents the population from turning to other, healthier and more realistic solutions:
Return to a healthy social lifestyle with an acceptable compromise between imposing targeted and limited quarantines (for really sick people and not just RT-PCR positive), and allowing the virus to circulate among those least at risk (healthy youth and adults) protected by their healthy immunity.
Give greater preference to effective NPIs (non-pharmaceutical measures) such as hand washing, physical distance and ventilation of confined spaces, rather than continuous mask wearing, which is more harmful than beneficial.
Allow front-line physicians to freely prescribe hydroxychloroquine and zinc early enough at the onset of symptoms of COVID-19 under medical supervision to minimize the well-known cardiac risks of HCQ.
Give priority again to the recovery of the economy, of social activity, because today, the solution against the problem of COVID is worse than the problem itself (by far).
Remember that we have immunity! Innate and cell specific immunity, not just antibody-mediated immunity! That the best allies of these immunities are our lifestyles (diet, physical activity, stress management, mental management). Everything should be done, today more than ever, to improve this.
To deal with the immense fear and post-traumatic stress that have been generated in recent months by the media and by our governments.
This fear alone makes us more vulnerable both to illness and to totalitarian abuses.
Provided that we wean ourselves from fear, lies and illusions, everyone can regain power over their health, their society and their lives.
Dr Pascal Sacré
Original articles in French
Part one:
COVID-19: au plus près de la vérité. Confinement
Part two:
COVID-19: au plus près de la vérité. Masques
Part three:
COVID-19: au plus près de la vérité – Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ)
Part four:
COVID-19: au plus près de la vérité – Tests et Immunité
Note to readers: please click on the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your mailing lists. Publish this article on your blog site, web forums, etc.
Notes :
[1] Les géants de l’industrie des vaccins, 14 mai 2020, Statista.fr
[2] Vaccin anti-Covid-19 et immunité de groupe, c’est non… et encore non, Emma Kahn, AIMSIB, 3 mai 2020
[3] Molecular Mechanism for Antibody-Dependent Enhancement of Coronavirus Entry, Journal of Virology,
[4] SARS vaccines : where are we ?, Expert Rev Vaccines 2009 Jul ; 8(7) :887-98. doi : 10.1586/erv.09.43.
[5] Peter Hotez, Wikipédia
[6] CORONAVIRUSES: UNDERSTANDING THE SPREAD OF INFECTIOUS DISEASES AND MOBILIZING INNOVATIVE SOLUTIONS, 5 mars 2020
[7] Coronavirus : les dangers d’un vaccin élaboré à la hâte, Céline Deluzarche, Futura Sciences (Futura Santé), 19 mars 2020, revu le 15 juin 2020. Quand le vaccin facilite l’infection virale…
[8] Immunogénicité
[9] Vaccin : être trop vacciné est-il dangereux ?
[10] Coronavirus: la Commission européenne organise un téléthon mondial pour financer la recherche d’un vaccin, 4 mai 2020
[11] Bruxelles travaille sur un passeport « Vaccins » afin de mettre la population sous surveillance totale
[12] Coronavirus : court-circuiter les étapes vers un vaccin?, 16 mars 2020, Agence Science-Presse, média indépendant basé à Montréal. En temps normal, le développement d’un vaccin peut prendre 15 à 20 ans
[13] Politique et corruption à l’OMS, Dr Pascal Sacré, mondialisation.ca, 12 janvier 2010, réédité 14 avril 2020.
[14] Le point sur la gestion européenne de la pandémie de grippe A H1N1, Dr Pascal Sacré, mondialisation.ca, 22 octobre 2010
[15] Pandémie de grippe H1N1, cru 2009 : quoi de neuf, docteur ?, Dr Pascal Sacré, mondialisation.ca, 20 avril 2010
[16] Près d’un quart des Français ne comptent pas se faire vacciner contre le Covid-19, 22 mai 2020.
[17] Covid-19 — Le fer de lance pour la mise en place d’une « nouvelle ère » de VACCINS à haut risque, génétiquement MODIFIÉS, Children’s Health defense, 10 mai 2020
[18] « Vaccins contre la COVID » et « Humains génétiquement modifiés », mondialisation.ca, Carrie Madej et Mark Taliano, 23 juillet 2020
[19] Coronavirus, vaccin, implant et traçabilité, Medias-Presse.info, 18 April 2020. Bill Gates, through his Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the ID2020 project that he finances and the pharmaceutical industries in which he holds important shares, intends to take advantage of the coronavirus to impose an almost global vaccination and include an identification and traceability implant.
[20] Covid-19, pots-de-vin et corruption — Le cartel criminel Big Pharma supervise le nouveau vaccin, Tony Carlucci, New Eastern Outlook, 6 mai 2020
“The further a society drifts from the truth, the more it will hate those who speak it.” George Orwell
Can we agree that there are two types of Covid-19?
The first type, is Covid-19 ,”The Virus”, which is a fairly mild infection that most people don’t even realize they’ve contracted. They remain either asymptomatic or have slight flu-like symptoms that go away after a week or so. A tiny sliver of the population– that are mainly-older, vulnerable people with underlying health conditions– can develop complications, become seriously ill and die. But, according to most analysis, the chances of dying from Covid are roughly between 1 in every 200 to 1 in every 1,000 people. (CDC-IFR- 0.26%) In other words, Covid is not the Spanish Flu, not the Black Plague and the Genocidal Planetary Killer Virus it was cracked up to be. It kills more people than the annual influenza, but not significantly more.
The second type of Covid-19, is Covid “The Political Contrivance” or, rather, CODENAME: Operation Virus Identification 20 19. This iteration of the Covid phenom relates to the manner in which a modestly-lethal respiratory pathogen has been inflated into a perennial public health crisis in order to implement economic and societal changes that would otherwise be impossible. This is the political side of Covid, which is much more difficult to define since it relates to the ambiguous agenda of powerful elites who are using the infection to conceal their real intentions. Many critics believe that Covid is a vehicle the Davos Crowd is using to launch their authoritarian New World Order. Others think it has more to do with Climate Change, that is, rather than build consensus among the world leaders for mandatory carbon reductions, global mandarins have simply imposed lockdowns that sharply reduce economic activity across-the-board. This, in fact, has lowered emissions significantly, but at great cost to most of humanity. Covid restrictions have triggered a sharp uptick in suicides, clinical depression, child abuse, domestic violence, alcoholism and drug abuse. The list goes on and on. Also, it has left economies everywhere in a shambles, increasing unemployment and homelessness exponentially, while setting the stage for massive famines in undeveloped countries around the world. Even so, key players in the Covid crisis– like mastermind Bill Gates– continue to marvel at impact these onerous restrictions have had on emissions. Take a look at this excerpt from a recent post at the Microsoft founder’s blog:
“You may have seen projections that, because economic activity has slowed down so much, the world will emit fewer greenhouse gases this year than last year. Although these projections are certainly true, their importance for the fight against climate change has been overstated.
Analysts disagree about how much emissions will go down this year, but the International Energy Agency puts the reduction around 8 percent. In real terms, that means we will release the equivalent of around 47 billion tons of carbon, instead of 51 billion.
That’s a meaningful reduction, and we would be in great shape if we could continue that rate of decrease every year. Unfortunately, we can’t.
Consider what it’s taking to achieve this 8 percent reduction. More than 600,000 people have died, and tens of millions are out of work. This April, car traffic was half what it was in April 2019. For months, air traffic virtually came to a halt.
To put it mildly, this is not a situation that anyone would want to continue. And yet we are still on track to emit 92 percent as much carbon as we did last year. What’s remarkable is not how much emissions will go down because of the pandemic, but how little.
In addition, these reductions are being achieved at, literally, the greatest possible cost.
To see why, let’s look at what it costs to avert a single ton of greenhouse gases. This figure—the cost per ton of carbon averted—is a tool that economists use to compare the expense of different carbon-reduction strategies. For example, if you have a technology that costs $1 million, and using it lets you avert the release of 10,000 tons of gas, you’re paying $100 per ton of carbon averted. In reality, $100 per ton would still be pretty expensive. But many economists think this price reflects the true cost of greenhouse gases to society, and it also happens to be a memorable round number that makes a good benchmark for discussions.
Now let’s treat the shutdown caused by COVID-19 as if it were a carbon-reduction strategy. Has closing off major parts of the economy avoided emissions at anything close to $100 per ton?
No. In the United States, according to data from the Rhodium Group, it comes to between $3,200 and $5,400 per ton. In the European Union, it’s roughly the same amount. In other words, the shutdown is reducing emissions at a cost between 32 and 54 times the $100 per ton that economists consider a reasonable price.
If you want to understand the kind of damage that climate change will inflict, look at COVID-19 and spread the pain out over a much longer period of time. The loss of life and economic misery caused by this pandemic are on par with what will happen regularly if we do not eliminate the world’s carbon emissions.” (“COVID-19 is awful. Climate change could be worse“, Gates Notes)
Isn’t it curious that Gates has spent so much time calculating the impact lockdowns have had on carbon emissions? And look at how precise his calculations are. These are not “back of the envelop” type computations, but a serious bit of number-crunching. He even takes the number of people who have died of Covid worldwide (600,000) and painstakingly compares it to the projected “global mortality rates” (“on an annualized basis”) of people who will die from “increases in global temperatures”.
Does it seem to you that Gates might have more than a passing interest in these estimations?? Does it look like he might be more than just a neutral observer impartially perusing the data?
Let me pose a theory here: In my opinion, Gates’ interest in these matters is not merely speculative curiosity. He and his fellow elites are conducting an elaborate science experiment in which we– mere mortals– are the lab rats. They are deliberately using the Covid-scare to conceal their real objective which is to prove beyond a doubt that curtailing emissions by shutting down vast swathes of the global economy will NOT stave off catastrophic climate change.
So, let’s just assume for the sake of argument that I’m right. Let’s assume that other elites read Gates report and agree with its conclusions. Then what?
This is where it gets interesting, because Gates doesn’t really answer that question, but his silence gives him away.
Let me explain: Gates says, “The relatively small decline in emissions this year makes one thing clear: We cannot get to zero emissions simply—or even mostly—by flying and driving less.”
Okay, so we cannot stop climate change by doing what we are doing now.
Then Gates says: “Let science and innovation lead the way….Any comprehensive response to climate change will have to tap into many different disciplines…. we’ll need biology, chemistry, physics, political science, economics, engineering, and other sciences.”
Right again, we’ll follow the science.
Gates then says: “It will take decades to develop and deploy all the clean-energy inventions we need.”
Okay, so we have to move fast to avoid tragedy.
Finally, Gates says: “Health advocates said for years that a pandemic was virtually inevitable. The world did not do enough to prepare, and now we are trying to make up for lost time. This is a cautionary tale for climate change, and it points us toward a better approach.”
Got that? So, on the one hand, Gates is saying ‘We must act fast and follow the science’, and on the other he is saying, ‘Shutting down the economy alone isn’t going to work.’
WTF? If it’s not going to work, then why bother? Why is Gates sending a mixed message?
Ahh, but there’s the rub. It’s not a mixed message and it is not a contradiction. What Gates is doing is leading the reader to draw the same conclusion that he has, (wink, wink) that is, if reducing economic activity isn’t going to work, then we have to find an entirely different solution, like reducing the size of the population. Isn’t that the only logical conclusion?
Yes, it is. So, the Great Lab Experiment of 2020 (Covid) has alot to do with population control; thinning the herd so our exalted Davos Overlords can ensure their blue-blooded offspring will have mild temps when they winter-over on their private islands in the Caribbean. But population control is just a small part of a much more ambitious plan to restructure the global economy, vaccinate everyone on the planet and dispose of those niggling civil liberties to which Americans have become so attached.
The elitist strategy has been dubbed the “Great Reset” which refers to the World Economic Forum’s Covid Action Platform, a program that aims at restructuring “economic and social foundations” in a way that best suits the interests of “stakeholder” capitalists. Here’s a clip from their press release:
“COVID-19 lockdowns may be gradually easing, but anxiety about the world’s social and economic prospects is only intensifying. There is good reason to worry: a sharp economic downturn has already begun, and we could be facing the worst depression since the 1930s. But, while this outcome is likely, it is not unavoidable.
To achieve a better outcome, the world must act jointly and swiftly to revamp all aspects of our societies and economies, from education to social contracts and working conditions. Every country, from the United States to China, must participate, and every industry, from oil and gas to tech, must be transformed. In short, we need a “Great Reset” of capitalism…
The level of cooperation and ambition this implies is unprecedented. But it is not some impossible dream. In fact, one silver lining of the pandemic is that it has shown how quickly we can make radical changes to our lifestyles. Almost instantly, the crisis forced businesses and individuals to abandon practices long claimed to be essential, from frequent air travel to working in an office….
Clearly, the will to build a better society does exist. We must use it to secure the Great Reset that we so badly need. That will require stronger and more effective governments, though this does not imply an ideological push for bigger ones. And it will demand private-sector engagement every step of the way.” (“The World Economic Forum’s Covid Action Platform“, WEF)
If it sounds like our illustrious leaders want to remake society from the ground-up, it’s because that’s exactly what they have in mind. And they’re not even trying to hide their real intentions. They say quite bluntly: “the world must act jointly and swiftly to revamp all aspects of our societies and economies, from education to social contracts and working conditions.”
That sounds alot like marching orders to me and, indeed, that’s exactly what they are; orders.
But how do they intend to affect these dramatic and revolutionary changes?
Why Covid, of course. They’re going to use Covid to make fundamental changes to the existing system, including accelerating privatization (“stakeholder capitalism”), merging governments into a unified global regime, intensifying the elements of social control (via mass electronic surveillance, intrusive contact tracing, security checkpoints, lockdowns, internal passports, biometric IDs etc) and taking whatever steps are required to introduce a tyrannical Brave New World.
It’s all there in black and white, they’re not even trying to hide it. In their own words, the “Great Reset” depends on the Covid Action Platform, right? In order to “build a better society” we need to “make radical changes to our lifestyles” including reductions in “frequent air travel to working in an office”. So just forget that trip to Italy next year Mr. and Mrs. WorkerBee. Ain’t gonna happen. Bill Gates says, “No.” And get used to working from home, too, because we don’t want your dog-eared Capri spewing carbon into our pristine-blue skies.
The statement also makes clear that the obliteration of millions of jobs and small businesses was not an accidental casualty of the Covid lockdowns, but the planned demolition of business and workers these Mucky-mucks consider ‘non-essential’.
And as far as who will participate in this new blueprint for Capitalist Valhalla? Well, everyone of course. According to the authors: “Every country, from the United States to China, must participate, and every industry, from oil and gas to tech, must be transformed.”
There it is from the horse’s mouth: The glorious Biosecurity Slave State is emerging right before our very eyes and we just thought we were in another Great Depression rounded off with a pandemic.
So, when we talk about Covid the “Political Contrivance”, we’re actually referring to the vehicle that elites have settled on to transition the country from its present condition to a full-blown “lock-down” police state. Covid is the smokescreen that’s being used to conceal the maneuverings of filthy-rich powerbrokers who want to implement their Grand Plan for humanity. So, if everything feels chaotic and upside-down at the present time, don’t be alarmed; it’s all by design. The more muddled and turbulent the world becomes, the easier it is to get people to submit to moronic activities like wearing a diaper on your mouth every time you leave the house or standing 6 feet apart at the grocery store so invisible pathogens don’t climb up your pant-leg and bite you. Psychologists know that –in a topsy-turvy world where uncertainty prevails — people are more apt to follow the directives of affable blockheads, like Tony Fauci, even though they may be abandoning their last-claim to personal freedom in the process.
Looking back to April of 2020, we probably should have anticipated where all this was headed, after all, Mr. NWO himself, Henry Kissinger, announced what to expect in an op-ed he posted in the Wall Street Journal. Here’s what he said:
“The reality is the world will never be the same after the coronavirus. To argue now about the past only makes it harder to do what has to be done…”(NOTE– Is Kissinger clairvoyant? How did he know the “world would never be the same again”?)
“Enlightenment thinkers (argued) that the purpose of the legitimate state is to provide for the fundamental needs of the people… Individuals cannot secure these things on their own. The pandemic has prompted an anachronism, a revival of the walled city in an age when prosperity depends on global trade and movement of people.” (NOTE– In other words: Globalism is good, Nationalism is bad. The same refrain we’ve heard for the last 30 years.)
While the assault on human health (from Covid) will—hopefully—be temporary, the political and economic upheaval it has unleashed could last for generations. (NOTE–Another peek into Henry’s crystal ball, eh?) No country, not even the U.S., can in a purely national effort overcome the virus. Addressing the necessities of the moment must ultimately be coupled with a global collaborative vision and program.” (“The Coronavirus Pandemic Will Forever Alter the World Order”, Wall Street Journal)
As Kissinger clearly states, globalization is still alive and well among the Davos heavyweights who now see a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to put their plan into action. Parts of Australia and New Zealand are already under de-facto martial law while PM Boris Johnson is adding another 2,000 cops in London to enforce his goofy Covid mandates. Everywhere in the western world, freedom is collapsing faster than a corrugated lean-to in a Kansas tornado. Meanwhile in panic-stricken America, fainthearted proles continue to hide behind their sofas waiting for the faux-plague to pass. Do they even see the train-wreck just ahead? Author Gary D. Barnett summed it up like this:
“At this moment in time we are standing on a precipice with the state attempting to push us over the edge. Once over that edge, there will be no coming back. This is why if the people fight back in mass, and withhold all support from the governing demons, we can awaken from this nightmare, and regain normalcy.” (“The State’s Covid Response Is a Cancer for the Freedom of Humanity”, Gary D. Barnett, Lew Rockwell)
DANIEL KENNEDY
One of Britain’s most influential lobbyists secretly served as an adviser to a health minister for six months — before (or while) sending sensitive information on lockdown policy to paying clients.
George Pascoe-Watson is chairman of Portland Communications, a lobbying firm that represents pharmaceutical companies, weapons manufacturers and banks.
The Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) appointed Pascoe-Watson, 55, a former journalist, as an adviser during the pandemic’s first wave on April 9 without announcing the move.
He participated in daily strategic discussions chaired by Lord Bethell, a hereditary peer and former lobbyist who serves as test and trace minister, for six months. Bethell, 53, was a surprise appointment in March having chaired Matt Hancock’s leadership campaign in 2019 and giving a £5,000 donation. Hancock, the
BUSINESS
CORONAVIRUS
PPE
Saturday 19 December 2020, 8:29am
Joel Hills Business and Economics Editor
The logistics company Uniserve is not a household name but it has received the highest total value of Covid contracts from the the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) without a tender.
Earlier this year, the government suspended "normal procurement and sourcing practice" in the the rush to supply the NHS with the personal protective and medical equipment (PPE) it needed.
To date, over 8,600 contacts have been awarded worth £18 billion.
The government awarded £777 million of contracts to Uniserve, a transport company based in Essex, without offering other companies the chance to bid for them.
On March 30, the DHSC awarded Uniserve a 12 month contract worth £473 million to "provide freight services for the supply of PPE and medical equipment".
The contract was prestigious - Uniserve, in effect, became DHSC’s global logistics partner - and huge. The Uniserve group recorded sales of £243 million for the whole of 2019.
Within weeks, Uniserve was not only delivering PPE for the government it was buying it and selling to government too, despite having no previous experience.
It’s easy forget that, back in March, global demand for PPE far outstripped supply.
The world descended on a few factories in China bidding for orders.
The government needed to buy quickly to support the NHS and "normal procurement" rules were abandoned.
But the scale of the contracts awarded to Uniserve without a competitive tender has raised questions about whether the DHSC achieved the best value for the taxpayer.
The government and ministers have a responsibility to deliver value for money for taxpayers, says shadow Cabinet Office Minister Rachel Reeves
"It was obviously the case you couldn't go through the normal procurement process, it would take too long but that doesn’t mean there should be a free for all and that the government should give contracts to who they want at whatever price they want," Rachel Reeves MP, the shadow Cabinet Office Minister told ITV News.
"The government and ministers have a responsibility to deliver value for money for taxpayers but also to ensure the companies that are best able to deliver get those contracts."
A Guardian and ITV News analysis of notices published via Tenders Electronic Daily (TED) − the European public procurement journal – identified Uniserve as the company that has received the highest total value of Covid contracts from DHSC without a tender.
Liz David-Barrett, professor of governance and integrity at the University of Sussex, said: "The purpose of a competitive process is to secure the best service at the best price and for the public, and other suppliers, to have confidence in it.
"Even in emergency conditions the government could run a streamlined competitive process, and an emergency should be for a short period.
"To let a really long contract under emergency provisions seems an abuse of the procedure, and puts public confidence at risk."
A government spokesman said the use of a single provider to ship PPE to the UK "presented significant operational synergies in the management of the complex and evolving logistical arrangements."
Iain Liddell, managing director of Uniserve, added: "The DHSC came to the right people as there are very few if any other companies that could have reacted so quickly… with the only intention of getting urgently required PPE to the frontline."
Internal NHS price bench-marking data suggests that some of the PPE sourced by Uniserve for the NHS was expensive.
On April 14, DHSC ordered 80 million 'Type IIR' face masks for £69.6 million from Uniserve – implying a price of 87p a mask.
According to market research commissioned by the DHSC, on April 14 the rolling 14-day weighted average price for Type IIR masks was 51p.
The DHSC ordered 80 million 'Type IIR' face masks for £69.6 million from Uniserve.
Mark Roscrow works for NHS Wales and, until last year, was the organisation’s Director of Procurement.
In his view, it appears that the government paid over the odds for the face masks Uniserve supplied.
“[87 pence] does look a little bit North of what we would expecting to pay even with the circumstances that were prevailing at the time,” he said.
When asked about the prices paid to Uniserve for PPE, a DHSC spokesman said: "Our priority has been to protect frontline health and care workers.
"These masks were delivered on time, in full and met the required standards."
Iain Liddell (right) is the CEO of Uniserve.
Uniserve boss Liddell, who said margins on his government contracts ranged between 5% and 20%, added: "Uniserve was driven by the national interest in getting PPE to the UK as quickly as possible.
"The Chinese PPE market was brutal with Europe, USA and China buying most of the PPE and gazumping most other nations.
"We did well under these extreme circumstances to secure production and deliver urgent PPE… All costs went through the DHSC process for approval."
By late summer, the volume of PPE that Uniserve was importing started to cause problems.
Warehouses were full and shipping containers stacked up at Felixstowe, blocking our largest port.
James Kemball, a logistics company owned by Uniserve, got the job of relocating the PPE. 15,000 shipping containers were moved.
The government is now paying from them to be stored on at least two plots, covering 10 acres, at Port of Ipswich.
Thousands of containers are also sitting at Port of Tilbury, a field in Mendlesham and on a strip of rented land opposite Melton railway station.
Uniserve told us that it had organised the storage in such a way that it has saved the government money and that the cost "has now been reduced by up to 90%" compared to Felixstowe.
Uniserve insists it has no connections with government but the company’s headquarters, at Upminster Court, are also home to the constituency office of Julia Lopez MP, a cabinet office minister.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You cannot download files in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Chat
Usergroups
Calendar
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
.
