by Iain Davis
Shortly before being ousted from power, then UK Prime Minister Theresa May used the last few weeks of her premiership to lobby other world leaders [33] to commit more tax payer’s resources to the BMGF cause. In doing so, she continued the unwavering policy commitment of previous UK governments. No matter who formed the UK government, their partnership with the BMGF [34] was unshakeable.
It is no surprise therefore that UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson, just like his predecessors, has been wedded to the BMGF since his election victory in July 2019, especially during the pseudopandemic. In May 2020 he met with Bill and Melinda and when the public submitted a freedom of information request [35] to find out what they had discussed the Prime Minister's Office refused to respond.
They met again in November [36], this time in the company of the pharmaceutical corporations to discuss the vaccine roll out. No minutes were offered.
However in his testimony to the Commons Hearing on Covid 19 in May 2021, former chief advisor to the Prime Minister, Dominic Cummins, confirmed what many suspected. He said:
"In March I started getting calls from various people saying these new mRNA vaccines could well smash the conventional wisdom.. People like Bill Gates and that kind of network were saying.. Essentially what happened is.. there is a network of people, Bill Gates type people, who were saying completely rethink the paradigm of how you do this.. What Bill Gates and people like that were saying to me and others in number 10 was you need to think of this much more like the classic programs of the past.. the Manhattan Project in WWII, the Apollo program.. But what Bill Gates and people were saying.. was, the actual expected return on this is so high that even if does turn out to be all wasted billions it's still a good gamble.. and that is what we did."
It seems secret discussions, which make a material difference to our lives, are the norm in the new normal representative democracies. What is not in doubt is that the UK's long standing commitment to a COVID 19 vaccine was the crux of the pseudopandemic campaign from the start. Bill Gates' instructions were clear. Vaccines were important to the BMGF and so they were equally important to the UK government.
With its COVAX project, funded by the tax payer, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations [37] (CEPI) launched its call for research into a COVID 19 vaccine on February 3rd 2020. CEPI was founded as a partnership [38] between the World Economic Forum (WEF), The Norwegian and Indian governments, the BMGF and GlaxoSmithKline’s foundation the Wellcome Trust [39]. CEPI’s partners include the European Commission and numerous pharmaceutical corporations.
As the world learned of the rapid spread of COVID 19, on the 3rd March 2020, the UK Government released [40] its Action Plan. It was abundantly clear from that document that the only medical treatment strategy the UK government were willing to consider was a vaccine or pharmaceutical corporations patented anti-virals. No other treatment options [41] were advocated or even considered.
Given that they had already invested a lot of tax revenue in vaccine development, through CEPI and GAVI for example, this was perhaps expected. In partnership with the BMGF and the World Economic Forum the UK government stated:
"The UK government has already pledged £20 million to the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) to develop new vaccines to combat the world’s deadliest diseases, including vaccines for COVID-19."
On the 12th March, the day after the WHO declared the pseudopandemic, following a meeting in the Cabinet Office Briefing Room (COBR - Cobra meeting), Boris Johnson addressed the nation [42]. He gave the people of the UK some hard truths:
"We’ve all got to be clear, that this is the worst public health crisis for a generation. Some people compare it to seasonal flu. Alas, that is not right. Owing to the lack of immunity, this disease is more dangerous.....I must level with you, level with the British public, many more families are going to lose loved ones before their time......At all stages, we have been guided by the science."
However, COVID 19 was absolutely comparable with the influenza. With regards to influenza, in 2018, The WHO stated:
"Hospitalization and death occur mainly among high-risk groups. Worldwide, these annual epidemics are estimated to result in about 3 to 5 million cases of severe illness, and about 290 000 to 650 000 respiratory deaths."
The COVID 19 mortality risk was known to be low and, despite claiming to be led by science, many scientists around the world questioned if a dangerous global pandemic even existed [43]. Johnson’s claim about being guided by science meant government were listening to selected scientific advisors while ignoring the rest [44] of the scientific community.
The UK government did listen to a handful of scientists from Imperial College London (ICL). Their wildly inaccurate computer modelled projections were used to justify subsequent polices. In addition, Spi-B, the behavioural science sub group of the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (SAGE), were also given selected credibility by the government. They attended the Cobra meetings where they advised Johnson [45]:
"A substantial number of people still do not feel sufficiently personally threatened.. The perceived level of personal threat needs to be increased among those who are complacent, using hard-hitting emotional messaging.. Some people will be more persuaded by appeals to play by the rules, some by duty to the community, and some to personal risk. All these different approaches are needed.. Communication strategies should provide social approval for desired behaviours and promote social approval within the community.. Use media to increase sense of personal threat.. Consider use of social disapproval for failure to comply."
This was essential for the pseudopandemic to proceed because the actual threat from COVID 19 was nowhere near severe enough to justify the kind of draconian polices the UK government, and their partners, were planning. Acting on Spi-B advice, Johnson's dire warnings and frightening rhetoric were gauged to deliver terror.
The level of fear was hammered into the public imagination with a relentless mainstream media propaganda campaign [46]. Never once checking to see if the projections were accurate, never seeking opposing scientific of medical opinions and actively censoring or attacking them when they emerged, the MSM investigated nothing and simply parroted whatever the State (the government and its partners) told them.
With the population understandably afraid, the State was free to enact the legislation (rules) that were vital to the core conspirators' objectives. They needed an Enabling Act [47] to give themselves the authority to set about creating the biosecurity State they desired. In the UK, this came in the shape of the Coronavirus Act [48]
No parliamentarians voted [49] to pass the Enabling Act. There was no debate, no questions asked, no parliamentary democracy. Simply the stamp of authority on the people.
The Coronavirus Act was rammed into force in the full and certain knowledge [50] that COVID 19 was not the threat the State claimed. On the 19th March, both Public Health England (PHE) and the Advisory Committee on Dangerous Pathogens (ACDP) judged that COVID was not a high consequence infectious disease (HCID). Their assessment stated:
“Now that more is known about COVID-19, the public health bodies in the UK have reviewed the most up to date information about COVID-19 against the UK criteria. They have determined that several features have now changed; in particular, more information is available about mortality rates (low overall)”
However, the State considered them to be the wrong scientists and public health experts. Their opinions were not useful and were therefore ignored.
Two days earlier, on the 17th March, the WHO reported that COVID 19 was less transmissible that influenza. They stated [51]:
"The serial interval for COVID-19 virus is estimated to be 5-6 days, while for influenza virus, the serial interval is 3 days. This means that influenza can spread faster than COVID-19."
This fact, that COVID 19 was a relatively low impact disease with a low mortality rate and less virulent than influenza, was not in dispute. The scientific evidence was clear. On the 30
th April the UK Chief Medical Officer and physicist Prof. Chris Witty, delivering a lecture at Gresham College [52], said:
"At an individual level the chances of anyone, watching this, dying of Coronavirus are actually low. Over the course of the epidemic, even if we have no vaccine, a high proportion of the people will not get this. Of those who do get it, a significant proportion.. have no symptoms at all. They get it without even realising it. Of those who do get the symptoms the great majority, probably around 80%.. have a mild or moderate disease. Which is sufficient that they need to go to bed or feel unwell, in some cases they can just carry on doing their ordinary activity - although we ask them not to - But they don't actually need to go to the doctor or medical services and they make a full recovery. A minority have to go to hospital.. the great majority of those will go on just to survive. And then a minority have very severe disease, and they need ventilation, and then, of those, some sadly die with current treatment. But, important to stress, even in the most high risk group, the majority of people who get this infection do not die."
When the ACDP met on the 13th March [53] to discuss the secure transport of clinical samples, Professor Neil Ferguson from ICL did not attend. When the UK Department of Health and Social Security (DHSC) contacted ACDP to clarify their position on the classification of COVID 19, they noted the committee's response:
"The Committee unanimously agreed that this infection should not be classified as a HCID."
The UK government decided not to listen to this unanimous expert opinion. It chose instead to listen to Neil Ferguson, and based its response upon his and his team's simulated computer models.
Control of the media meant these findings from PHE, ACDP and the WHO were not reported. This enabled the politicians, their partners and hand-picked scientific advisors to brush aside the available scientific evidence and plough on regardless.
On the 23rd March Johnson again addressed the nation [54] to let the people know about the restriction the State had decided to inflict upon them for no apparent reason. What he provided was an outrageous omission of the truth.
Talking about invisible killers, threatening many more deaths, destroyed lives and oppressive police enforcement, Johnson outlined a number of measures to deal with the claimed national emergency that didn't exist. Assuming full authority, he told other human beings what he and his partners would allow them to do.
They were allowed to go out to buy essential supplies; they were permitted, like prisoners, to exercise for one hour a day; people were licensed to go to work, if strictly necessary, and could care for vulnerable loved ones if they had to.
Though terrified, most people were fairly sensible. Exercising the precautionary principle seemed logical. Though somewhat onerous, most were willing to accept these restrictions because no one had told them that COVID 19 was not the plague they had been given to believe. Those that tried were called science deniers and conspiracy theorists.
If the majority had any notion of what the coronavirus Enabling Act really contained, it is extremely unlikely so many would have complied. Their suspicions would naturally have been aroused. Therefore the State, personified by Boris Johnson, took the most expedient course available. He didn't tell them.
He neglected to mention that the legal protections against falsifying death certificates had been removed; he missed out the part about rescinding mental health safeguards, making it much easier for the State to lock people up on mental health grounds; it slipped his mind to inform people that the NHS duty of care had been significantly downgraded, meaning they did not have to assess ongoing healthcare needs prior to discharging patients; he forgot that the State had given itself the power to halt legal gatherings, including protests, whenever it chose; he didn't think it necessary to tell people that approved State officials could lock them up if they merely suspected they were ill, then force them to undergo treatment; he failed to tell the nation that the State could now retain their biometric data for an additional period and he completely overlooked the need to tell the people that all elections were suspended and their representative democracy had been temporarily cancelled.
However, he did remember to remind people of their obligations. Because the "new normal" is not about what your country can do to protect your health, it is about what you can do for your biosecurity State. In Johnson's words:
"..In this fight we can be in no doubt that each and every one of us is directly enlisted. Each and every one of us is now obliged to join together, to halt the spread of this disease."
While The Coronavirus Act didn't receive royal ascent (become law) until the 25th March, Johnson chose the 23rd March to announce it. This was precisely 87 years to the day after the Nazi's had enacted their Enabling Act [55].
On 23rd March 1933 Hitler was bestowed with supreme executive power (plenary power) by the German Enabling Act. Just as the Nazi's exploited the Reichstag Fire to seize dictatorial control, so the UK State used the pseudopandemic to do the same. In both cases, trampling all over their national constitutions.
Tellingly the UK State did not use the available legal provisions created for national emergencies, such as pandemics. The Civil Contingencies Act 2004 [56] (CCA) was formulated following lengthy consultation and debate and gave the State (executive) the plenary powers considered necessary to deal with a real national emergency.
The CCA also severely restricted those powers, in order to protect both the constitution and democracy. It set a strict time limit of 30 days for emergency powers and compelled the government to continually return to parliament to extend their authority if necessary.
The pseudopandemic was planned to deliver permanent economic, social and political change. In order to achieve this, emergency powers had to be sustained and the State needed to ignore the constitution and sideline democracy. While the CCA was more than adequate to deal with a genuine pandemic, the pseudopandemic wasn't real and the parliamentary oversight mechanisms within the CCA would have quickly exposed it.
By not invoking the CCA the UK State were among many around the world who did not formally declare a State of Emergency in response to COVID 19. In legal terms, the pseudopandemic was not a national emergency [56].
By using the system of global authority, in concert with extensive planning, and by maximising the advantages of compartmentalisation, the core conspirators guided global public private partnerships and strategically positioned informed influencers to consolidate their political control. They had successfully converted their financial means into the political means required to operate the pseudopandemic.
Sources:
[1] - https://in-this-together.com/how-banksters-rule-the-world/
[2] - https://d-dean.medium.com/biosecurity-and-politics-giorgio-agamben-396f9ab3b6f4
[3] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giorgio_Agamben
[4] - https://archive.is/zMEuQ
[5] - https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/43385/9241593903_eng.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
[6] - https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/blog/2015/12/sustainable-development-goals-kick-off-with-start-of-new-year/
[7] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public%E2%80%93private_partnership
[8] - https://in-this-together.com/bernays-the-danger-of-public-relations/
[9] - https://in-this-together.com/wgTe/TRFATTFLONTTUN.pdf
[10] - https://www.sdgphilanthropy.org/About-SDGPP
[11] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City_Remembrancer
[12] - https://amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2011/oct/31/corporation-london-city-medieval
[13] - https://in-this-together.com/the-british-constitution-deception-part-1/
[14] - https://archive.is/BnIW1
[15] - https://in-this-together.com/Wdh4hd/GHG.pdf
[16] - https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/246107/9789241580496-eng.pdf;jsessionid=432656A276F8191DCB90B755B43CD5EF?sequence=1
[17] - https://www.who.int/news-room/q-a-detail/emergencies-international-
health-regulations-and-emergency-committees
[18] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Director-General_of_the_World_Health_Organization
[19] - https://archive.is/U6VBh
[20] - https://archive.is/5GCWq
[21] - https://archive.is/tywrg
[22] - https://archive.vn/mX3PE
[23] - https://archive.vn/bJYQb
[24] - https://web.archive.org/web/20130304175426/https://www.gatesfoundation.org/How-We-Work/Resources/Grantee-Profiles/Grantee-Profile-ONE
[25] - https://www.one.org/international/about/
[26] - https://archive.ph/QU7vZ
[27] - https://www.one.org/international/about/financials/
[28] - https://www.red.org/partners
[29] - https://archive.is/Peie2
[30] - https://archive.is/h6jG1
[31] - https://archive.is/cAKMe
[32] - https://www.bitchute.com/video/ywNmWlKFtAxb/
[33] - https://archive.vn/PNC2O
[34] - https://archive.is/wTe2H
[35] - https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/request_for_full_recording_and_m
[36] - https://archive.is/ai99g
[37] - https://cepi.net/
[38] - https://cepi.net/about/whoweare/
[39] - https://wellcome.org/who-we-are/history-wellcome
[40] - https://web.archive.org/web/20200325110459/https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/coronavirus-action-plan/coronavirus-action-plan-a-guide-to-what-you-can-expect-across-the-uk
[41] - https://in-this-together.com/?s=hydroxychloroquine
[42] - https://archive.vn/Sh3NB
[43] - https://archive.is/iNrI5
[44] - https://archive.is/NKUgn
[45] - https://web.archive.org/web/20201114093107/https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/887467/25-options-for-increasing-adherence-to-social-distancing-measures-22032020.pdf
