The test is a manufacturing technique, and is NOT intended or well suited as an infection diagnostic tool.

 The test is called a RT PCR test – Reverse Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction, invented by Nobel Laureate Kary Mullis in 1993.

 Its sole purpose is to replicate tiny DNA sequences millions and billions of times, through a process of amplification – in order to help with research.

 Mullis, who died last year, was VERY vocal during his lifetime that his test was NOT to be used as a diagnostic tool in detecting viruses – as the amplification process creates many integrity issues – and yet during the HIV crisis, it got commissioned for exactly that.

 If you read the  article below, you’ll see why this is a very contentious issue.

 Its made much worse by the fact the  virus HAS NOT been purified!

The gold standard for evaluating a virus and a test is to isolate a virus from all other matter, sequence it, and then make sure it passes the 4 Koch’s Postulates tests – eg that the purified virus when introduced to a non-infected person exhibits identified symptoms.

 None of this has been done. 

  Four of the most prominent research efforts on SARS CoV2 have all admitted that they have NOT purified the virus in their sequencing of the RNA, and that they have not fulfilled the Koch Postulates tests.


 The test uses a process of amplification – over 30x and the output is highly distorted and unreliable.

 There are serious noted false positive and consistency issues – eg result inconsistencies on the same patient!

 Positive and Negative results can be created by reducing or increasing the amplification.

 As the virus has not been purified, we are likely testing for debris too – other self, prior infected viruses and medical RNA make up the sequence being matched for! 

 As the virus itself has not been isolated, we’ve yet to prove clinically that it can induce the symptoms and infection.

As you can see it’s a bloody MESS!

 This is why we need to take positive cases and CV related deaths with a large pinch of salt.

 Data analysis from AdapNation and everywhere else relies on this unreliable data.

Bulgarian Pathology  Association show tests are meaningless:


The following was written by Andrew Johnson.

An Independent Investigation


The sudden imposition of mask wearing in the UK and other countries is clearly a test to see how gullible and pliable the population has become.

In the UK we were told that we went past the CV19 peak whilst shopping in supermarkets with no required masking and the Covid 19 mortality rate went down for weeks on end.

Then the non essential shops opened without required masking and we were told the CV19 mortality rate went down for weeks on end.

Then the pubs and restaurants opened and we were told the CV19 mortality rates went down for weeks on end.

Then a rule about having to wear masks in supermarkets came along and the rates have gone up since. So at best the masks by their own definition are absolutely pointless, at worst they are linked to people getting more unwell by wearing them.

The Government is slowly chipping away at out liberty and freedom until without people realising it we will be enslaved by a totalitarian state. The Government is using psychological warfare on the masses to achieve their intentions.

The government has a department called the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (SAGE) staffed with psychologists. Within SAGE there is a team called the Behavioural Insights Team (BIT). The intent of BIT is to change the behaviour of the masses with fear. BIT have stated that their intent is to ramp up the fear.

BIT understand human psychology and when people are fearful it lowers a persons’ consciousness. A person with lowered consciousness can easily be manipulated and controlled with suggestions to make behavioural changes. It is all about controlling the masses.


Norwegian Public Health Study :

Doctor and nurses discusses the futility of face masks :

Video showing unsanitary conditions of mask production : 


Posted by Jim Fine on Friday, 3 April 2020

This is now a part of related future socially engineered mind controlled programs to getting the docile conformist to comply with the unlawful regulations, and eventually compulsory vaccination.

As for the scientific support for the use of face mask, a recent careful examination of the literature, in which 17 of the best studies were analyzed, concluded that, “ None of the studies established a conclusive relationship between mask/respirator use and protection against influenza infection.” 

 Keep in mind, no studies have been done to demonstrate that either a cloth mask or the N95 mask has any effect on transmission of the COVID-19 virus. Any recommendations, therefore, have to be based on studies of influenza virus transmission. And, as you have seen, there is no conclusive evidence of their efficiency in controlling flu virus transmission.

Denis Rancourt, PhD, has published over 100 peer-reviewed studies in his career, but ResearchGate choose to censor and remove this paper because it didn’t fit the narrative of the Great Panic of 2020 over COVID-19. Such censorship proves the existence of an alternative agenda. 

Again, this underscores the Technocrat methodology of shaming, ridiculing and censoring anybody that comes forth with real science that refutes their pseudo-science. ⁃ TN Editor

No study exists that shows a benefit from a broad policy to wear masks in public!

 Orange county in USA got rid of the mask mandate,we should follow suit. 

Well said

Posted by Eloc Cummings on Thursday, 23 July 2020

N95 masks: are designed for CONTAMINATED environments. That means when you exhale through N95 the design is that you are exhaling into contamination. The exhale from N95 masks are vented to breath straight out without filtration. They don’t filter the air on the way out. They don’t need to.
Conclusion: if you’re in Tesco and the guy with Covid has N95 mask his covid breath is unfiltered being exhaled into Tesco (because it was designed for already contaminated environments, it’s not filtering your air on the way out)

• Surgical Mask: these masks were designed and approved for STERILE environments. The amount of particles and contaminants in the outside and indoor environments where people are, CLOG these masks very very quickly. The moisture from your breath combined with the clogged mask with render it “useless” IF you come in contact with Covid and your mask traps it, you become a walking virus dispenser. Every time you put your mask on you are breathing the germs from EVERYWHERE you went. They should be changed or thrown out every “20-30 minutes in a non sterile environment”

By now hopefully you all know CLOTH masks do not filter anything.  Yes. The one with sunflowers that looks so cute? Yes. The bandanna, the cut up t-shirt, the scarf ALL of them offer NO FILTERING whatsoever. As you exhale you are ridding your lungs of contaminants and carbon dioxide. Cloth masks trap this carbon dioxide the best. It actually risks health. The moisture caught in these masks can become mildew ridden over night. Dry coughing, enhanced allergies, sore throat are all symptoms of a micro-mold in your mask.

Ultimate Answer: N95 blows the virus into the air from a contaminated person.

The surgical mask is not designed for the outside world and will not filter the virus upon inhaling through it. It’s filtration works on the exhale. (Like a vacuum bag it only works one way)

Cloth masks are WORSE than none.

The CDC wants us to keep wearing masks. The masks don’t work.

The government has betrayed us, the markets and the private sector have no reason to support ordinary people, quite the reverse, the legal system is not going to suddenly come to our aid, nor the police, who have been used time and again to stifle protest, not aid it. However you feel about it, we’re it.

The UK government has prostituted itself to the ‘free’ markets and private interests, and, as with the banking crisis, it is we, the public who get shafted. The least we can do is oppose, resist and expose.

Denis Rancourt, PhD, has published over 100 peer-reviewed studies in his career, but ResearchGate choose to censor and remove this paper because it didn’t fit the narrative of the Great Panic of 2020 over COVID-19. Such censorship proves the existence of an alternative agenda. 

Again, this underscores the Technocrat methodology of shaming, ridiculing and censoring anybody that comes forth with real science that refutes their pseudo-science. ⁃ TN Editor

Nobody knows anyone who has become unwell as a result of pubs and shops being open. But we are being threatened with a lockdown if we do not ‘obey the rules’. This is a war against us by the establishment.

When you see admissions and hospital deaths continuing to fall, and a government which is using faulty test results from healthy people which do not turn into hospital admissions to demonise ordinary people for daring to go out shopping and socialising…..there is something seriously wrong.

They are using ‘divide and rule’ tactics to split us into 2 groups. One group is fearful and believes the government.
They are being made to think that the other group (not fearful and just trying to enjoy life and do normal stuff) is the enemy. The fearful group will be persuaded to believe that people like me are causing the ‘spike in cases’, when it is down to increased testing and inaccurate tests.
This will turn into a ‘mask war’, when the ‘fearful’ group becomes convinced that anyone not wearing a mask is infected and dangerous.
This will allow them to keep increasing mask use everywhere, cracking down on dissenters and possibly throwing some of us into prison, as they are currently doing in other countries.
They will continue to wage war on all of us and make life as unbearable as possible, until the wondrous day when the miracle vaccine will come along to save us all from misery.

(Reminder: the virus has a survival rate of 99.8% so why are they so bothered about testing everyone?)

It’s called the Hegelian Dialectic – Problem, Reaction, Solution

Create a fake problem. Manufacture the reaction using the media and the Behavioural Insights Team. Introduce the pre-planned solution.

We are hurtling full speed towards totalitarianism.

Thanks to Dave Dewhurst for the following:

When the government decides that you now need to wear gloves to go on public transport and in supermarkets, are you going to comply?
When the government decides that you now need to wear goggles to go on public transport and in supermarkets, are you going to comply?
When the government decides that you now need to wear a face mask, gloves AND goggles, not only on public transport and in supermarkets, but in ALL public spaces, are you going to comply?
When the government decides that you now need to wear a face mask, gloves AND goggles, not only in public spaces, but in your own home as well, are you going to comply?
When the government decides that you now need to prove that you’re not an “asymptomatic carrier” (by being tested), in order to be in public spaces (including public transport and supermarkets), are you going to comply?
When the government decides that you now need an “immunity passport”, in order to be in public spaces (including public transport and supermarkets), are you going to comply?
When the government decides that you now need “proof of vaccination”, in order to be in public spaces (including public transport and supermarkets), are you going to comply?
When the government decides that you now need a microchip in your arm, in order to be in public spaces (including public transport and supermarkets), are you going to comply?
I guess the real question is: Is there ANY point at which you’re going to stop doing what the government tells you to do? Because until large enough numbers of people stop complying with all this nonsense, the government mandates are only going to keep getting more intrusive, more authoritarian and harder to roll back.
The “new normal” was never meant to be temporary, right from the very beginning of this manufactured crisis, it was always intended to go on indefinitely, as a means of stripping you of your freedom, privacy and autonomy, increment by increment.

Jacobs, J. L. et al. (2009) “Use of surgical face masks to reduce the incidence of the common cold among health care workers in Japan: A randomized controlled trial,” American Journal of Infection Control, Volume 37, Issue 5, 417 – 419.

Cowling, B. et al. (2010) “Face masks to prevent transmission of influenza virus: A systematic review,” Epidemiology and Infection, 138(4), 449-456. review/64D368496EBDE0AFCC6639CCC9D8BC05

bin-Reza et al. (2012) “The use of masks and respirators to prevent transmission of influenza: a systematic review of the scientific evidence,” Influenza and Other Respiratory Viruses 6(4), 257–267.

Smith, J.D. et al. (2016) “Effectiveness of N95 respirators versus surgical masks in protecting health care workers from acute respiratory infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis,” CMAJ Mar 2016

Further studies :

No study exists that shows a benefit from a broad policy to wear masks in public!

We have launched a campaign to inform the public  with information questioning the official narrative of the “pandemic.”

PLEASE NOTE: FB  has removed the campaign group today (3.8.20) This website will soon have a constructed forum in which to run the campaign and communicate with others.Here is a temporary discord server which allows us to communicate about the campaign whilst a forum is set up for this on my website.You do not need an account! Just click and you are in and you can talk to me and each other: Share please.

How it works:
Firstly,the campaign will be run jointly on this website and on the FB group page. You can download various leaflets and posters from the FB ‘files’ section; print your own at home, send to printers for larger batches or request that we send you some from the campaigns own printed supply.
Both platforms will be used to show all contributions and costs and distributors, sponsors and campaign creators are urgently  needed to share  in every community.  (Please tell us if you’d like to be kept anonymous from these updates)

We have to be realistic, whilst the UK is getting primed for a ‘second wave’ and further lockdowns and restrictions by late summer Sept/Oct, we have a window of opportunity to enable us to inform our communities of facts that they may not be aware of, to make an informed decision on the authenticity of the claims being made by officials.

We encourage people to start their own more localised campaigns to spread the work load and to help bring maximum awareness, there is only a limited  amount of people that we can reach in the next few months, the job to inform is huge and needs your help. This is not someone else’s problem, this is something that will impact your life and that of your loved ones in a negative and devastating way if we do not take action.

For this reason the campaign is relying on many people downloading the link and printing their own leaflets to share or having access to a decently priced online printer which we believe we have found with Nectarine printers.

They will print 5000 leaflets for £72. The larger orders get a better deal.

The World Health Organisation, Gates Foundation and other players are behind a disinformation campaign. It is imperative that concerned citizens are willing to counter-act the false information and share facts with their community.
The leaflet campaign  has enabled us to produce leaflets for those who may not have the ability or means to create their own leaflets.
We urge those who have the means to print the leaflet themselves, to do so as this is a time for us all to take responsibility for our future and that of our children and grandchildren.
It is clear that those who we need to reach are members of the public who are sceptical yet unaware of all the facts.
We can send leaflets for FREE to those with no funds or no means of getting any printed, via the generous donations of others, you can help with these donations by using this email address via paypal.

A small contribution will cover the cost of printing and posting. If you can afford to put a bit more in then this will help to cover the free leaflets. Everything is transparent and public and carried out by trusted individuals with a track record for campaigns such as this.

This website has a 5G Mass Action Campaign running which has been up and running since March 2018, all details and contributions can be found within this site and it is openly visible on the FB group also.

The link to the FB group for CV Facts Not Fear :

A link to the printable leaflets:

What can you do?

Share links with others, start your own campaign using our leaflets and online printers, sponsor leaflets, be part of a distribution network to get more leaflets out to the public, inform as many people of the campaign as possible, be willing to go out into the community with leaflets.

If you are not comfortable talking to the public, it has been suggested that you could put them in libraries which recently re-opened (even if only as a skeleton service) + cafes, pubs and other businesses and anywhere with public noticeboards/display areas for leaflets,  and of course we can also hand them to people directly (after first asking if they’d be interested to find out what the government and corporate controlled msm aren’t telling them.

We hope that others see the urgency of the campaign and act accordingly, YOU are the person you have been waiting for.If you want some flyers to hand out please contact the FB page or email this website.To give you an idea of how much a batch of 300 costs to print and package and post its around £8

The following are fully referenced facts about Covid-19, provided by experts in the field, to help our readers make a realistic risk assessment. (Regular updates

These are the links that have been shown on the leaflet for further info:


CV Facts Not Fear Campaign advertised on David Icke website.


Updates from the campaign: 

Campaign begins 4th July 2020.

So far we’ve received very generous contributions from the following people:£50 from Tasha Krett £40 from Nic Treadwell  £10 from Dave Dewhurst   £25 from Karen Georgeson  £5 from J C Silvester £5 from Lee Stead £10 from Andy Collier Total in the fund is £145

Another £5 from Andy Collier £20 from Steven Stephen Phillips £20 from Judith Crawford £50 from Kath Holdsworth  Bringing the campaign fund total to £235. 

5th July 2020
£20 from David Lawrence £10 from Gaynor Morse £30 from Patricia Kempa
£10 from Marie Pearce  £8 from Sinead Dawes £15 from Jane Janie Chichester £10 from Alan Dean £40 from Jill Kirkwood £20 from Lee Stead
£10 from Sarah Foster £15 from Dan Doe
Wow guys we’re up to £423
6th July 2020
£423 was in the fund at last update.
£30 from Robert Williams £8 from Emma Emz Lockett
£342.50 spent on 25,000 double sided A5 fliers
Total now in the PayPal account: £118.50.
Campaign update #5
7th July 2020
£118.50 was in the fund at last update…
£8 from Emz Lockett
£15 from Margaret e Wyllie
£20 from Nykii Day
£10 from Steve Hopley
£20 from Colleen Waters
£8 from Tina M McNamara
£10 from Tina Voller
Total now in the fund: £209.50
Campaign update #6
8th July 2020
£209.50 was in the fund at last update…
£20 from Robert Williams
£12 from Tina Dyer
Total now in the fund: £241.50

Campaign update #7

9th July 2020

£241.50 was in the fund at last update

£10 from R Meroza

£30 from Lee Stead

Total now in the fund is £281.50

Update #8

11th July 2020

£281.50 at last update

£50 from a very generous anonymous supporter

Now we have £331.50 in the fund!

Update #9

15th July 2020

£331.50 was in the fund at last update

Some VERY generous donations have come in recently!

£100 from Connie Walters

£8.60 from Angie Mulroy

£60 from John Sherwood

Ann Marie Carey has spent £56.95 and £118.84 (see her posts)

Total now in the fund £324.31 

Update #10

15th July 2020

More amazingly generous donations into the campaign fund today!

£72 from Kaoru Aramaki

£17.40 from Sean P Maguire – great radio show mate!

£30 from Sinead A Gogarty

£8 from Jo Silvester (have I tagged the right person?)

Second batch of 25,000 leaflets ordered today costing £332.50

Total left in the fund is now £119.21

Update #11

16th July 2020

£119.21 was in the fund at last update

 Annie  spent £40.20 (See her post from earlier today regarding postage)

Generous campaign sponsorships from the following amazing people:

£30 Joanne Boddington

£10 Eleri Potter

£10 John Thacker

£8 Joy Stockley

£10 Nick Turner

£20 Theresa Phillips

£167.01 is now in the campaign fund

Update #12

17th July 2020

£167.01 was in the fund yesterday

The campaign has received the following generous contributions today:

£20 from Adam Coleman

£15 from Intbel

£30 from Denny Berfield

Annie has spent another £29.65 on postage today

so there’s now £202.36 in the fund.

Update #13

20th July 2020

£202.36 was in the fund at last update

More generous donations from the following amazing team members:

£20 from Helena Eagles

£15 from Elena Mari

£15 from Claire Staples

£10 from AnuskaLuana Cinnamom

£15 from Janice Jacobs

£20 from Karen Green

£10 from Peter Cooke

£200 from Deliah Roth 

Bringing the campaign fund total to £507.36

Update #14

22nd July 2020

£507.36 was in the fund at last update

£7 from Cain Milburn

£10 from Corrine Edwards

£20 from Liz Keaney

£20 from Janis Roantree

£10 from Sarah West

£16 from Karen Rankin

£15 from Mark Philips

£20 from Maureen Hillier

£20 from Simon Piper

Bringing the campaign total to: £645.36

Update #15

26th July 2020

£645.36 was in the fund at last update

£15 from Claire Storch

£10 from Lisette Chesshire

£6 from Bez Catt Lee

£10 from Joanne Haynes

£15 from Rebecca Kane

£10 from Anonymous this morning

£30 from Christine Houghton

£30 from Janet Godfrey

Tina Dyer has spent £227.10 so far on postage and envelopes etc (see her postage updates)

Campaign total is now £544.26

Update #16

2nd August 2020

Apologies that it’s been so long since the last update I’ve had an extremely hectic week 

£544.26 was in the fund at last update

£100 from Anonymous

£10 from Ian Swirles

£10 from Chrissie Richardson

£25 from Pc Murphy

£20 from Andrea West

£10 from Jason Green

£10 from Daniel Thomas

£8 from Julie Croley

£30 from Margaret Sherwood

£10 from Lillian Potter

Tina Dyer has spent £77.19 on postage

3rd batch of 25 thousand leaflets has been ordered costing £332.50

Total now in the fund is £367.57

Update #17

6th August 2020

£367.57 was in the fund at last update

£10 from Lynne Barrett

£20 from Ruth Acaster

£10 from Rita Anna Carter

£20 from Steev Filleepz

£10 from Glen Allen

We’ve just ordered the 4th batch of 25 thousand leaflets which cost £332.50 so the total in the campaign fund pot is now £105.07

otal now in the fund is £367.57  



Update #18

10th August 2020

£105.07 was in the fund at last update

We’ve had a massively generous donation of £333 which covers an entire batch of 25 thousand leaflets which is absolutely amazing! from Kaoru Aramaki

and many more very generous donations from the following good people:

£30 from Nic Treadwell

£10 from Sheila Forde

£20 from Heather Kirkup

£5 from Rebecca Mackay

2 more donations are “on hold” on paypal as they weren’t sent as family and friends – Hopefully they will re-send them as family and friends which will save on fees and also land firmly in the account – These will be included in the next update when this gets sorted

Total now in the fund £503.07

Update #19

13th August 2020

£503.07 was in fund at last update

Tina Dyer was spent £361.22 posting out the last lot of leaflets

New donations and sponsorship money from the following good people:

£10 from Angela Peacock

£10 from Zed

£10 from Nick D

£15 from James Light

£25 from Dominique Anderson

£20 from Tammy Wadmore

Total now in fund is £231.85


Doctors are starting to speak out – anonymously, at the risk of losing their jobs. This is an absolute scandal. Locking down an entire city on the basis of absolutely nothing.

“I’m a doctor at University Hospitals Leicester NHS Trust. Many of my colleagues are angry and confused about what is happening nationally and particularly in Leicester and Leicestershire. We are reminded daily that we are not allowed to speak to journalists or on social media, which is why I am stringently anonymous and more vague than I’d like to be here. I love being a doctor, and I risk suspension for speaking out.

I’m going to use Public Health England’s own numbers for this analysis (found here) and I’m going to explain why I think the conclusions they (and the politicians) have drawn are wrong.”

Dr Q goes on to explain that there is no evidence of any increase in the rate of infection in Leicester based on Pillar 1 data – tests administered to inpatients by hospital staff.

“By May, positive cases averaged around 10 a day and deaths were continuing to fall. In late May, we started swabbing every single admission to the hospitals, and this is where things get interesting.

I work in a department that isn’t respiratory medicine.

This means that the patients who are in our area are there for other health issues that are not caused by COVID-19 (think surgery or mental health).

Of those we swabbed, just 1% tested positive and all of them were asymptomatic. That rate has been steady since May 23rd. I believe that our patients are representative of the rate in the UK population and, for what it’s worth, it’s the same story in Manchester, Leeds and Guildford, where I’ve been comparing notes with colleagues.

Unpublished data shared on an open forum from Leeds, Manchester, Sussex also confirms this – 1%, all asymptomatic when testing positive. These patients have, almost without exception, not developed any symptoms, although some have had household members with a cough.
So why the panic? Pillar 2 data. But there’s a problem with Pillar 2 data.

The point of “Lockdown” has always been to ‘flatten the curve’ in order to ‘Protect the NHS’. Given we were coping on March 31st, when we had nearly ten times the number of positive cases in hospitals, with relatively little access to testing, we are certainly coping now.

The issue and alleged cause of the “Local Lockdown” is our Pillar 2 numbers. These are the community tests outsourced to private companies. There is no guarantee that these tests are all taken from different people (unlike the Pillar 1 data, which is cross checked against a unique patient identifier). In fact, the Government accepts that the number of Pillar 2 cases is not the same as the number of people with COVID-19 because Pillar 2 data includes people who’ve been tested more than once – often because they have to re-test before they’re allowed back to work.”

In other words, the “evidence” that cases are increasing at a dangerous rate in Leicester – or were, since even the Government acknowledges that even Pillar 2 data show the number of cases is falling now – is unreliable. And Dr Q doesn’t even get into the problem of false positives with PCR tests.

Dr Q points out that even if we decide to accept the Pillar 2 data at face value it shows the average age of all these newly infected people is 39, so there’s almost zero risk of them dying from COVID-19 anyway. And he/she highlights the sheer lunacy of closing schools, given that almost no children have died of COVID-19 across the United Kingdom.

The first WHO Global Pandemic Preparedness report submitted in Sept 2019 was the result of a joint venture by WHO the former Director General of the WHO, Gro Harlem Brundtland, former PM of Norway.

The report was sponsored by WHO and the World bank who had co-convened the GPP board to follow on from  a UN based project after Ebola.

Its monitoring board members includes Fauci, Gates Foundation, Chinese CDC and Wellcome Trust. The goals of the Board are to:
• assess the world’s ability to protect itself from health emergencies
• identify critical gaps to preparedness across multiple perspectives;
• advocate for preparedness activities with national and international leaders and decision-makers.

The WHO and World bank plan encouraged countries to have a cost effective plan for a pandemic at the ready by July 2019.  That was acted upon by  59 countries who submitted a National Action Plan for Health Security (NAPHS).

This preparedness plan was to begin from Sept 2019 and to end  Sept 2020 which also included instructions to hold two simulation exercises, one would involve a lethal pathogen that causes a global pandemic.

The progress report requires that a UN and WHO two system  wide training and simulation exercises should  take place, one of which is the release of a respiratory pathogen that causes a pandemic!

Which countries took part? Which departments were costed? How much  did each country cost a pandemic at and for what period of time did the ‘costed’ pandemic cover?  If this global pandemic plan  began in Sept 2019, when did it stop? What happened between the start of the exercise  and the WHO declaration on the 31st December? Which actions were already taken?

There is evidence that the NHS organisations  were aware of the requirement for plans to respond to a disease outbreak in February 2019

The WHO Simulation Exercise manual from 2017 states that during these sort of global exercises, they involve table top exercises such as the ones performed by the Event 201 team in New York, again, the same members of the Global Pandemic Monitoring Board attended this event, including the Chinese CDC Director-General.

Did the pandemic exercise also include a pathogen from China that causes a pandemic?
Where were the origins of the global exercise?
If the pandemic exercise began in September 2019, does this mean that the table top exercise (written about in the WHO manual, which occurs before a live event) was Event 201?

According to the WHO Simulation Exercise Manual, the table top exercises are to inform members of the preparedness community ( Event 201 states this as the purpose of the table top exercise) who can then follow with real live full scale exercises that include the use of hospitals, media broadcasts, actors, organisations, govts and others.

Event 201:

Does this mean that our govts  were involved in a global exercise for preparedness, who were the preparedness community that the Event 201 claims to be informing?  

What transpires is that the Chinese CDC and others  were chosen to be on the monitoring board of a group calling for a global pandemic exercise. Co-convened  by WHO and the World Bank, who planned to create a UN and WHO global exercise to test how each country would cope in a pandemic. WHO wrote the manual for a simulation exercise in 2017. Another was written in 2018.

That pandemic exercise plan covered in the WHO manual included the requirement to hold a table top event prior to the simulation.

And here we have the Event 201, with all the SAME people on the monitoring board involved, advertising itself as tool to inform the policy and monitoring community.

But they ARE the members of the monitoring board …So the table top exercises were part of the global preparedness simulation.

How many people are aware that  many countries had a cost effective plan already in place in case of a pandemic just 6 months prior?
How does the plan compare to the pandemic?
Are the hospitals involved in the ‘cost’ effective plans for a pandemic the same hospitals as those involved now?

Why are we not calling for  an investigation into why those making claims of a pandemic, whilst running live exercises of a pandemic will profit financially from a pandemic?

Is there any evidence of extra funding for a pandemic PRIOR to the announcement of one?

In the US, the office of Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response under the Dept of Health and Human Services was given an extra budget of $722 million, giving them a budget of $2.2 Billion for FY 2019.

The job of this dept is to maintain and respond to pandemic preparedness. This included $145 million more than the 2018 budget to provide medical counter measures that address pandemic and emerging diseases.
And $138 million above the 2018 budget, to maintain and respond to pandemic preparedness.

Budgeting extra for a pandemic before it happens,  was that for the pandemic exercise?

The Monitoring board pushes the vaccine agenda.…/GPMB%20Statement%20-%20Global%20Vacc…

The WHO Simulation Manual.…/WHO-WHE-CPI-2017.10-eng.pdf;sequence…

The framework for the global monitoring board was created by Harvard Global health Institute and the chosen reviewers include CDC, In-Q-tel (A CIA created company) HHS, World Economic Forum, John Hopkins centre,WHO and various universities.

This report claims that China has a response system for pandemic preparedness in place that has been approved by WHO.  

Public health systems. As a first step, China’s government established the necessary legal and regulatory infrastructures for preparedness activities. The resulting national system comprises of (1) a public health emergency command center to coordinate activities at the national, provincial, prefecture, and city levels with external organizations and other countries in the region (2) a nationwide reporting network for reporting infectious
diseases and public health events (3) a nationwide pathogen laboratory network and (4) an emergency medical rescue team. This national system responds to both infectious disease outbreaks and other public health
emergencies through 37 emergency medical teams distributed throughout China’s 23 provinces. In December 2016, the Shanghai team was certified using the WHO Global Emergency Medical Team processes and checklists for deployment ready teams.

Lucky it started in China then?

Monitoring will be essential because it will provide regular reports on the status of the world’s ability to reduce and respond to pandemic risk.
Because the monitoring will generate objective information, the results should provide a substantial incentive to governments, the private sector, and international organizations to sustain momentum on improving health security.
The monitoring project will be needed until such a time when:
• All countries have robust public health capacities that comply with IHR and meet OIE standards;
• Competent official agencies regularly analyse risks that weak public health capacities pose to economies and actively engage in reducing these risks;
• International organisations are positioned to rapidly and effectively support countries during major disease outbreaks and to foster development of countries’ public health capacities; and
• Diagnostics, drugs, and vaccines for new diseases are available to mitigate the spread of contagion and its impacts on economies, communities, and public health.

And from this framework on global risk assessment and the call for a monitoring committee, came the  Global Prepardness Pandemic Monitoring Committee.


The Chinese are members of the monitoring board for pandemic preparedness, have taken part in what appears to be a table top exercise for a global pandemic preparedness exercise which occurs prior to the live event, have been approved with certification from WHO to be at the forefront of a global preparedness plan. They work with the  Gates Foundation and with US pharmaceutical companies as well as working with UN on its sustainable goals.

The EU,s biggest funding body for research to implement the Smart agenda, Horizon 2020, have been involved in joint projects with China and the EU countries since 2018 with a funding budget of 100 Million Euro.

China works closely with the UN and showcased the UN during the Wuhan military games just prior to the ‘proclaimed’ pandemic.

During the military games in Wuhan that clearly paid homage to the UN, there was also another high level meeting that took place.


The EIOS system builds on a long-standing collaboration between WHO and the Joint Research Centre (JRC) of the European Commission (EC) to develop a system for public health intelligence and responds to the need for a global initiative to bring together PHI efforts.

In September 2017, WHO accepted leadership of EIOS under the Health Emergencies Programme (WHE) with a governance structure involving multiple stakeholders. The Coordination Group is made up of twelve organizations, networks, and government bodies who serve two-year terms.

EIOS picked up the first article reporting on a cluster of pneumonia in Wuhan at 03:18am (UTC) on December 31st 2019. By the end of March, the EIOS system was collating up to 228,000 articles per day related to the outbreak, helping to sort through this information and making it available it to experts across the globe. Since the start of the outbreak, members of the EIOS community have been working on additions to the system to help manage the unprecedented volume of articles by looking at improved ways to filter, contextualize and visualize all of the content coming in.

This shows that the WHO is directly linked to the information being shared globally.

The EIOS system builds on a long-standing collaboration between WHO and the Joint Research Centre (JRC) of the European Commission (EC) to develop a system for public health intelligence and responds to the need for a global initiative to bring together PHI efforts.

JRC is the European Commission’s science and knowledge service.

At a more international level, the JRC and the US reinforced their cooperation through several cooperation agreements to facilitate the way towards compatible standards across both sides of the Atlantic  and explored which role the EU and the US could play in the development of Smart Grids, intelligent electricity systems, and Smart Cities, efficiently organised cities based on integrated management, active citizen participation and integration of ICT systems.

JRC researchers analysed the geographic spread of the virus as well as the age and gender of the patients in view of informing the measures for gradually reopening the EU.

To help reach the objectives of the Coronavirus Global Response, approximately EUR 1 billion will be mobilised under Horizon 2020 to accelerate access to COVID-19 vaccines, medicines and tests.

The European Commission is heavily involved in research and the pushing of vaccines.They have daily updates that are followed by the international community. The update below is from June 2020.

ECDC warned against the lifting of community physical distancing and other IPC measures, as together with testing and contact tracing, they are the most important approach for controlling the spread of COVID-19 in all settings, including during travel.

Overall, following the self assessment and the external assessment process the UK has demonstrated a strong baseline position across all Action Packages. One of the key areas of strength identified in the UK is the cross Government and organizational coordination
and response. The UK will be a good resource for ideas on how to navigate some of the challenges to true implementation of the “One Health” concept in other countries. This was particularly well demonstrated within the AMR and Zoonotic disease Action Packages.
The UK has a well-practiced system of response to real outbreaks and testing the systems through simulation exercises. Few countries have this degree of experience and number of targeted exercises which serve to fine tune the system.

Which targeted exercises and simulations involving health care?

The UK has been a leading player in the preparatory work on the
WHO Global Action Plan on AMR. The Global Action Plan is a “one health” approach,

The Global Action Plan was developed in response to a request made by the Heads of Government of Germany, Ghana and Norway – and later the United Nations Secretary-General – requesting that the Director-General of WHO and heads of other multilateral agencies streamline their collaboration and develop a Global Action Plan.

The Global Action Plan broadly complements the United Nations System-wide Strategic Document, which describes the work of the United Nations Development System as a whole to support implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.

The Global Action Plan was  launched on September 24, 2019 on the side-lines of the United Nations General Assembly in New York.

The Global Action Plan was launched to coincide with the High-Level Meeting on Universal Health Coverage and the United Nations General Assembly in September 2019.

Who are the signatory agencies to the Global Action Plan?

  • The 12 signatory agencies to the Global Action Plan are Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance, Global Financing Facility, Global Fund to Fight AIDS, TB and Malaria, UNAIDS, UNDP, UNFPA, UNICEF, Unitaid, UN Women, World Bank Group, World Food Program and World Health Organization. Together, these agencies work to address all targets in Sustainable Development Goal (SDG)  and many other health-related SDG targets.

Global Health Security Index 

The GHS Index is a project of the Nuclear Threat Initiative (NTI) and the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security (JHU) and was developed with The Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU).The Index was published in October, 2019, and analyses the readiness of the world’s countries to combat pandemics

The Global Health Security (GHS) Index is the first comprehensive assessment and benchmarking of health security and related capabilities across the 195 countries that make up the States Parties to the International Health Regulations (IHR [2005]).  These organisations believe that, over time, the GHS Index will spur measurable changes in national health security and improve international capability to address one of the world’s most omnipresent risks: infectious disease outbreaks that can lead to international epidemics and pandemics.

GHS created 140 questions for countries’ capacities, whether a capacity exists and where it is  and also whether that capacity is regularly—for example, annually—tested and shown to be functional in exercises or real-world events.

The GHS Index, NTI, JHU, and the EIU project team— was made possible with  grants from the Open Philanthropy Project, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, and the Robertson Foundation.

We also have the Global Health Security Agenda whose  permanent adviser is WHO.

The GHSA is governed by a Steering Group comprised of approximately 15 countries, international organisations, and/or non-governmental stakeholders. The primary role of the Steering Group is to provide strategic guidance and direction, including identifying overall GHSA priorities, tracking of progress and commitments, and facilitation of target-driven multi-sectoral coordination and communication among GHSA members.

Permanent Steering Group Members (2019 – 2023)

Indonesia, Italy, Kenya, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Republic of Korea, Senegal, Thailand, United States, GHSA Consortium (GHSAC), Private Sector Round Table (PSRT)

Rotating Steering Group Members (2019 – 2020)

Argentina, Australia, Canada, Finland, Netherlands, World Bank.

The GHSA mandate on Immunisation.


This Action Package seeks to attain effective protection through achievement and maintenance of immunisation against measles and other epidemic-prone VPDs.


  • Maintain high vaccination coverage rates and improve optimal vaccination rates where needed
  • Strengthen systems for the safety management of adverse effects from vaccinations
  • Identify and target immunization to populations at risk of epidemic-prone VPDs of national importance and create a priority list of high-risk regions and populations in order to provide vaccinations to VPD endemic areas
  • Strengthen systems for VPD prevention and control, such as outbreak response immunization, case-based surveillance system, and access to a laboratory in a VPD laboratory network for diagnostic confirmation
  • Conduct routine or supplementary immunization activities for addressing immunity gaps for measles


Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Republic of Korea, United States

Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), World Health Organization (WHO), World Organization for Animal Health (OIE)

According to Australia,s Action Plan For Health Security 2019 to 2023,  they and 195 other countries are part of a legally binding agreement called  International Health Regulations (2005)  including all WHO Member States.

The IHR was adopted at the 58th World Health Assembly in May 2005,
and subsequently entered into force on 15 June 2007.
The purpose and scope of the IHR are:

“to prevent, protect against, control and provide a public health response to the international spread of disease in ways that are commensurate with and restricted to public health risks, and which avoid unnecessary interference with international traffic and trade”.

International Health Regulations Monitoring and Evaluation

The Framework was developed in 2016, in collaboration with related initiatives such as the Global Health Security Agenda.

  • The remaining three components of the Framework consist of:
     Annual Reporting to the World Health Assembly (mandatory):
  • Simulation Exercises:
  • After-action Review:           

A major component of the NAPHS is establishing an interoperable, interconnected electronic disease surveillance system for both human and animal sectors, coordinated at the national level and incorporating an outbreak management system.develop a Costed National Action Plan for Health Security (NAPHS).$File/Aust-Nat-Action-Plan-Health-Security-2019-2023.pdf

The NAPHS was created with multi-sectoral engagement with involvement of International Partners including the World Health Organization (WHO), United States Center for Disease Control and Prevention (USCDC), USAID.

High-level attention, risk assessment, resources, and strategic planning by  The Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security.

All the countries signed up to the WHO National Action Plan for Health Security (NAPHS) are also obliged to take part in simulations.

In US, The Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response (ASPR), which maintains the U.S. International Health regulations (IHR) NFP and performs the required monitoring and evaluation of U.S compliance with the IHR, led the development of the National Action Plan.

( This is the department mentioned in this article above which was given an  extra budget of $722 million for 2019, giving them a budget of $2.2 Billion for FY 2019.)

The job of this dept is to maintain and respond to pandemic preparedness.

The following is the initial follow-up process and timeline for the implementation of the National Action Plan:
• Beginning of the federal monitoring and evaluation process for the United States Health Security National Action Plan – November 2018.
• First interagency comprehensive National Action Plan Review and Progress Report Meeting – January 2019
• Online publication of the 2018 National Action Plan Progress Report and publication of a revised National Action Plan (if needed) – February 2019.
• Second biannual IHR Working Group Action Item Review Meeting – July 2019.
This annual schedule of activities iterates until the second JEE of the United States, tentatively planned for mid-2021.

This is from the WHO 2018 Influenza Pandemic simulation exercise manual.

And here is the simulation plan. Created in advance.

Sounds rather familiar!

Describing the development, spread and impact of the fictitious influenza pandemic will add depth and realism to the exercise, as well as events for participants to respond to.

Global pandemic phases: Changes in the severity of the global pandemic phases can be used in a scenario to stimulate discussion, trigger potential preparedness actions and add international context.

The WHO global pandemic phases describe the spread of the pandemic influenza virus around the world, and will be used by WHO to communicate the global pandemic situation.
The global pandemic phase will be based on WHO risk assessments performed on virological, epidemiological and clinical data collected internationally. Currently, there are four WHO global
pandemic phases (1):
ƒ interpandemic – the period between influenza pandemics;
ƒ alert – influenza caused by a new subtype has been identified in humans; therefore, increased vigilance and careful risk assessment will be initiated at local, national and global levels;
ƒ pandemic – global spread of human influenza caused by a new subtype, determined through global surveillance; and
ƒ transition – reduction of assessed global risk, de-escalation of global actions and reduction in response activities or movement towards recovery.

The ‘ demands’ of the NHS health care system during this pandemic in the UK  were put into the hands of Palantir.

Palantir is a US data mining company that cut its teeth working for the Pentagon and the CIA in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Palantir had 10% of their workforce work within the NHS government data project to predict surges in the NHS demands during the CV19 pandemic from  which the company  earned one pound, despite the costs of wages for the workforce

Now we can see why?

WHO 2018 Simulation Preparedness Report:

UK Government have to go through certain procedures which could take years before a vaccine can be administered to the public.

“The best way to defeat a virus is with a vaccine”

Spoken by the clueless Matt Hancock, the health secretary who has no background in such matters. There has NEVER been an effective coronavirus vaccine in history!

If there had they would have already invented it by now.
The flu shot is not  a success story either.
It seems to be a repeated failure year after year.
There are medical and academic studies that show a correlation between increased illness AND getting the flu shot in many cases.
Vaccine derived virus interference was significantly associated with coronavirus and human metapneumovirus.
All being suppressed.
Where is our democratic and human right to openly discuss and question?
With all these problems wouldn’t Matt Hancock and UK Government be more cautious and at least more reserved about this fait accompli CV19 vaccine? 
The CV19 vaccine is certainly viable from a profit point of view but is it from a ‘save lives’ point of view?
This statement from Hancock is a scandal.
He said they are stock piling these vaccines BEFORE they have been APPROVED. 
This Astra Zeneca/Oxford University vaccine has NOT been APPROVED but has received A LOT of UK Government money.
Is the UK Government paying for these vaccines whether or not they are effective?
Since WHEN did a commercial organisation which is FOR-PROFIT make a drug in order to have stockpiles BEFORE it was approved?
This is a disgraceful state of affairs.
Already they are BREACHING a number of protocols with regards to safety and testing on vaccines and pharmaceuticals.
Has this vaccine passed the ‘Gold Standard” protection?
Are they going to be open and transparent with a Gold Standard testing?
In a randomised controlled trial (RCT) can be very expensive to run.
They can take many years to complete, and even then may not last long enough to assess the long-term effect of an intervention such as vaccine immunity, or to detect rare or long-term adverse effects.
Will this vaccine be monitored on an ongoing basis by the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) through the Yellow Card Scheme, as is the monitoring process required by UK law before a vaccine is licensed for use in the UK?
Has this vaccine followed the UK Governments ‘UK Vaccine Network’?
The UK Government has published no information and their website has not been updated since 2019.
Working group 2: Understand how a vaccine will impact on an epidemic disease outbreak.
Working group 3: Produce a process map for vaccine development, from discovery to deployment.
Working group 4: Look at the manufacture of vaccines.
The virus is on its way out.
The majority of the population were NEVER at any serious risk.
It specifically targets one specific demographic overwhelmingly, the elderly with MULTIPLE comorbidities and within that demographic specifically targets nursing home residents thus far. 
The general population, children, middle aged people, teenagers, 20s and 30s were NEVER at any serious risk of hospitalisation to CV19.
Studies are showing there is more of a threat of the seasonal flu than CV19.
Remember this:
no vaccine manufacturer shall be liable in a civil action for damages arising from any vaccine-related injury to your health such as brain damage or death associated with the administration of a vaccine.
Given the fact that this vaccine has not adhered to the procedures and processes of vaccine safety before being licensed to administer and has  skipped and spectacularly ignored all guidelines and  given that vaccine manufacturers are not liable for ANY damages as a result of this vaccine including death and you will have to just have to accept whatever the effects, are you willing to take a huge risk to your life and wellbeing by taking this shot and accept whatever the effects?
Will the government and globalists honour our basic human right to refuse anything that we believe or know will cause detrimental affects to our health & wellbeing?
There are strong musings if anyone uses their rights and refuse this vaccine they will have access to their bank accounts stopped. Thus stopping your ability to purchase food and water in order to live. Isn’t this not only blackmail of the most evil kind but also cold blooded murder.
Given also that the public have been misinformed about past vaccines and the CDC, a for profit company, have blatantly covered up detrimental side effects  such as denying that vaccines cause autism in babies which has only recently been admitted after many years of denial.
The CDC-  as of March 2nd, 2020, the CDC has admitted in federal court that they do not have any evidence proving that vaccines given to babies don’t cause autism. For years they claimed that the studies had been done, the evidence was clear, and that there was a consensus: “vaccines don’t cause autism.” Yet, this was a lie.
How many people were involved in flu vaccines prior to this reported outbreak?
 According to Dr. Alex Vasquez, in September 2019, Italy rolled out an entirely new type of influenza vaccine.
This vaccine called VIQCC is different than others.
Most available influenza vaccines are produced in embryonated chicken eggs. VIQCC, however, is produced from cultured animal cells rather than eggs and has more of a “boost” to the immune system as a result. VIQCC also contains four types of viruses – 2 type A viruses (H1N1 and H3N2) and 2 type B viruses. It looks like this “super” vaccine impacted the immune system in such a way to increase coronavirus infection through virus interference that set the stage for what happened in Italy.

Is the rush to a vaccine the best solution?

According to Dr Murray the attempt to create a vaccine for SARS-CoV showed that vaccines were able to offer protection against infection, but came with a cost of disruption to the immune system. This altered immune function led to severe lung inflammation when test animals were exposed to the virus.
The final statement of the study cannot be highlighted enough: “Caution in proceeding to application of a SARS-CoV vaccine in humans is indicated. 

Despite this, the UK Flu vaccination programme has been stepped up for   2020/2021 by govt. 

How vaccines are tested, licensed and monitored

(From Oxford Uni website) How vaccines are tested, understandably, people are often concerned to know how rigorously and extensively vaccines have been tested.

This is especially true for new vaccines.

This page aims to outline the process involved in developing and licensing a vaccine for use in the UK. The standard for testing and monitoring of vaccines is higher than it is for most other medicines, because they are one of the few medical treatments given to healthy people (mainly healthy children).

This means that the level of acceptable risk is much lower than it might be for a cancer treatment, for example. It can take many years for a vaccine to pass through all the stages described. 

In the case of the MenB vaccine, for example, it took nearly 20 years from the first idea to the vaccine being licensed for use.

These are some of the stages a vaccine will have gone through before use: Literature review: looking at what has been done before. Theoretical development or innovation: coming up with a new idea, or a variation on an existing idea. Laboratory testing and development. This involves ‘in vitro’ testing using individual cells and ‘in vivo’ testing, often using mice.

The vaccine has to pass rigorous safety tests at this stage, and demonstrate that it works in animals. Phase I study – an initial trial involving a small group of adult participants (up to 100 people).

This is carried out to make sure that the vaccine does not have major safety concerns in humans, and also to work out the most effective dose. Phase II study – a trial in a larger group of participants (several hundred people).

Phase II trials check that the vaccine works consistently, and look at whether it generates an immune response.

Researchers also start looking for potential side effects.

Phase III study – a trial in a much larger group of people (usually several thousand). Phase III trials gather statistically significant data on the vaccine’s safety and efficacy (how well it works).

This means looking at whether the vaccine generates a level of immunity that would prevent disease, and provides evidence that the vaccine can actually reduce the number of cases.

It also gives a better chance of identifying rarer side effects not seen in the phase II study.

Licensing – expert review of all trial data by the UK government (through the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency  – MHRA) or European regulator (European Medicines Agency  – EMA).

At this stage the regulators check that the trials show that the product meets the necessary efficacy and safety levels. They also make sure that, for most people, the product’s advantages far outweigh the disadvantages.

Phase IV studies – post-marketing surveillance to monitor the effects of the vaccine after it has been used in the population.

These may be requested by a regulatory body, or carried out by the pharmaceutical industry. 

The vaccine and the trials used to test it must meet the regulations laid down by the following authorities: ICH-GCP  (International Conference on Harmonisation of Good Clinical Practice) – international ethical and scientific quality standard for designing, conducting, recording and reporting trials that involve the participation of human subjects.

Declaration of Helsinki  (1964; 2008) – Ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects EU Clinical Trials Directive  – enshrined in UK law by the Medicines for Human Use (Clinical Trials) Regulations (2004) RCPCH Guidelines  for the ethical conduct of medical research involving children (2000) In addition, for trials in the UK, the vaccine and the trial must receive individual approval from the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), while the trial itself must be approved from the following authorities: An NHS Research Ethics Committee (see more information on the NHS Health Research Authority website ) The local NHS Research and Development office, who support and advise researchers in meeting the requirements of the UK regulatory framework. The Health and Safety Executive (HSE), for certain types of trials monitoring.

Although vaccines undergo  testing before they are licensed for use in the UK, it is important that the safety of vaccines is monitored on an ongoing basis, as with all licensed drugs.

In the UK this is undertaken by the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) through the Yellow Card Scheme.

Reports of suspected side effects are sent to the MHRA by drug companies (who are obliged to pass on any reports of suspected side effects that are defined as serious), health professionals, and, since 2005, patients themselves.

How many times has the pharmaceutical industry been caught red handed in making false claims and misrepresenting studies? The author of this website suggests  reading informative books such as this one:

Who is responsible for monitoring vaccine safety?

What does the MHRA do with these data?

The data are evaluated each week, and the reported side effects are compared against the expected side effects as detailed in the information sheet for the vaccine.

If a previously unidentified reaction emerges, or the frequency of reactions is not in line with what is expected, then the MHRA will investigate carefully. What happens next?

This will depend on the kind of side effect identified, but options include insisting that details of the new side effect are given in the product information leaflet or giving out warnings identifying groups of patients who should not be given the vaccine. In rare circumstances, the vaccine may be withdrawn from use.

 You can find detailed information on the scheme here , and data on Yellow Card reports for individual products here . Page last updated:  Monday, October 29, 2018

Report a problem with a medicine or medical device.
Report a suspected problem (‘adverse incident’) with a medicine or medical device using the Yellow Card Scheme as soon as possible, for example if: a medicine causes side effects someone’s injured (or almost injured) by a medical device, either because its labelling or instructions aren’t clear, it’s broken or has been misused a patient’s treatment is interrupted because of a faulty device someone receives the wrong diagnosis because of a medical device a medicine doesn’t work properly a medicine is of a poor quality you think a medicine or medical device is fake or counterfeit Anyone can report a problem.
The UK Vaccine Network brings together industry, academia and relevant funding bodies to make targeted investments in specific vaccines and vaccine technology for infectious diseases with the potential to cause an epidemic.
Role of the group:
Vaccines are widely recognised as an important mechanism in controlling infectious disease outbreaks. However, outbreaks of some of the world’s deadliest diseases only occur intermittently, and often in the world’s poorest countries, meaning that there may not be a strong market incentive to for the pharmaceutical industry to develop vaccines for such diseases.
The UK government is taking concerted and coordinated action to address this market failure.
The UK has committed to invest £120 million between 2016 and 2021 for the development of new vaccines for such diseases, in line with the expert advice provided by the UK Vaccines Network.
The focus of the Network is to support the government to identify and shortlist targeted investment opportunities for the most promising vaccines and vaccine technologies that will help combat infectious diseases with epidemic potential, and to address structural issues related to the UK’s broader vaccine infrastructure.
Membership The UK Vaccine Network is made up of leading experts from academia, industry and policy. All members are invited to join the Network in a personal capacity, not as representatives of specific organisations or bodies.
Chair Chris Whitty, Chief Scientific Adviser to the Department of Health and Social Care Members Adrian Hill, Andrew Pollard, Bryan Charleston, Ceri Lyn-Adams, Charlie Weller, Charlotte Watts, Chris Whitty, Christian Schneider, Eleanor Riley, Fiona Tomley, Gary Entrican, Ian Hudson, Jean Lang, Jeffrey Almond, Joann Prior, Johan Van Hoof, John Edmunds, Jonathan Pearce, Julian Bonnerjea, Mahesh Kumar, Massimo Pamlarini, Michael Francis, Miles Carroll, Neil Ferguson, Nick Adkin, Paul Cosford, Peter Openshaw, Simon Foster, Stephen Inglis, Steve Chatfield, Sue Middleton, Tarit Mukhopadhyay, Timothy Atkins, Xiao-Ning Xu.
Working groups.
The Vaccine Network operates through a series of working groups. Each group has a specific focus and they feedback their findings to the Network. A full list of contributors for each working group is listed at the bottom of this page.
Working group 1: Identify and prioritise human and zoonotic diseases Chair: Miles Carrol, Public Health England.
Working group 1 identifies and prioritises human and zoonotic diseases with epidemic potential in human or animal populations, for which vaccines can have an outbreak altering impact.
The group also looks for gaps in knowledge about these diseases (including basic pathogen biology and host immunology), and where human and veterinary vaccinology can learn from each other.
The group’s findings are used to inform the investment strategy for the £120 million budget.
Working group 2: Understand how a vaccine will impact on an epidemic disease outbreak Chair: Eleanor Riley, The Roslin Institute.
Working group 2 aims to develop a systematic, shared understanding of under what circumstances a vaccine is likely or unlikely to have an impact on an epidemic disease outbreak.
This includes outbreaks where the pathogen is not currently known, and what vaccine technologies could play an important role in future outbreaks.
The group has created a decision tool based on this work.
Working group 3: Produce a process map for vaccine development, from discovery to deployment Chair: Tarit Mukhopadhyay, University College London.
 See the process maps.
Working group 4: Look at the manufacture of vaccines Chair: Jeffrey Almond, University of Oxford.
Working group 4 considers questions around the manufacture of vaccines, such as: where could a small scale or large scale facility make a difference in the UK? what could we build, and where/with whom could or should we collaborate with? what existing facilities are there that could support scale-up for manufacture of small stockpiles?
The Department of Health and Social Care is funding a number of projects to develop candidate vaccines for priority pathogens and to develop technologies and processes to support vaccine manufacturing and delivery in low and middle income countries (LMICs).
Fast tracked vaccines WITHOUT studies are being implemented( that could provide early warning signs of runaway immune response), partially funded by Gates and taxpayers money via govt’s.
 In the next 2-3 months dangerous vaccines are to be given to the public in a mass vaccination campaign in a way that you have no choice but to comply; you’re stuck in your house and you’ll beg for the vaccine to get back to“normal”. So the side effects are not revealed until the vaccine has already been widely distributed.
The planned vaccine will be an MRNA vaccine.
MRNA has direct coding. It will do what it is programmed to do. In this case the RNA can cause direct DNA mutation which can lead to cancer and autoimmune diseases.
On the 12th September 2019, at the joint EU-WHO “Global Vaccination Summit”,they announced the “10 Actions towards Vaccination for All”, with a “feasibility study” set to run from 2019 through 2021.
An exercise  was planned for global pandemic preparedness for a dangerous pathogen and pandemic which began in Sept
2019, created by WHO and World bank; members on its board include Chinese CDC, Fauci, Gates Foundation Wellcome trust and others.
 Many countries were given until July 2019 to submit  a cost effective plan that would allow them to be part of the global preparedness plan for a pandemic that would have two tests between Sept 2019 and Sept 2020.

How is it possible that all the same players involved in a global pandemic exercise are the same players who are involved in the CV pandemic that is happening in the same time frame?
The ultimate objective of the  Global Preparedness Plan board, which includes the Chinese CDC, Dr Goa, is to:

To create a Universal vaccine

Progress indicator(s) by September 2020 include,The United Nations (including WHO) conducts at least two system-wide
training and simulation exercises, including one for covering the deliberate
release of a lethal respiratory pathogen.

This would explain the expansion of vaccine manufacturing worldwide that occurred just prior to the test/pandemic.

In the UK, In 2018 Imperial College formed a partnership with CEPI, the Centre for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations contributed £8.4 million to partner Imperial College to develop vaccines in 16 weeks instead of 10 years. They called this platform, ‘RapidVac’ and the disease they called Disease X.

Imperial college are responsible for flawed models of the CV 19 and also created a ‘FOR PROFIT’ offshoot of a public vaccine manufacturing initiative just a week prior to the public announcement by World Health Organisation.


What do they have in store for those who object?oria/new-covid-19-restrictions-will-be-needed-for-anti-vaxxers-20200616-p55330.html

Leaflets outlining the truth about this pandemic have been created  and are available for download on this website.

Or direct from Google Drive.

PDF link

Also linked to another informative website in the leaflets menu.


Testing for CV19

In the beginning the public were diagnosed by symptoms only, then blood test that test for antibodies was introduced, this tests any viral or bacterial antibodies that could be from any known health problem and our immune system created these antibodies when in recovery, then the PCR test were used which use saliva which has also unverifiable results.

PCR tests were claimed to be insufficient for testing diseases by the test creator.These Test kits were claimed  to be for experimental use only by the CDc,s own website.

After this came on-site test kits which have a ten minute diagnosis, unapproved yet allowed to make up the final numbers in the claims of CV19.

None of the above are capable of making a CV19 diagnosis.

This doctor explains in more detail and offers a reward for anyone who can prove that CV19 exists.


Face masks could increase risk of infection, medical chief warns…/coronavirus-news-face…

A fraction of carbon dioxide previously exhaled is inhaled at each respiratory cycle. Those two phenomena increase breathing frequency and deepness, and hence they increase the amount of inhaled and exhaled air.

This may worsen the burden of covid-19 if infected people wearing masks spread more contaminated air. This may also worsen the clinical condition of infected people if the enhanced breathing pushes the viral load down into their lungs.

The BMJ warns of the dangers:

This study is the first RCT of cloth masks, and the results caution against the use of cloth masks. This is an important finding to inform occupational health and safety. Moisture retention, reuse of cloth masks and poor filtration may result in increased risk of infection. Further research is needed to inform the widespread use of cloth masks globally. However, as a precautionary measure, cloth masks should not be recommended for HCWs, particularly in high-risk situations, and guidelines need to be updated.

Dr. Russell Blaylock is a nationally recognized board-certified neurosurgeon, health practitioner, author, and lecturer in the U.S. He warns that not only do face masks fail to protect the healthy from getting sick, but they also create serious health risks to the wearer. The bottom line is that if you are not sick, you should not wear a face mask.…/

Many doctors report that masks are not effective for protection.

Mandatory Face Masks:

By Tasha Krett

Some key reasons to question and oppose the wearing of face masks (mandated on public transport in England from 15th June):
The Government’s mantra on Covid 19 is that they’re ‘’guided by the science’’ however it’s clear that they’re in fact guided by nefarious political agendas propped up by made to order pseudo-science and wildly exaggerated computer modelled projections (such as used by Neil Ferguson of Imperial College, London).

For example the overwhelming current (unbiased) scientific evidence indicates that not only are the majority of masks worn by the general public, ineffective but they are also detrimental to the health, as prolonged mask use can cause: Hypercapnia, Respiratory Acidosis (due to elevated C02 levels in the blood) and Hypoxia (even after only 30 minutes in some cases) which can even cause some people to faint putting them at potential risk of brain injury or even fatal brain bleeds from falls, and also putting taxi drivers and pilots who wear masks at risk of having accidents , as well as weakening the immune system which makes people more susceptible to colds and flu (which can then conveniently be attributed to an increase in alleged Covid cases in time for the pre-planned 2nd Wave (by those in power with a vested interest in padding the figures for example due to their proven financial ties to Bill Gates and Big Pharma/The Vaccine industry).

Also people with pre-existing respiratory conditions such as COPD and asthma etc are at extra risk from wearing masks, and the website actually has a Face Coverings Exemptions list which includes children under 11 years old and physical and mental health conditions etc and a Mask Exemption card can also be downloaded and printed off from that site (bearing in mind most people would technically meet the requirement of the exception:

‘’ Where a person removes their face covering to avoid harm or injury, or the risk of harm or injury, to themselves or others.’’

Also please consider how acquiescing to wearing masks on public transport/taxis is setting a dangerous precedent for masks to then be mandated in shops and even possibly in all public spaces outside of one’s own home!

As well as conditioning the public to accept even more draconian measures such as mandatory testing, mandatory use of the Track and Trace (Big Brother) App and most worryingly, leading up towards (defacto) mandatory (health and DNA destroying) experimental Covid vaccines ( which may be pushed through social and financial coercion and strict restriction of movement etc of those who don’t comply – aka medical tyranny, in direct contravention of the Nuremberg Code)!

Additionally, masks are used for social control through muzzling and de-humanising people and increasing social isolation through reducing the likelihood of social interaction, as well as being symbolic of the worrying increase in censorship of those who oppose the mainstream official narrative on Covid and other topics.
Masks also serve as props to keep project fear alive through the illusion of there being a ‘pandemic’ even though the UK government’s own website admitted on 19th March that Corona 19 was no longer considered to be a Highly contagious infectious disease (HCID) and it actually doesn’t meet the criteria of a real pandemic or even of an epidemic also bearing in mind that the virus has never even been isolated.

*(please see links below for more information) *

Unmasking the Truth: Studies Show Dehumanizing Masks Weaken You and Don’t Protect You

The Miserable Pseudo-Science Behind Face Masks, Social Distancing And Contact Tracing

Do Masks Even Work? Can You Be Forced To Wear One? Dr. Kaufman Weighs In

I am OSHA 10&30 certified. I know some of you are too. I don’t really know WHY OSHA hasn’t come forward and stopped the nonsense BUT
I wanna cover 3 things
• N95 masks and masks with exhale ports
• surgical masks
• filter or cloth masks

Okay so upon further inspection OSHA says some masks are okay and not okay in certain situations.
If you’re working with fumes and aerosol chemicals and you give your employees the wrong masks and they get sick you can be sued.
• N95 masks: are designed for CONTAMINATED environments. That means when you exhale through N95 the design is that you are exhaling into contamination. The exhale from N95 masks are vented to breath straight out without filtration. They don’t filter the air on the way out. They don’t need to.
Conclusion: if you’re in Stewart’s and the guy with Covid has N95 mask his covid breath is unfiltered being exhaled into Stewart’s (because it was designed for already contaminated environments, it’s not filtering your air on the way out)

• Surgical Mask: these masks were designed and approved for STERILE environments. The amount of particles and contaminants in the outside and indoor environments where people are CLOGG these masks very Very quickly. The moisture from your breath combined with the clogged mask with render it “useless” IF you come in contact with Covid and your mask traps it You become a walking virus dispenser. Everytime you put your mask on you are breathing the germs from EVERYWHERE you went. They should be changed or thrown out every “20-30 minutes in a non sterile environment”

Cloth masks: today three people pointed to their masks as the walked by me entering Lowe’s. They said “ya gotta wear your mask BRO” I said very clearly “those masks don’t work bro, in fact they MAKE you sicker” the “pshh’d” me.

By now hopefully you all know CLOTH masks do not filter anything. You mean the American flag one my aunt made? Yes. The one with sunflowers that looks so cute? Yes. The bandanna, the cut up t-shirt, the scarf ALL of them offer NO FILTERING whatsoever. As you exhale you are ridding your lungs of contaminants and carbon dioxide. Cloth masks trap this carbon dioxide the best. It actually risks health. The moisture caught in these masks can become mildew ridden over night. Dry coughing, enhanced allergies, sore throat are all symptoms of a micro-mold in your mask.

Ultimate Answer: N95 blows the virus into the air from a contaminated person.

The surgical mask is not designed for the outside world and will not filter the virus upon inhaling through it. It’s filtration works on the exhale. (Like a vacuum bag it only works one way)

Cloth masks are WORSE than none.

The CDC wants us to keep wearing masks. The masks don’t work.

Wash your hands. Sanitize your hands. Don’t touch stuff. Wash your phone. Don’t touch people. And keep your distance. Why? Because your breath stinks, your deodorant is failing, your shoes are old and stink, that shirts not clean, I like my space. Trust me I can hear you from here. Lots of reasons. But trust me. The masks do not work.
*Occupational Safety & Health Administration sited.
The top American organization for safety.
They regulate and educate asbestos workers, surgical rooms, you name it.
If your mask gives you security wear it, just know it is a false sense of security.

If stores stopped enforcing it no one would continue this nonsense.

A doctor discusses the disastrous impact that the lockdown will have on our health, which will be far reaching and more devastating than CV.

COVID – will lockdown lead to a major health disaster

Meanwhile the main stream media is reporting on false facts and figures with no accountability.

This chart presented by the mainstream media is WRONG.

If you watched Newsnight  you were given a lot of misinformation. Broadcasting that the UK has higher daily deaths than the whole of the EU is just WRONG.

180 people died in the last 24 hours, NOT 359. . This can be easily checked by downloading the daily data provided by NHS England.

359 is the total of reported deaths, but the people died on completely different days.

20 of the deaths occurred on June 2
47 on June 1
18 on May 31
66 were between May 2 and May 30
24 were in April
4 were in March

So a total of 179 of the 359 reported did not die on the day they said they did.

Do you still believe the whole of the BBC reporting on covid-19 now? Is it not obvious they are trying to make the situation worse than it is? Why would that be? Maybe to justify continuing the lockdown and keep the fear up?

This was the chart presented on Newsnight

The second chart shows the daily hospital deaths which the media never show, but which shows the epidemic in terms of deaths is going to zero (not including care homes, which of course should be reported separately, but are not).

Can you see how data is being manipulated and presented in a way that is completely misleading?

Remember also that all these people did not die ‘of covid’. They died ‘with covid’

~Jill Kirkwood.

The World Health Organization (WHO) just made an announcement that literally dismantled the PRIMARY REASON we shut down our economy, social-distanced from family and friends for months, destroyed businesses, stopped going to church, astronomically increased mental health-related breakdowns, submitted ourselves to mandatory mask-wearing orders, forced people to bury their loved ones with no funeral, etc.

Remember how often we were told that “asymptomatic carriers of Covid-19 can spread this disease to hundreds of people before they even realise they are infected?” It didn’t matter that this defied common sense and experience, did it? Nope. We were chastised over and over again and told to “listen to the experts.”

Some of us said, “Historically, the practice is to quarantine those who are sick.” But, the answer we received was “No, this isn’t enough with this Coronavirus because you can be spreading it long before you show any symptoms. Therefore, we have to put everyone in quarantine.” And those who questioned this idea were accused of being selfish, self-centered, “caring more about money than people,” and “wanting to kill grandma.”

How convenient now for the WHO to come out with a statement telling the world that they’ve actually realized that “spread of Covid-19 by asymptomatic carriers is rare.” Rare, of course, means that IT HARDLY EVER HAPPENS.

~Dan Mcghee

Three days after the World Health Organisation issued its revised advice on wearing masks, Dr. Maria Van Kerkhove, Head of the World Health Organisation’s emerging diseases and zoonosis unit, at a news briefing from the United Nations agency’s Geneva headquarters, reported that:

‘From the data we have, it still seems to be rare that an asymptomatic person actually transmits onward to a secondary individual. We have a number of reports from countries who are doing very detailed contact tracing. They’re following asymptomatic cases. They’re following contacts. And they’re not finding secondary transmission onward. It’s very rare.’

This is not what the UK Government or other governments around the world wanted to hear in order to justify keeping their populations under lockdown and imposing measures such as wearing masks, and the very next day Dr. Kerkhove was forced to retract her statements, and articles that had reported her remarks were rewritten in another of the increasing examples of censorship of online information that contradicts government policy.

“First, let’s handle the question of vaccination.

There is a measles vaccine, yet it kills 140,000 a year.

There is a pneumococcus vaccine, yet it kills between 2 and 2.5 million a year.

There is a hepatitis B vaccine, yet it kills 140,000. There is a tetanus vaccine, yet it kills 89,000 annually. There is a retrovirus vaccine, yet it kills 800,000. There is a HPV vaccine, yet it kills 250,000.

There is a tuberculosis vaccine, yet it kills 1.5 million.

There is an influenza vaccine, yet it kills 650,000 to 1 million deaths a year.

None of these are considered pandemics, cause entire economies to be shut down or, or call for any extraordinary measures at all.”

~Nicholas Manousos

Meanwhile in UK, CV claims  have been doubled due to testing errors.

Meanwhile, those behind the false claims openly admit to have joined forces with each other in order to produce vaccines for CV which they have already started to manufacture without waiting for any trial results!

So many unanswered questions.

How was it possible for Bill Gates to help negotiate a $100 Billion deal for contact tracing months before the reported pandemic?

The UK government are sharing confidential patient data in the  coronavirus response with a CIA funded  company called Palantir.
Palantir is a data mining company that cut its teeth working for the Pentagon and the CIA in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Some of its customers alongside our Govt and the NHS are JP Morgan Chase, Airbus, the FBI ad the CIA. They profess to uncover human trafficking rings,  child exploitation, respond to national disasters, TRACK DISEASES, prevent terrorist attacks etc.   It’s software was rumoured to have been used to track Osama Bin Laden. (Those people who are aware of the full facts surrounding Bin Laden will realise the implications of this claim.)

Palantir were so eager to be involved in the UK and the NHS that they chose to allow 10% of their workforce to work on a government data project to predict surges in the NHS demands during the CV19 pandemic from  which the company  earned one pound, despite the costs of wages for the workforce. A  BuzzFeed News investigation revealed that many of the company’s most consistent clients are entities that cannot afford to pay its high fees — which can exceed $US1 ($1) million per month — including a slew of federal agencies that, since 2007, have paid the company about $US120 ($158) million.

Palantir was co founded  by Peter Thiel, a right-wing billionaire, who has set up ‘HHS Protect Now’ in the US, which – according to Forbes magazine – won a $17 million contract on 10 April from the US Department of Health and Human Services Program Support Center to provide detailed data from a wide range of organisations on the spread of COVID-19. Thiel is publicly backing Trump’s 2020 re-election campaign.

Those recently  given contracts  within the NHS with no competion were Palantir as well as  Google, Microsoft,  Amazon Web Services, and Faculty.

Peter Thiel co owns Palantir 12%, it’s valued at $20 billion.  Set to go public this year, now it’s embedded in our NHS.
PALANTIR  is working with UN, WHO, UK ( NHS),USA, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), FBI, CIA  and   Cummings.
 Palantir software is designed to synthesise and collect data to help govt employees to stop plots before they’re executed.
 Law enforcement can use it to search for links in phone records, photos, vehicle information, criminal history, biometrics, credit card transactions, addresses and police reports.  In fact it’s been used for “predictive” policing.
Thiel co founded Pay Pal then went into create Clarium Capita a global macro hedge fund.   Thiel recently sold 73% shares in Facebook but he still owns 59,913 class A shares FB.
The name Palantir comes from JRR Tolkien –  “One that sees from afar” or “ seeing stone”.  It’s sometimes known as Palantir Gotham.  This integrates and transforms data where it’s ‘enriched’ and ‘mapped’ into meaningfully defined objects ie… people, places and events that connect them. It was formed in 2004 under a secretive veil.  Peter Thiel is one of Trumps biggest backers.   It’s secretive as many of their “customer agreements involve NDAs so they deliberately fly under the radar. 

Gotham (formerly Palantir Government) is designed for the needs of intelligence, law enforcement, and homeland security customers. Gotham works by importing large reams of “structured” data (like spreadsheets) and “unstructured” data (like images) into one centralized database, where all of the information can be visualized and analyzed in one workspace.

The company is known for three projects in particular: Palantir Gotham, Palantir Metropolis and Palantir Foundry. Palantir Gotham is used by counter-terrorism analysts at offices in the United States Intelligence Community (USIC) and United States Department of Defense, fraud investigators at the Recovery Accountability and Transparency Board, and cyber analysts at Information Warfare Monitor, while Palantir Metropolis is used by hedge funds, banks, and financial services firms.


Gandalf: A palantir is a dangerous tool, Saruman.
Saruman: Why? Why should we fear to use it?
Gandalf: They are not all accounted for, the lost Seeing-stones. We do not know who else may be watching.
Source: Lord of the Rings

On 10 April 2020, Palantir won a $17 million contract from US Department of Health and Human Services Program Support Center to provide detailed data from a wide range of organisations on the spread of COVID-19. 

On 12 April 2020, citing confidential documents, the Guardian reported Palantir would be involved in a Covid-19 data project which “includes large volumes of data pertaining to individuals, including protected health information, Covid-19 test results, the contents of people’s calls to the NHS health advice line 111 and clinical information about those in intensive care”. 
Despite assurances by the NHS that the medical data  will be returned to the NHS or desrtroyed after the pandemic, Palantir are notorius for making it difficult for companies to  extract from them without losing embedded software.
Palantir took over Project Maven from Google early this year after Google had concerns over its ethics, this is a Pentagon program to build an AI system that could use drones to target people.

The Canary reported that Palantir:

was awarded contracts to handle vast data sets on UK citizens for British spy agency GCHQ. The company also helped develop an aid for the spyware XKEYSCORE programme. And a 2010 presentation on the joint NSA-GCHQ ‘Mastering the Internet‘ surveillance programme recommended running Palantir software on Android handsets (smartphones and tablets). Palantir was also used as part of a GCHQ project which sought to improve the agency’s ability to collect tweets, blog posts and news articles.

Dominic Cummings is heavily involved  in affairs of the UK as the chief adviser to Boris Johnson. 
He has embedded himself in the new role created to  replace the chief of staff position (which was vacant since the resignation in February 2020 of Chancellor Sajid Javid) Javid had resigned after refusing to follow orders from Cummings.
Cummings was also the special adviser to Micheal Gove from 2007 to 2014 and the man behind the ‘Vote Leave’ campaign.
A blog written by Dominic Cummings in 2017 references Palantir and Peter Thiel, it also states that it was possible back then to :
Deploy a drone with facial recognition to identify a relevant face and blow it up!

Peter Thiel was also on the board of Facebook during the Cambridge Analytica data gathering of FB users which was reportedly helped by  members of Palantir. Thiel was an initial investor in Facebook.

Cambridge Analytica was formed by a white house chief strategist and had people filling in a seemingly innocent facebook survey (masquerading as a quiz) only to find out that the data of 87 million FB users and all their contacts was made available to the company with no permission granted.

Big Data is the name of the game, it is dangerous and has the potential to effect every part of our lives.

AI may be good at finding trends in raw data and correlations in diverse data sets but the correlations it finds are not based on the best outcomes for the public but rather the best outcomes for those in control of the data which is at best discriminatory and at worse, potentially diabolical.

Data security within the health service was once its number one priority, especially after a series of high level breaches.

In the US the top three breaches of data-security were from the health care industry.

The most valuable data is pharmaceutical and biotech intellectual property. According to a “Health Warning” report by the Intel Security McAfee Labs, cyber-criminals are putting more time and resources into exploiting and monetising health care data.

In 2017 the Information commissioner in the UK was investigating concerns that the medical records of 26 million patients were embroiled in a major security breach amid warnings that the IT system used by thousands of GPs was not secure.

The Information Commissioner was investigating concerns that records held by 2,700 practices – one in three of those in England – could be accessed by hundreds of thousands of strangers.

Palantir, who are one of the companies given access to our medical records,  won a contract for $876 million  to provide the the US army with software.

So despite the fact that Palantir are working with UN, WHO, UK (NHS), USA, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), the FBI and the CIA as well as Cummings, by putting themselves in  position by claiming  that they are only providing the tools to help assess the data from hospitals, they have embroiled themselves into our NHS  by offering  for free, to assess how bad the situation is? 

Given the background of Palantir, notorious for its heavy involvement in military and security contracts and its CIA connections, this is NOT in the best interests of the public in UK who should have been involved and informed on who was given the contract, made even more scandalous by the blogs of  the Prime ministers adviser, Dominic Cummings and his obvious ‘admiration’ for both Thiel and Palantir as evidenced in his 2017 blogs.

FedScoop: Inside Palantir’s work with the CDC, HHS to synthesize COVID-19 data

It would not be the first time that patient data has been sold unknowingly to the US.

Another quote from Cummings/Thiel blog from 2017:

This quote shows that he has globalist leanings despite the fact that he headed the campaign to leave the European Union.

Palantir created Investigative Case Management (ICM) to help deport immigrants from US.

This gave access to information on a subject’s schooling, family relationships, employment information, phone records, immigration history, foreign exchange program status, personal connections, biometric traits, criminal records, and home and work addresses.

One of the Immigration Case Management (ICM) data collection tools by Palantir is Falcon. Documents also state that FALCON includes access to services provided by Cellebrite, an Israeli company that specialises in software used to breach cellphones.

Giving Palantir access to confidential NHS patients data is outsourcing with no scrutiny whilst giving health duties from the NHS to the private sector and can be seen as crossing a red line according to civil liberties groups.

In 2013, Investigative journalist Lee Fang explained that:

Palantir’s rise to prominence, now reportedly valued at $8 billion, came from initial investment from In-Q-Tel, the venture capital arm of the CIA, and close consultation with officials from the intelligence-gathering community, including disgraced retired admiral John Poindexter and Bryan Cunningham, a former adviser to Condoleezza Rice.

In 2010, Palantir, along with firms HBGary Federal and Berico, were solicited by the US Chamber of Commerce to target its critics. The group began “plotting a campaign of snooping on activists’ families and even using sophisticated hacking tools to break into computers”.

As Fang notes:

The tactics described in the proposals are illegal. However, there were no discussions in the leaked e-mails about the legality of using such tactics. Rather, the Chamber’s attorneys and the three contractors quibbled for weeks about how much to charge the Chamber for these hacking services. At one point, they demanded $2 million a month.

Jim Killock of the Open Rights Group (ORG) civil liberties organisation has warned The Canary that surveillance and analytics firm Palantir is “not a company you want handling sensitive personal data”

Killock warns that, as a result, Palantir may become impossible to remove [from public service contracts], and increasingly [become] involved with personal data. They have already been granted access to ‘anonymised’ personal data – this is usually data than can be relinked to people in practice, so already promises that they wouldn’t handle personal data have been broken.

‘Surveillance firms have no place in handling sensitive data’ – Killock

Killock’s position is clear: when personal data is handled, [Palantir] should be excluded while they have a surveillance business, in much the same way as companies like Lockheed Martin which sell surveillance tech as well as business tech must be treated with caution.

In reality, Palantir’s offer of help for the NHS should probably not have come as a surprise.

The company has been courting the UK health service – and its £120bn annual budget – for years and its software has already won a place on the Government’s online catalogue for civil servants to pick from. Access to NHS data is among the most lucrative centralised data sets in the world.

Global partnerships have been at the forefront of the UN Sustainable goal models for decades.

All the information involving statistics and spreading of the alleged virus from the CDC is from data collected by Palantir who are also reporting to public health agencies around the globe including UK.

Whilst commercial manufacturers and government agencies are using Palantir collaboratively to meet demand for supplies.

Palantir allowed 10% of its workforce to work in the NHS in the early stages of CV. Even though it cost the company anywhere between tens and hundreds of thousands of pounds in wages, they offered to charge the NHS £1. allowed surveillance experts Palantir to be in control of the ‘claims’ made of the demands on the NHS during the pandemic because of predictions they made.

Predictions and statistics regarding the CV pandemic in the UK and US has been collaborated by a team from Palantir. Questions have arisen in the past from false data that “predictive-analysis” systems like Palantir’s can generate.

Palantir who has clients that mostly consists of military and intelligence outfits and large financial institutions has embedded itself in our NHS.

Documents show how Palantir applies Silicon Valley’s playbook to domestic law enforcement. New users are welcomed with discounted hardware and federal grants, sharing their own data in return for access to others’. When enough jurisdictions join Palantir’s interconnected web of police departments, government agencies, and databases, the resulting data trove resembles a pay-to-access social network—a Facebook of crime that’s both invisible and largely unaccountable to the citizens whose behavior it tracks.

Another company given the ‘uncontested’ contract to mine confidential data from NHS patients is Faculty.

Cummings based his Brexit models on ‘Faculty’ created ideas. Faculty were known as Advanced Skills Institute as this time. Faculty have also been involved in the new AI lab created in partnership with the NHSX since March 2020.

Faculty is responsible for turning the data Palantir collates into actionable insights for hospitals, as well as government officials and ministers. 

Faculty has until recently remained largely unknown outside of the data science community, but claims to have “Europe’s most experienced team of AI and machine learning specialists”, having poached some of the UK’s best data science PhD students through its fellowship programme.

However, the spotlight has turned to the company after its chief executive’s brother, Ben Warner, was named as one of the two political advisers who attended the SAGE meetings in March. The other was the prime minister’s chief adviser Dominic Cummings. Warner and Cummings worked together on Vote Leave and the former has been appointed as a data science adviser to Downing Street in recent months.

Palantir’s NHS data project “may outlive coronavirus crisis”

Interestingly, the UK Government signed a year long contract with Faculty just a short time before the CV was claimed to be a pandemic. One has to beg the question:

“How did many contracts with universal  players occur just PRIOR to CV?”

Data harvesting is nothing new for Boris Johnson and Dominic Cummings as they also turn GOV.UK into a “platform to allow targeted and personalised information to be gathered, analysed and fed back actively to support key decision making”  just as happened during Brexit.

More than 8,000 people have signed a petition for the government to “release details of the secret data deals.” The Department of Health said on the 14th of May that it would need another 20 days to consider whether to release the data-sharing agreements, while assessing the balance between public and “commercial interests”.

The risks and costs associated with health care data security breaches are too high, and the confidential, personal health data of millions are at risk. This makes data security health care’s biggest concern today and allowing it to fall into the hands of unscrupulous companies should be stopped by everyone who uses the NHS.

Everyone in the UK!

In the past, data about millions of NHS patients has been sold to the US and other international pharmaceutical companies for research, raising new fears about America’s growing ambitions to access lucrative parts of the health service after Brexit.

US pharmaceutical giants, including Merck (referred to outside the US and Canada as MSD, Merck, Sharp and Dohme), Bristol-Myers Squibb and Eli Lilly, have paid the Department of Health and Social Care, which holds data derived from GPs’ surgeries, for licences costing up to £330,000 each in return for anonymised data to be used for research.

“Do patients know – have they even been told by the one in seven GP practices across England that pass on their clinical details – that their medical histories are being sold to multinational pharma companies in the US and around the world?””

“Patients should know how their data is used. There should be no surprises. While legitimate research for public health benefit is to be encouraged, it must always be consensual, safe and properly transparent,” said Phil Booth, coordinator of medConfidential, which campaigns for the privacy of health data.

How did Palantir have knowledge of the CV before other companies, as evidenced by its actions of recalling staff from abroad?

An annual report released in September 2019 by the Global Preparedness Monitoring Board released a report. This was a joint effort between WHO and the World Bank.

In this first annual report, members of the board (who also include those involved in CV) call for tests globally on the global prepardness for a pandemic caused by a lethal pathogen.

They call for a cost effective plan from more than 53 countries to be included and sent by July 2019, with a view to run tests from Sept 2019 to Sept 2020.

Members of the board.

This means that an action plan costed and  developed  by July 2019 from over 53 countries was due to begin for a year from Sept 2019 to Sept 2020. 


The report openly discusses having multisectoral simulation exercises.


What are the chances/odds that a global pandemic prepardness exercise involving WHO and the Chinese CDC, Fauci, Wellcome and Gates foundation would be simultaneously occuring in which contracts were being signed PRIOR to the CV pandemic, a prepardness exercise happening at the same time is exactly the MO during the London bombing 7/7, 9/11, Boston marathon, to name but a few.

It is not beyond the realms of possibilty for the whole event to be created, with the help of the board members such as the Director-General of the Chinese CDC and Fauci, monitored by government insiders such as Palantir and Faculty. 

Implemented by all the countries who are members of the WHO and used as a further tool to create the desired UN agenda of  technological advances that offer less freedom to the public whilst achieving a tighter control system for governments and agencies.

Thiel is on record stating: ‘I no longer believe that freedom and democracy are compatible.’

The Global Prepardness Report thanks the John Hopkins University for help with the background paper, the same organisation who are at the forefront of the CV pandemic.

The Global Pepardness Report also thanked Dr. Bernhard Schwartländer.

Schwartländer is a WHO Representative in China and a member of the World Economic Forum who hosted the online pandemic mock up called Event 201.


Michale Ryan was also thanked.

 Ryan is Chief Executive Director of the WHO Health Emergencies Programme which is tasked with the international containment and treatment of COVID-19.

Some other names who have contributed to the Global Prepardeness Report include:

Peter Salama was also thanked for his work. Salama died suddenly in January.

He was a member of GAVI since June 2019 and despite being the Executive Director for Emergency Preparedness and Responses at WHO, he was downgraded by WHO to Executive Director of Universal Healthcare in March 2019.

Months later in June 2019, he joined the board of GAVI.
Then during the time that GAVI were celebrating 20 years in business on January 2020 in Geneva, he died of a heart attack aged 51.

GAVI was created at the World Economic Forum 20 years ago.

Dr. Jaouad Mahjour is Assistant Director-General for Emergency Preparedness. Acting WHO Regional Director for the Eastern Mediterranean.

Gabriella Stern.

The report states that the UN and WHO conducts at least two system-wide training and simulation exercises, including one for covering the deliberate release of a lethal respiratory pathogen.

We have very strong grounds to be suspicious of a planned global response the same time as the CV pandemic.

This report from Gulf news on March 2020 claims that 194 countries have contracted the CV.

The same number of countries that are bound to implement the WHOs International Health Regulations (2005) (IHR). This binding instrument of international law entered into force on 15 June 2007.


GAVI to which the UK Govt is one of the biggest donors, has on its governing board many pharma industry representatives.

This group sets the price for vaccines, stimulates needs and using public money and money from “donors” is highly involved in the vaccine process.
The pharma industry sell vaccines to other countries, which is paid for by GAVI, the pharma companies can then collect that money back from a special fund called the Advance Market Committment.
So they can set the price of vaccines involving the same companies that stand to profit; a clear example of conflicts of interest.

Global health organisations like this are complicit in ensuring corporate welfare at the expense of the public and the public’s health!
In July 2017, Madagascar had an Economic Development Document drawn up by the IMF. This was to involve the country in the UNs Agenda 20/30 to develop its natural resources.
One of the steps for implementation includes, “Promotion of Innovative financing such as those used by GAVI”.
Six weeks later, Madagascar were reporting a plague!

You have heard of DARPA, what about ARPA?

Dominic Cummings, the PM’s aide, has been forging ahead to create ARPA, the UK version of DARPA. In his 2017 blog, Cummings discusses the values of ARPA, laughed out of Whitehall in previous years. The Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) invited academics to a meeting at 10 Downing Street on the 25th September 2019 to discuss plans for the agency. Cummings was present at the meeting.

A similar plan to the Advanced Research Projects Agency was also mentioned in the Conservative Manifesto in discussions about high reward research agencies.

The budget in March 2020 included £800 million for the new agency.

ARPA made its first formal appearance in the October 2019 Queen’s Speech, which stated that:

“My Government is committed to establishing the United Kingdom as a world leader in scientific capability and space technology. Increased investment in science will be complemented by the development of a new funding agency, a more open visa system, and an ambitious national space strategy.” The background briefing document went on to elaborate that this would involve: “Backing a new approach to funding emerging fields of research and technology, broadly modelled on the US Advanced Research Projects Agency.

ARPA was also featured during the General Election campaign. In the accompanying press release to a speech given by Boris Johnson in Coventry on 13 November 2019, the Conservatives committed that they would: “Set up a British Advanced Research Projects Agency- investing £800 million over five years for a new research institution in the style of the US ARPA- to support blue skies, high-reward, research and investment in UK leadership in artificial intelligence and data.”

In a 2020 paper, co-authored by Boris Johnson’s brother Jo and published by the right-wing thinktank Policy Exchange, another co-author argues that ARPA could work closely with the NHS, at least in terms of procurement:

At the very least ensuring procurement teams are engaged with ARPA mission leads right from the start and that they are empowered to think beyond the parameters of existing solutions and performance measures. If it is to go beyond central government to involve the NHS, local government and other major spenders, it may require new nationwide guidance or legislation to ensure that innovation is actively considered as a factor in procurement across the wider public sector.

NHS “procurement” in this context implies NHS privatisation.

Cummings blog dated 2nd January 2020, entitled ‘Game Theory ‘in which he discusses the requirements for ARPA :

The same blog again quotes Peter Thiel.

Another proponent of the science of prediction. An unhealthy fascination with Thiel appears to thread through the prime minister’s aides blogs.

In this blog he also speaks of: Tetlock/IARPA prediction tournaments.

IARPA is interested in methods that can be used to generate probabilistic forecasts for events of interest to national security decision makers, including political, social, and military events on one-month to one-year time horizons.

Superforecasting, the ability to predict the future. Proffessor Philiph Tetlock wrote a book called The Art and Science of Prediction.

Tetlock co-wrote the book after he was involved in a project that he also co-created called the ‘Good Judgement Project’ which launched as a competition by IARPA in 2011 for four years, to identify methods to  forecast events.

“harnessing the wisdom of the crowd to forecast world events”.

 Parallels could be drawn in how both Thiel’s  powerful moves to instill some of his ideas into the US administration, and Cumming’s similar powerful moves into the UK govt and NHS, certainly gives credence to the idea that they are both on a mission to bring about the destruction of the respective systems.

On May 21st 2020 IARPA, the US intelligence community research labs, put a call out for rapid diagnostic tools including tools to track and predict CV as well as diagnostics.

They include offers of funding contactless test methods to test CV such as breath test analysis to be used in shops and public transport, contact tracing for those with no mobile phones, via other means such as the Internet of Things and wastewater testing.

They also offered funds for data tools to ‘predict’ CV spread. If you read the PDF embedded below, you will see that IARPA want to fund even more outlandish diagnostics. (Please make sure to read the  document below to understand the diagnostic tools being requested by IARPA for CV.)


Trump proclaimed his withdrawal from the WHO to the world via the media.  According to this report, he does not have the jurisdiction to just pull out of funding in this way. He has to bind by the agreement to fund them for another year AFTER he declares his withdrawal.

Palantir and Contact Tracing.

Janet Daley asks this question in the Telegraph:

“Should a free society tolerate the introduction of a witch finder surveillance system in which anyone who happens to test positive for a virus is permitted to trigger the incarceration of any other person for 14 days, possibly in solitary confinement if he or she is the sole member of the household, simply by naming them, without any fear of being identified as the “accuser”?”

Look at the below graphic. The death rate is 0.26%. Most people will have either no symptoms or a mild illness. And if you say “yes but they could spread it to other people…”, well, the answer is the same, most of them will also have no symptoms or a mild illness. In fact the death rate is about the same as flu.

So anyone who comes into contact with someone who tests positive (and remember that the test has an up to 80% false positive rate), will have to isolate themselves for 14 days, when they are very likely to be fit and healthy.

Palantir has two contracts for CV tracking with Human Health Services.

A tool called ‘HHS Protect NOW’.

A study was performed in May 2020, a study funded by the Wellcome trust, which determined that digital contact tracing could play a critical role in avoiding or leaving lockdown.

The Wellcome Trust study also used the original study by Ferguson in its appraisal and concluded that contact tracing alongside social distancing and quarantine were required to combat the virus.

A mobile phone app can make contact tracing and notification instantaneous upon case confirmation. By keeping a temporary record of proximity events between individuals, it can immediately alert recent close contacts of diagnosed cases and prompt them to self-isolate.

Apps with similar aims have been deployed in China.

Public health policy was implemented using an app that was not compulsory but was required to move between quarters and into public spaces and public transport.

The app allows a central database to collect data on user movement and CV diagnosis and displays a green, amber, or red code to relax or enforce restrictions on movement. The database is reported to be analysed by an artificial intelligence algorithm that issues the colour codes. The app is a plug-in for the WeChat and Alipay apps and has been generally adopted.

Funding: This work was funded by the Li Ka Shing Foundation. A.N. is funded by the ARTIC Network (Wellcome Trust Collaborators Award 206298/Z/17/Z). The funders played no role in study conception or execution.

The study paper is clearly influenced by Wellcome trust despite the claims in the study that it had no conception or execution of the study.

15,000 calls centres are set to be opened up with a days training for staff for the new Corona phone app.

Whilst Apple and Google have joined forces to create an app for contact tracing, others have warned of the dangers.

An open letter, published on 19 April 2020 and signed by professors from 26 countries, urges governments and public health authorities to evaluate the potential dangers of developing contact-tracing technology.

Some of the Bluetooth-based proposals would enable (via mission creep) a form of government or private sector surveillance. 

Phil Booth, coordinator at privacy group medConfidential, which has previously called on NHSX to be upfront about how the app will be used, said: “It’s time for them [NHSX] to stop talking and blogging about being transparent, and actually be transparent. Where are the DPIAs, the other Impact Assessments, the Data Sharing Agreements, the contracts? We were promised they would be published over a month ago, and still nothing.

“The lack of transparency is beyond an embarrassment. The real danger is that this undermines trust – for if they can’t show that they are and have been competent, honest and reliable throughout, then NHSX just failed the three pillars of trustworthiness. Not good for an experimental app that demands 60% of the population risk their lives to it.”

It comes as the privacy and security of contact-tracing apps has been called into question by a number of experts.


As of 1 July 2019, NHSX, which brings teams from the Department of Health and Social Care, NHS England and NHS Improvement together into one unit, is responsible for driving digital transformation and leading policy, implementation and change in this area.

The Open Rights group are campaigning for more transparency on the centralised app being built by govt.

In the UK a centralised app will mean that anyone reporting symptoms will go into a database and that will use AI to decide who to alert amongst contacts.

Health authority’s servers and the government could end up with an enormous database cataloguing everyone’s social interactions.

The proposed system by the UK involves Oxford University who have also been funded by the UK government. They also founded a vaccine manufacturing initiative with Imperial College.

Here is a list to all the countries using the contact trace apps.

In 2019, Privacy and others asked for information regarding the contract between the Dept of Health and Amazons Alexa app which the Dept of Health were reluctant to discuss, but finally after many FOI requests they released the contract with many parts redacted.

On the 5th June 2020  Privacy International, Big Brother Watch, medConfidential, Foxglove, and Open Rights Group received answers from the 10 questions they sent Palantir about their work on the project to seek clarification and assurances. The conclusions were that the answers fail to clarify the extent of the project and what protections exist.

In June 2020 the NHSX app which cost tax payers  nearly £12 million was scrapped by Hancock in favour of another app.

Meanwhile AI will dictate who needs to attend hospital appointments.

How can the UK Imperial college professor have got away using an outdated data modelling and predictions software from 13 years ago intended for Influenza and then refuse to allow that to be scrutinised?

His supposed ‘resignation’ from the top job for not sticking to his own guidelines appears highly likely to be a ‘get out clause’ before the SHTF.

This could be evidenced by magazines like the ‘Spectator’ asking serious questions of his ability to be taken seriously when he has got it wrong dramatically on so many occasions.

Which is all well and good but when you factor into the equation that the commissioning editor of the ‘Spectator’ is Mary Wakefield, the wife of Dominic Cummings, then we can see how Ferguson plays into the story. 

This was the story in the same magazine April 2020:


Jack Wakefield is the  brother of Mary Wakefield, the brother in law to Cummings, Cummings and Jack were friends then Jack introduced him to his sister and they later married.

Jack Wakefield launched Firtash in the UK. He was the director of Firtash 2008 – 2013. The company was directly involved in the scandal involving the Ukrainian oligarch at the centre of the Donald Trump-Ukraine scandal.

The COG-UK Consortium is an innovative partnership of NHS organisations, the four Public Health Agencies of the UK, the Wellcome Sanger Institute and more than 12 academic institutions providing sequencing and analysis capacity.

It is supported by £20 million funding from the UK Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC), UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) and the Wellcome Trust.

The goal of the COG-UK Consortium is to deliver large-scale SARS-CoV-2 genome sequencing capacity to hospitals, regional NHS centres and the Government that, when combined with epidemiological and clinical information, will inform interventions and policy decisions during the current UK COVID-19 epidemic.

Various partners listed here include universities,including Ferguson at Imperial college, genomics and  public health bodies.

One of its aims include to:

Drive the development of advanced research techniques and insights through greater data integration (for example by combining health records, virus genomics, human genomics and metagenomics).

All the labs collecting CV samples  throughout the UK are overseen by the Wellcome lab and it is seen as the project manager.

This means that a pharmaceutical company (Wellcome) and a CIA fronted data mining company (Palantir) are not just at the forefront and centre of CV information, statistics and data but they also stand to profit from that position.

Collecting DNA from samples is another avenue that needs serious consideration and the implications fully understood. 

Ferguson along with others, should be made to face independent tribunals in which all the evidence that he has used should be publicly scrutinised, his conflict of interests, of which there are many, should be analysed and if necessary, criminal charges brought. 

A week before the WHO announced the CV to the public, members of Imperial College created a private, for profit offshoot of the Vaccine Manufacturing and Innovation Centre UK called VMIC UK SERVICES LTD.

Numerous links to various organisations and profit making enterprises that cover both contact tracing, data mining and vaccines are linked to Imperial College, CDC, Big Pharma, WHO and the Gates Foundation, which means that the evidence for corruption is apparent yet ignored by main stream media in favour of a fear induced coma that seeks to indoctrinate the unsuspecting public into a complete relinquishing of all hard fought for human and personal rights, whilst echoing false alarmist figures that do not stand up under scrutiny.

Anyone who dares to share any information that can contradict the mainstream and its constant repetitive and  false information is being demonised online.

A selective amnesia seems to have blanket covered the entire world when it comes to some of the false news that governments and corrupt agencies have been previously involved with.

How many people died in Iraq after a false statement was made by the PM, backed by ministers, in which the media was fully complicit in spreading those lies? 

Insanity is repeating the same mistakes and expecting different results.

CV numbers have been padded; this was the only reason that the CDC changed the way it collaborates the number of deaths recorded. Making it  feature highly amongst other comorbidity deaths has blurred the line between what is reported and what is real.

The crossroads that we face is obvious, we cannot look to a time years in the future, to assess and scrutinise what happened over CV claims, like we were able to after the Iraq war because by then it will be too late.

The difference between then and now is that civil surveillance is being ushered in on the back of CV allowing selective enforcement and vaccination will be final solution.

This is an extremely dangerous game being played with the future of humanity. Giving private information to companies that train and build AI models for use in future war fare models, such as the contract Palantir   have taken over from Google, to build drones that can attack the public, gleefully blogged about by the PM’s adviser is nothing short of an impending nightmare. 

We must all take responsibly for any information that we come across regarding events that affect us and learn to discern truth from lies.

Further links: 
How Cummings (Tories) recruited Wakefield.


This article has been made possible with information collaborated between Annie Logical Uncensored and Deborah Evans. The author of this website wishes to thank Deborah for her hard work in research.