Spread the word far and wide.

During the years leading up to the CV pandemic claims, many top level meetings took place. Pandemic preparedness was discussed in detail and the need for all countries to ‘be prepared’ for a possible pandemic.

It was clear that an agreement had been reached that a preparedness exercise BEFORE a pandemic was cost effective and necessary.

In this document dated July 2018, a meeting took place for global health security at the John Hopkins Centre which was attended by 70 organisations, all of whom were asked for input into global health security strategy .https://www.centerforhealthsecurity.org/our-work/pubs_archive/pubs-pdfs/2018/180820-us-global-health-security-strategy-meeting.pdf


During this meeting it was stated that although concentrating efforts on a ‘dangerous pathogen’ was limiting, it allowed  for the DoD to work with other partners and countries, which would not be ordinarily permitted and that it would be cost effective to have plans in place BEFORE a real pandemic.



Proof that the plans for global preparedness needed to involve a ‘dangerous pathogen’ so that the DoD could have full control.

This was no ordinary meeting, it was attended by the following:



They discuss how it enables them to identify what does and does not work. And allows the DoD involvement helping share several military goals.


So it is clear that in July 2018, the decision was made in a global health security meeting at the John Hopkins Centre,  for the need to test run a security risk. This would have to involve a lethal ‘pathogen’ to enable the DoD to have full involvement and allow global health security to be coordinated in all countries.

The John Hopkins Centre  is at the forefront of the claims being made about this CV pandemic.

On 18th September 2019, the John Hopkins Centre created this document on behalf of the Global Preparedness Monitoring Board.


This report states:

A report presented to a Global Preparedness Monitoring Board, by the JHC months before the reported outbreak, which discusses how preparedness plans should be followed. 

 The  GPMB is a monitoring board that has members who are  involved in all aspects of the ‘reported’  CV pandemic, including the Chinese CDC Director General and others such as Fauci, Gates Foundation and Wellcome trust. 



The GMPB recommended:

Calling for the UN and WHO to conduct two training and simulation exercises on the release of a lethal  respiratory pathogen to help mobilise national, international and multilateral action. Between September 2019 and September 2020.

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.


My full article explains in depth links to agencies and their involvement. 


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.


How is possible for a high level ‘Pandemic Preparedness Plan ‘ exercise to be called for and initiated  involving agencies such as WHO, UN, CDC, National Academy of Medicine, Wellcome Trust, Gates Foundation, NIH, Chinese CDC,  FDA, BMJ, DHHS, Dept of Defence, Homeland Security, National Security Council, John Hopkins Centre,  DARPA and many International agencies and departments, at the SAME TIME as a reportedly genuine pandemic?

It is obviously apparent that they are one and the same.

The John Hopkins Centre at the forefront of preparedness for global health,  with the input of many agencies, agreed upon the need to create plans to establish the shortcomings of all WHO countries to react to future pandemics.


• Jarbas Barbosa da Silva Jr., Pan American Health Organization
• Rick Bright, US Department of Health and Human Services
• Elizabeth Cameron, Nuclear Threat Initiative
• Gail Carson, University of Oxford
• Jeremy Farrar, Wellcome Trust
• Keiji Fukuda, University of Hong Kong
• Bruce Gellin, Sabin Vaccine Institute
• Julie Lyn Hall, International Federation of the Red Cross and Red Crescent
• William Hall, Wellcome Trust
• Keith Hamilton, World Organisation for Animal Health
• Anne Huvos, World Health Organization
• Chikwe Ihekweazu, Nigeria Centre for Disease Control
• Bruce Innis, PATH
• Daniel Jernigan, US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
• Kerri-Ann Jones, Pandemic Influenza Preparedness Framework Advisory Group
to the World Health Organization
• Rebecca Katz, Georgetown University
• Lawrence Kerr, US Department of Health and Human Services
• Marie-Paule Kieny, INSERM
• Marion Koopmans, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center, The Netherlands
• Amanda McClelland, Resolve to Save Lives
• Hilary Marston, National Institutes of Health
• Claudia Nannei, World Health Organization
• Toomas Palu, World Bank Group
• Diane Post, National Institutes of Health
• Eduard Salahov, Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation
• Ethan Settembre, Seqirus
• Cecilia Mundaca Shah, Forum on Microbial Threats, National Academies of
Sciences, Engineering and Medicine, USA
• Beverly Taylor, Seqirus
• Jonathan Van-Tam, Department of Health and Social Care, England
• Netsanet Workie, World Bank Group
• Members of the World Health Organization Strategic & Technical Advisory Group for Infectious Hazards

The same John Hopkins Centre involved in the planning of a simulation for pandemic preparedness has been given the task of convincing the public that a real pandemic exists.

This fact alone should be enough for members of the public to question the authenticity of this pandemic.

John Hopkins Centre at the forefront 


The document shared above from the John Hopkins Centre, which included recommendations for preparedness planning (GMPB) to implement simulations for pandemic preparedness was led by Jennifer Nuzzo.


Member of CFR

Jennifer Nuzzo is also heavily involved in the ‘reported’ pandemic.


In this report Nuzzo states:

In her article on social distancing Nuzzo states that in order to resolve the problem of social distancing, there needs to be a nationwide surveillance program using different agencies and governments, mocking the fact that that is exactly what is occurring.https://www.politico.com/news/agenda/2020/03/30/social-distancing-game-plan-154915

Nuzzo is heavily involved in global health security. 

On the 18th September 2019, the same day that reports were published about the intentions for pandemic preparedness, the media were also notified world wide.



Note the dates.

We were informed via the media on the 18th September 2019 that the GPMB had created  Pandemic Preparedness in order to determine how the world would function during a real pandemic.

The National Security Act of 1947 was a law enacting major restructuring of the United States government’s military and intelligence agencies following World War II. The majority of the provisions of the Act took effect on September 18, 1947.

This coincides with the anniversary of that act and marked the first day of operations for the Dept of Defence.

Organisations and agencies  are involved in the pandemic preparedness exercise on the anniversary of this date, some 72 years later.

Under the guise of a respiratory pathogen that causes a pandemic which then enables the DoD to get involved. 

So happy birthday to the CIA, DoD and all the agencies involved in the creation of the National Security Act, a pandemic exercise took place to commemorate.

A pandemic exercise that has been created not  just to test the world wide reactions to pandemic planning but to usher in the UN,s agenda of security, control and the Smart Specialisation programme.

September  2019 also saw the first Infectious Diseases
Strategy 2020-2025 created by Public Health England.



September 2019 also saw recommendations by the Biodefence science board.

Another article  in which Nuzzo expresses the need, along with other collaborators, to discuss what needs to be done to undermine national capability to counter biological threats.


Countries that have submitted a preparedness plan in Africa coincide with the claimed cases of CV.

The Pandemic preparedness plans that were put into place by the monitoring board and due to begin in September 2019 shows  correlation with countries in Africa who submitted preparedness plans years earlier.

The following is a graph of the countries in Africa who submitted pandemic plans to WHO.

Compare it to the ‘claims’ made about the cases in Africa and we can see that the  countries with early preparedness plans coincide exactly with the countries claiming to be affected by CV.

The WHO link

This shows the countries claiming to be affected.

How is it possible that the countries with the first and largest claims of CV are the same ones who have created early preparedness plans for a pandemic? 

Algeria, Egypt and Nigeria were the first countries to claim there were CV cases in Africa, all the countries with early pandemic preparedness plans that satisfied the WHO.

Burkina Faso, Egypt is also on the WHO map as being  one of the early  providers of a pandemic preparedness plan. 

Egypt has played an active role in the implementation of WHO and UN frameworks.

Some of the ministers took to FB to announce they were CV positive.

Egypt has collaborated with WHO to create the UN Sustainable goals agenda.

Nigeria, also one of the countries that have an early preparedness plan submitted to WHO, claimed that the first death from CV was from a patient who had returned from the UK and was being treated for cancer and diabetes, yet supposedly died from CV.


The Nigerian CDC also shared that information via a tweet. 

Algeria are also well prepared and were reportedly one of the first countries in Africa to have a patient who had travelled from another country. http://saharareporters.com/2020/02/26/who-confirms-coronavirus-algeria

Those who were most eager to have created pandemic preparedness plans to WHO were the same countries that were hit?


South Africa may not have submitted a pandemic preparedness plan before 2014 but they will have been highly involved in later pandemic preparedness planning.

There is clear evidence that the world is not in the grip of a pandemic but in the grip of a world wide global health security exercise. An exercise that  the security services and the UN are using as a front to bring about the changes needed to build their new world.

It is seen as progress for the greater good.

There are no data or details on the human suffering that has taken place during this exercise and the aftermath will be one of hardships and chaos for the population, meanwhile the future generations of the rich and privileged will be prepared for a real pandemic, which they know will never happen anyway because they created them.

Why else has pandemic planning gone live, not once but THREE times!

Dr Stephen Redd is the CDC,s Director of Public Health Preparedness and Response

Dr Redd was a member of the Global Pandemic Preparedness event called Event 201, held in October 2019. A few Months before the news of CV was made public.

This event was a table top exercise created to put all the players involved in global pandemics together to trouble shoot how a pandemic would operate and how they would deal with it. 

Dr Stephen Redd has also been involved  in other ‘claimed’ pandemic events.


According to reports, Dr Redd was wrapping up a flu pandemic planning meeting on April 15th 2009 when the phone call came in that a virus had infected a 10 yr old.

Two days later the CDC conformed the diagnosis and a week later, Redd had been made incident commander of the 2009 H1N1 pandemic.

So we are to believe that he was chairing a meeting for  pandemic preparation at the same time as he got the call that a ‘possible’ real pandemic might occur? Really?

The following was reported on the CDC website:

Coincidence would have it?

Claims were made by the CDC that this would kill millions. It never happened.

Five years later in August 2014, Dr Redd was due to be involved in an exercise for planning of pandemic preparedness once again. 

Coincidentally, at that exact time, the exercise was overshadowed by the claims of an Ebola outbreak that meant that all those involved were now working on Ebola.

This information was shared by Dr Redd himself during an interview in 2016 with CDC Museum, Global Health Chronicles.


The Ebola event then led to the creation of the Global Health Security Agenda.

 Five years later again and the Director was now in the driving seat of another pandemic preparedness event which became a ‘reported’ real event.

 What are the odds that this man would be involved in and heading, not one but THREE separate exercises for pandemic preparedness  that all go live at the exact same time as the exercise?

Redd also stated during the Ebola event that:

The same man claimed he was given a job working in the White House during Ebola and days later was a given a list of vaccines to be used to treat Ebola. And of course, the USA were claiming to have a case.

The WHO Simulation Exercise manual from 2017 states that during these sort of global exercises 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.

There is also evidence of simulations from within the health care departments.


The question is why? The answers are explained in amazing detail in this report by Alison McDowell.







  1. This is all good information, the part that is missing is the “why?” What is happening that requires a global biosecurity state? Well, that is the advent of the Fourth Industrial Revolution and the creation of human capital bond markets for “stakeholder capitalism.” Privatization of social welfare benefits linked to IoT compliance (surveillance of the poor) can only scale as an impact market IF they have global digital identity. That digital ID system MUST be imposed and framing this as a national security threat will enable that to move forward – biometric health passports. PLEASE understand that the global security state is about control of populations, yes, but also about BOND markets. That is why people HAVE to look not only at Gates but at Michael Bloomberg who owns Johns Hopkins, especially their school of public health. Health is UN SDG 3.




Post your comment

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>