Relax for a few minutes, sit back, and pretend morals and business ethics are redundant. Then imagine an infallible, risk-free business scheme in which you get to create the market, decide the product, manage its regulation, then have the power to confine people to their homes or remove their income until they submit to buying it. And no one can sue you or take you to court if it all goes wrong.
So, imagine:
• Your organization is a public-private partnership, so using taxpayer money but guided by the private sector.
• You spin a story that a series of plagues are about to engulf humanity, exponentially increasing in frequency and severity (your partners own the media, so don’t be troubled by reality).
• You then use public money to set up a surveillance network guaranteed to find virus variants (i.e., go and find nature, you can’t miss it).
• Governments agree ahead of time to give you the power to control health care policy when you decide these variants pose a threat (not harm, just a threat). They agree that this includes border closures, restrictions on the daily life of their citizens, and of course mandated vaccination (in return for them “getting freedom back”).
• You then transfer these virus variants to laboratories and pharmaceutical companies of your choice (your friends and supporters, who will in return give your organization some money).
• The pharmaceutical companies are ready: They have been receiving free billions from taxpayers annually under the same scheme, to keep their production lines ready to profit from the market you are about to create.
• Your pharma-investor sponsors also sponsor disease modelers willing to produce the most fantastic death figures to shore up public compliance. They do this.
• You then use your powers to impose these lockdowns and insist that a 100-day vaccine must be rushed out to save hapless humanity and allow a return to an “inter-pandemic” period.
• Once your chosen companies rush out the vaccine, you control the regulatory bit (more money changes hands), bypassing pesky safety trials and those interminable ethics reviews.
• All the while, you note any dissenting opinions that may reduce your market size; your governmental partners having already agreed to deal with them.
• Once you have the profit flowing, you decide when the profiteering can stop (think “respiratory virus vaccine” and more sponsored modeling—the rapid waning of efficacy so lots of boosters to keep humanity safe).
• All the while, you have ensured freedom from liability for your pharma partners and your own regulatory process.
• You, of course, have no liability either—you are above any national jurisdiction. You don’t even have to pay tax to anyone!
What Is the WHO?
The WHO is an organization that receives roughly a quarter of its funding from the pharmaceutical industry and major pharmaceutical investors. These same sponsors have profited greatly from the COVID-19 response and are strongly aligned with the WHO’s current pandemic preparation and response proposals. The largest country-based funders are the United States and Germany, also heavily invested in pharma. German public money backed BioNtech, the developer of the Pfizer mRNA COVID-19 vaccine.Most of the WHO’s funding is “specified,” meaning that it does what the funder specifies. The WHO has now become a tool of vested interests for much of its work. Approximately 75 percent of its total funding works this way. This is a completely different type of organization than the WHO of 75 years ago. When originally set up, its budget was based on “core” funding from countries, and the WHO decided its priorities based on disease burden and country requests.
How Will the New Outbreak Business Be Developed?
The proposed legally binding Pandemic Agreement and IHR amendments are designed to work together. Having two parallel documents has allowed the WHO director-general to repeatedly claim that the Pandemic Agreement does not hand any power to the WHO and that anyone who says so is a liar and conspiracy theorist. A group of former country leaders and public health people debased themselves recently by publishing a letter saying the same. The clauses that they say don’t exist in the Pandemic Agreement do exist, of course, in the proposed IHR amendments. The Pandemic Agreement says the two documents are compatible (Article 26.2).If you think this is all fanciful and that such powers would only be used in dire circumstances, recall that the WHO director-general declared Mpox (monkeypox) a public health emergency of international concern (the future trigger for this process). This was declared after just five deaths, with transmission essentially restricted to a small demographic, against the advice of his own advisory committee.
Why It Can Work
Money, in large amounts, is really good for helping people to understand that wrong might be better than right. It also helps those who don’t care at all about what’s right, or truth, to rise to the top despite their obvious unfitness. It allows the media to survive if they please these sponsors, and it can help country delegates to find more important priorities than the good of their own people. During COVID-19, the industry pushing the new WHO initiatives made an unprecedented amount of money, so the pandemic agenda has lots of momentum.Thousands of well-paid staff are already becoming dependent on this scheme within the WHO, other public-private partnerships, and the research and “humanitarian” industries. They have mortgages, health care costs, education, and travel benefits to maintain. This is largely why, despite being able to work out that this massive resource diversion will increase poverty, reduce life expectancy, and abrogate public health ethics, they find themselves able to support it.