WELL SAID

A number of people have shared with me the emails that they sent to Dame Barbara Stocking. I appreciate their skillful writing and I applaud their efforts. Please read their emails below.

Please read my previous article (CLICK HERE or below) to understand why these emails were written and sent to Barbara Mary Stocking, Dame Commander of the British Empire.

If you have not yet shared your advice with Dame Barbara Stocking, please do so.

Contact Dame Barbara Mary Stocking: bms44@cam.ac.uk

Below are wonderful emails that others have already sent.

Hello Barbara,

We're both women of roughly the same age, different paths but various life challenges and accomplishments to make us elders in our time.

RE: your recent guest essay, we do need integrity and independence, starting with the question “cui bono?” Essentially, who benefits? And at whose expense?

Influenza has been around as long as humanity; it's a process by which the body eliminates metabolic wastes, toxins, debris it knows it should get rid of, not retain in the body. When people take measures to interfere with that process, the (crud) remains in the body, encumbering normal physiological processes, adding to the clutter, gradually leading to greater likelihood of more complex diseases. Such diseases are not merely infectious and usually brief, but if impeded become chronic and degenerative, often leading to cancer. To have a Global Public Health Convention making decisions for the entire world, under the guise of 'equity' and to ensure that research and innovation continue(s) in the pharmaceutical industries', is flat out dangerous.

You and I both know that a major donor to the WHO makes enormous amounts of $ through vaccines, and that his poorly disguised intent is more to profit and increase his already ungodly billions than to promote health, and if people don't get disease along the way, that's coincidence. This is not about health; it's about business. Meanwhile the fruits of the current WHO (and allies) latest decree of a global pandemic have resulted in

• millions dead, paralyzed, severely encumbered

• not from the disease itself but from the measures to deal with it, specifically

• the experimental shots -- called vaccines only to grant them absolute lack of liability when people are injured by them (See OpenVAERS.com in case you're not already aware of the damage they've done), or by

• the medications approved (remdesivir = run death is near), or

• by delay of proper treatment and

• denial of time tested measures which have clearly been shown effective but whose use interferes with 'emergency use authorization' claims.

• major disruption to economies and basic social structures

Cui bono?

To grant one agency the power to declare a pandemic, to declare treatment -- and to deny other measures -- is at best out of touch with solid understanding of human nature. (Spoiler alert: People tend to put personal interest over what's good for others.)

Make sure that people all over the world have access to clean water, to locally grown food -- that's food, not commodity substances, and to self determination. When your goldfish keep getting sick and die, do you clean their tank, or vaccinate the fish? Drugs are not the answer to health; you can't poison your way to 'health' by continually disabling the body's efforts to heal itself = blocking symptoms.

Please disconnect your gracious self (and any shadow selves as well) from this dishonest scheme. State your respectable and informed word AGAINST any single agency making declarations that apply to everyone on the entire planet, and NO to any effort that seeks to put pharmaceutical businesses in charge. (IOW Don't let them USE you.) Granted it's a fabulous business plan -- declare a pandemic anytime Pharma comes up with a new drug (or market share falters), (call it a vaccine to eliminate liability), impose one solution/medication on everyone, silence all dissenters, and rake in the profits. Unfortunately, my sense of integrity is such that I'd have a hard time sleeping at night if I were part of such a scheme.

Please, honored gracious senior woman and fellow human traveler, look at the entire picture and ask what's really going on. Cui bono? What do you want your legacy to really be?

Very truly yours, and if you are ever in the Toledo Ohio USA area, my door is always open for you to drop in, and have a proper cup of tea.

Sincerely,

Karen L.

Dear Dame Barbara Stocking,

I hope this letter finds you well. Your guest essay in the Geneva Health Files was both insightful and thought-provoking. However, after reading it, some additional perspectives warrant your attention to facilitate a deeper understanding of the issues related to the World Health Organization's CA+ framework.

The current trajectory of WHO CA+ focuses extensively on bolstering the Pharmaceutical Hospital Emergency Industrial Complex (PHEIC), rather than addressing global citizens' core health and human rights. I would like to emphasize that these negotiations need to be re-evaluated and potentially halted until we resolve many pressing issues.

To offer a more structured approach, I recommend focusing on the following areas before moving forward with any negotiations:

1. Origins of SARS-CoV-2: Understand its origins to learn the lessons it offers for prevention.

2. COVID-19 Transmissibility and Risk: Scientifically review the data on its transmissibility and real level of danger.

3. Social Controls: Evaluate the long-term efficacy and collateral damage caused by implemented social controls such as lockdowns and mask mandates.

4. Medical Countermeasures: Assess vaccines' efficacy and long-term safety, particularly mRNA-based solutions, and other medical interventions.

5. Alternative Measures: Investigate why less invasive or costly measures were largely suppressed or disregarded.

6. Conflicts of Interest: Examine the role of private profits and other interests that may have influenced public health policies.

7. Accountability: Investigate the actions and decisions by WHO and other international bodies, especially in the context of their diplomatic immunity.

Please consider these multidimensional aspects in your ongoing discussions about the WHO's approach to global health governance. At its core, the current leadership seems "unfit for purpose.” A comprehensive review is imperative.

Thank you for your time and consideration. I look forward to your thoughts on these matters.

Sincerely,

Stewart

Dear Dame Barbara Stocking 

Bigger has never proved better, as it is usually too unwieldy. To give to one costly, non-representative world body the power to decide what constitutes a pandemic, the power to decide if there is the possibility of a pandemic; to give such an organisation, funded as it partly is by entities such as the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, one of whose founders is heavily invested in profiting from pharmaceutical products, who has a terrible reputation for damaging the health of children in India and Africa, the power to decide and not 'advise', but make it mandatory for poorly tested mRNA so called vaccines which are actually not vaccines but gene therapies, to be foisted upon the peoples of all countries  who fund the WHO, is a really poorly thought through idea.

All it requires is the simple 'capture' by nefarious means (not unheard of),  of the HEAD of that organisation by any corrupt individuals or company, and the whole world would be at the mercy of criminals. Corporations such as many in the pharmaceutical fields have had to pay massive fines for the damage they have done to people with some of their drugs...take Pfizer as an example. Let us not hand a Carte Blanche to potential miscreants.

If we wish to avoid pandemics each country needs to see to it that their population is healthy and it is up to the People of each country to decide how to approach their government about this matter. A top down, heavy handed approach by an unelected entity such as the WHO,  agreed to by unelected representatives from different countries, with absolutely no real public debate having been held  about such an important issue as ones personal health, is both insane and undemocratic.

I strongly recommend that you change your mind about promoting this Pandemic Treaty and the terrible amendments to the IHR that have removed the words 'Human Dignity', amongst other changes, which bode no good to humanity, for the sake of the well being of said humanity.

In hope I thank you.

Regards,

SuziAlkamyst

Dear Dame Barbara Stocking,

In response to your guest essay on Geneva Health Files, I offer my opinion on world health initiatives.

Persuasion is better than force. Each locality should be offered information from diverse sources, and free to respond in a way democratically selected, and responsive to local needs. For example, UK chose to respond to the COVID pandemic by closing down businesses and encouraging vaccination. That worked for UK, and limited deaths to 330 per 100K population. Nigeria chose to use ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine for prevention and early treatment, and limited deaths to 1 death per 100K population.

Different solutions for different localities. 

Josh Mitteldorf

Madam,

I trust you are well, given events.

I am writing to you to express my dismay at the role of the British establishment in current affairs, notably at the United Nations. As a child I remember my grandfather returning from New York and a visit to the U.N. and explaining the Charter and the hopes of nations emergent from the tragedy of global war. That his memento of the visit was an ashtray, that to this day I retain, seems somewhat apt considering the depths to which the once august institution has fallen.

The evident funding by Western oligarchy, assent by royalty and diktat by supranational organisations, who can all be described as neo-Malthusian, cares not one jot about health, wellbeing and peace but only control. These post-modern, technocratic zealots have taken the wrong path, an unnatural path, and I would urge you to call them out as others are doing. This precious jewel of a planet which we inhabit will provide for all, it just takes effort. The complicated, difficult and righteous path is not one the idle rich have ever traversed. Perhaps it is time for them to do so.

Regards,

LaMaisonGelat

Good morning from Texas!

I'm curious, why do you think countries cannot handle their own policies in dealing with pandemics? Isn't it demeaning to assume a committee of outsiders know better? People with common sense understand that a committee is not the answer, just a waste of money and a concentration of power in the hands of those that believe they know best. The world and society will thrive when individuals have autonomy.

Thank you for taking the time to consider that you might be on the wrong track and I hope we can count on you to support the fundamental right of humans to determine their own destiny.

Gina T.

Dear Dame Stocking:

I respond to your public request for advice concerning the ongoing negotiations about the WHO CA+ and IHR amendment negotiations, which you described as "in a difficult place". 

My advice is to put your hands in the air and step away from those negotiations. 

Take notice:  You are engaged in an attempt to subvert the sovereignty of nations around the world, notably my own, the United States of America.  This marks you as an enemy of the Constitution of the United States.  You have been identified and your actions documented.  

The WHO CA+ and IHR amendment negotiations are a transparent attempt by the WHO to grant itself supra sovereign powers using medical emergencies as a pretext.  The 10th amendment of the US Constitution reserve health policy decisions to the States or to The People.  Even our Congress does not have the legitimate authority to give those powers over to the WHO.  Hands off! 

Clearly the WHO is acting as a catspaw of the globalist elite publicly spearheaded by Klaus Schwab and the World Economic Forum, Bill Gates, The Chinese Communist Party, George Soros - all eugenicists, all promoters of One World Government unaccountable to We The People, all sociopaths hostile to humanity.  

I insist that "government of the People by The People for The People shall not perish from the Earth."  I will not consent.  I will not comply.  We will resist.

I ask that you reconsider your position in this global coup attempt. 

Please cease your attempts to breach the sovereignty of the U.S. Constitution.

Please read the attached critique of the proposed amendments.

Sincerely,

Erik L.

United States of America

Dear Dame Barbara Stocking

I totally support the analysis by James Roguski as shown in the attached .pdf file.

I don't have a problem with the WHO being a discussion/consulting organization, but I am totally against it assuming the power to control the sovereignty of all nations when it comes to health decisions or anything else, including the bodily autonomy of all citizens. I will not follow the dictates of any world organization.

I will not comply!

Brenda R.

Dear Dame Barbara Stocking,

I think it is beyond dispute that the World Health Organization has been, at best, woefully incompetent, or, at worst, positively harmful to the people of the world.

We can cut through this Gordian knot of amendments and negotiations by encouraging all countries 

1. to withdraw from the WHO,

2. to defund the WHO, and 

3. to repeal any legislation that was used to create the WHO.

This might offend the banksters at the BIS, the Bank of England, and the U.S. Federal Reserve, but the rest of humanity will sleep more soundly knowing that a global criminal gang has been put down.

Best regards, 

Dan M.

Respected Dame Barbara Stocking,

Regarding the WHO and the secret negotiations they are doing:

In the past 4 years the WHO has lost all remaining credibility about caring for the health of the inhabitants of this planet, and became more and more clear for us the people, that it is not about health, but about greed of power and control, conspiring with private (and ignorant in health issues) billionaires and corporations in a deathly lobbying agenda. And after this course of action, nobody seems to be accountable for their inefficacy, for their prerogatives to create a "pandemic" that never was, deploy a lethal injection (bioweapon) in billions of people who were unaware of the risks and consequences of their "trust in the science and recommendations of the WHO and their health professionals." Crimes were committed.

There is no moral authority for the WHO and their bodies to do anything, and why would sovereign nations and their inhabitants render it to a bunch of conspirators?

It is difficult after what we lived in the last time, to dialogue with liars and criminals who not only are trying to avoid responsibilities, but to have more power to do more atrocities.

Until justice is delivered, it would not be prudent for any self respecting citizen to dialogue with "health terrorists".  

In attachment a very detailed document that represent a lot of my concerns.

Thanks for your attention, receive you my kindest regards,

Carlé C.

Thank you for soliciting advice from people on the impasse at the WHO CA+. I would like to tell you how I and many others think about the plan the WHO/WEF/UN and other world wide PPP criminal syndicates have decided for we the people. We don't want it implemented. Why?

The WHO would like unprecedented powers of control over our lives. Such control is not in their charter and is thus illegal. More importantly, the WHO has shown that it is a complete failure as an organization which actually improves people's health.

During COVID-19 it behaved in a criminal manner, restricting the freedom of the people, giving commands for treatments which were deadly while forbidding treatments which were effective and actually safe. The WHO forbid discussion of the origin of COVID-19. The only treatments it pushed were those which resulted in death and maiming--so called "vaccines". The WHO used this time period to grab economic power over nation states and individuals. It took power over individual rights such as travel and even getting groceries if one did not have a vax pass. This pass was not about health, after all, vaccines do not prevent transmission, infection, and one is more likely to spread COVID-19, to be hospitalized and die if one has had the injection. Injections are not about health, they are about control. There is no legal or ethical right held by the WHO, it is simply grabbing this power on behalf of its masters.

The WHO wishes to illegally be an instrument of control over nation states and all the world's people. I guess that is very equitable? But I tell you, we will be equally free, not equally controlled.

I don't care what measures you try to get through the WHO, we the people will not comply. We are free. We are not "inclusive", "equitable" slaves to this and other PPP/world wide corrupt, criminal syndicates. You misunderstand: we are not your slaves and we know exactly what you are trying to do to us. We will control our own banking, speech, health care, movement and economies

Jill

Dear Dame Barbara,

Thank you for the opportunity to provide input into the WHO negotiations.

The reason why they are not progressing well for you is because the WHO is a morally bankrupt criminal control organisation and the people are not going to put up with their bodies and farms being controlled by 'one source of information.'

This is called censorship.

This censorship killed tens of millions during covid in the form of shutting down and starving the third world, withholding early treatment, vaccines that were not safe or effective and hospital protocols that saw people strapped down and murdered while their families screamed on the other side of tempered glass while their families were crash tackled by police.

I saw my fellow Australians get shot in the street and I was told I should be liquidated in a camp for being unvaccinated and my country build multiple large camps called 'wellness centres' for the purposes of separating families and destroying lives chasing the unicorn farm of 'covid zero.' All on the order of the WHO 'declaring a pandemic' for something that was no more deadly than influenza.

Australia had a federal COVID-19 plan in February 2020 that was ripped up on your orders because you blackmailed us and we bent over and took it because our leaders are feckless compromised cowards.

People like you killed tens of millions and if you do not cease and desist you will kill tens of millions more.

You have zero authority to operate in Australia, the people of Australia do not recognise your authority and we will not and never will comply with you and your orders.

You, the WHO and your pandemic treaty can go to hell. This is God's country, not yours.

Best wishes and kind regards!

ExcessDeathsAU

Madam,

I so appreciate the opportunity to send you a message with regard to my concerns around the WHO and their Pandemic Treaty and the proposed Amendments.  I am terribly concerned about the removal of sovereignty for the nations of the world should this treat and the amendments come into force.  I also do not believe in a ‘one size fits all’ solution to any medical issue.

We have experienced an unprecedented few years wherein the WHO has mandated, without scientific justification, a number of their ’solutions' around the Covid virus:  mandates for the injections, lockdowns, masks, removal of access to proven treatments, censorship of opposing opinions around treatment, etc.  All of those have since been exposed as unhelpful, often dangerous and completely unproven concepts.  If you would be so kind as to listen to some of the most eminent doctors and physicians around the world you would be appalled at the damage done by these arbitrary steps.  Please visit the websites of the World Council for Health, Drs. Peter McCullough, Pierre Kory, Mark Trozzi, William Makis and many other heroes for the truth around all these issues.  Also, please visit the website of James Roguski for a full explanation of the dangers of the Pandemic Treaty and its Amendments.

I have no idea why anyone would consider giving the WHO another opportunity to decide the responses to any health issue after their appalling failures during the Covid situation.

I also have serious concerns about the fact that Bill Gates and his foundations and organizations are major funders of the WHO.  He has some unethical (almost criminal) ideas around what is best for the people of the world.  He is not a medical professional.  He is not a concerned individual.  He is promoting his own agenda of vaccines for everything and rights and privileges for only himself and his cohorts.  Please also remember that a lot of people, like Bill Gates, made an unbelievable amount of money during the Covid situation because of their investment in ‘medical solutions’.

Many thanks for the opportunity to voice my concerns.  I would hope that the governments of the world would investigate the WHO and oppose their Treaty and Amendments and, in fact, withdraw their support of the Organization before it is  too late.  This issue has nothing to do with health and everything to do with controlling the citizens of the world.

Sincerely,
Patricia Hayes

Dear Dame Stocking

I personally feel that we are standing at a crossroads, taking the wrong path could affect the future of mankind.

We already have in many countries distrust between the people and their respective governments. Surely governments need to work harder to try and rebuild this trust within their nations.

Yet, behind closed doors, contracts are being negotiated and amended behind the backs of the people.

Those who have seen the initial text, amendments, and deletions are extremely concerned and worried that government representatives are passing control and sovereignty to a private non-elected organization, which appears to have a different understanding of human rights.

If a government presents this to their people after signing without a referendum. There could be a risk of civil unrest.

Each country is different and has differing health problems. A single organization controlling global health is not the answer.

Each government should be there to help their own people, all they need is a fast response with other governments as well as a fast communication network of completely independent scientists, virologists,s and doctors.

If they wish to use health consultancy companies, that’s fine.

However, to pass everything over to one company is the biggest mistake mankind could ever make. The conflict of financial interests could take the focus away from public health.

For the governments who work in the interests of the people of their nation and who manage to resist the “takeover” by the WHO, their first task could be to ensure that medical censorship in their country is made illegal.

During the last 3 years, many have suffered severe side effects and deaths from a suggested medical intervention. As warnings were censored, many were unaware and unknowingly took the same medicine. Many lives could have been saved.

Dame Stocking, you have my respect for reaching out and inviting the public for input. I do hope that through your diplomatic contacts, you are able to stop this nonsense before it’s too late.

Humanity will be eternally grateful to you.

With kindest regards

Ian de Souza

Dear Dame Stocking,

I welcome your guest letter in the Geneva Files and respectfully offer a different view. I and many critics of the changes to the International Health Regulations (IHR) and the proposed WHO Pandemic Preparedness Treaty (PPPT) believe the reason that the negotiations “are in a difficult place” goes far beyond the content into the realm of economic and political power, governance, sovereignty and human rights.

The Geneva Files state that their “…larger goal has always been to contribute to greater accountability and transparency in global health policy-making in Geneva, often perceived as being far removed from national and local realities at the country level.” 

Here it is in a nutshell; the workings of global health policy-making in Geneva are seen as opaque, not accountable and irrelevant to national and local realities. A global ‘One Health’ model (especially if legally binding) is seen at best as narrowly focussed and paternalistic and at worst a global power grab. (See this cogent analysis by a former medical officer and scientist at the World Health Organization: https://brownstone.org/articles/cheat-sheet-for-legislators-regarding-who-health-emergencies/)

If the experience of the recent WHO pandemic response and its disastrous consequences for the physical, mental, social and economic health of the countries that followed their recommendations are anything to go by, then more of the same is not a wise or effective response. The latest Political Declaration of the United Nations General Assembly High-level Meeting on Pandemic Prevention, Preparedness and Response (Sept 2023) and IHR and WHO documents are overwhelmingly focussed on methods such as vaccines, research and development of new therapeutics, involving vested interest organisations such as the World Bank and public/private partnerships, and expanding technologies for digitalised surveillance and censorship. No mention of existing therapeutics which, although suppressed, have proven highly effective and affordable, or the wealth of local traditional and indigenous therapeutics that could be, and have been, effectively utilised.  This is not a much-needed multi-disciplinary approach but one dominated by a Western medical model strongly influenced by the vested interests that stand to profit the most. (https://worldcouncilforhealth.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/Policy-Brief-Summary-1.pdf)

The changes to the IHR and proposed PPPT have major consequences for human rights and sovereignty. How can a group of unelected bureaucrats and public health experts possibly know what is best for each region, let alone each country or individual? Yes, countries need to cooperate and share knowledge and resources, but insisting that every member state follows the directives of the IHR and WHO is a gross transgression of human rights and national sovereignty.

In the words of David Bell “It is essential that debate moves on from disagreement on specific public health interventions, and addresses the longer term issues of sovereignty, proportionality and conflict of interest. There are ways for countries to cooperate together in public health without subverting laws and democratic processes that many have fought to achieve over previous centuries.” https://pandata.org/raise-objection-to-proposed-pandemic-treaty-of-the-who/

I appreciate your well-intentioned efforts to bring into effect ways of keeping the world ‘safe’ in the eventuality of future pandemics but I urge you to seriously consider the bigger picture. 

Respectfully yours,

Peta J.

Dear Dame Barbara Mary Stocking,

You have requested some advice and feedback from people outside your narrow circle. I shall therefore make this brief and respectful.

You state that global health security is only as strong as its weakest link. So what would that be?

Is the weakest link a lack of "preparedness", a shortage of "vaccines", a lack of compliance on the part of some nations wrongly suspicious of neo-liberalism's push towards one world government, and the eugenicist agenda at work within it?

No, the weakest link lies not in the refusal or inability to comply with top-down commands from the UN, WHO, government or NGO whose fundamental MO has increasingly devolved into groupthink and diktat.

The weakest link occurs in the act of thinking, not in the process of acting.

The weakest link lies in the intellect itself. It exists inside assumptions and unproven hypotheses fueled by the opportunity for prestige, power, and massive financial gain, and thus rife with the worst kinds of corruption. It lies inside the unexamined fantasy of pandemics reverberating inside the supposedly adult mind like any primal and irrational fear reverberating inside an infant's brain before the fontanels actually close.

I sense this may perhaps make you uncomfortable...

The weakest link is self-deception and the substitution of fairy stories for truth. The weakest link is the abrogation of the scientific method on the part of those who are supposed to be its guardians.

The weakest link lies at the top of the chain of command and is to be found within its operational logic or rather, lack thereof. The unelected "experts" at the top end have lost all credibility and been revealed to be nothing but toadies and cronies, genuflecting before billionaire psychopaths for whom logic and truth mean as little as used toilet paper.

All this is so far removed from the true scientific method as to make a primary school idiot blush in shame.

Is there an exit ramp for you?

Yes, there is a way out of this catastrophe of corruption and harm, and that is to take up Occam's razor and just walk away. Please lead by example and venture back to join us ( an increasingly large minority of the world's population) inside the world of logic and clear thinking. You will be welcomed and would do yourself and others a great service.

It is not a crime to make an error of judgment. It may however become one if a person does not change their fundamental course once evidence has piled up for all to see on their front lawn.

Respectfully yours,

Shaq Roberts, Ph.D.

Dame Barbara Stocking

Putting lip stick on a pig is still a pig. When the UN was created the UN said there were to many people on this planet and they started to track CO2 as I've read in a resent story. None the less in 1991/1992 the UN and over one hundred world leaders all signed a plan THE NEW WORLD ORDER) the first one was called Agenda 21 and later called Agenda 2030. That plan was to reduce the population by 90% or so. How would that be accomplished? What a great idea, Introduce a viruses that is harmless to most but deadly to few. Scare the population of the planet to see if we or they can get them to follow orders?

Then introduce the kill shot disguised as a vaccine that will save the world.

Here we are today. (Since 1991/1992 for the most part Pharma has not developed anything that saves lives. Everything is rushed to market. ) Now the UN demanded total control of the worlds health just building on the Agenda to reduce the people on the planet. We also have a lie from 1970 introduced as Earth day. All to save the planet. In all my years there have been 41 prediction that the world will have climate disasters. Of which not a one has come true. Today we have the most outlandish one that in 2312 days or on January 21, 2030 the world will come to an end. This will be number 42. So the very wealthy with the coat tails of the UN/WHO telling the world what has to be done. If a real plan that had meaning back in 1991 was well put together they would have done a much better UN rolling.

I've gone on to long here, We need to face that the UN and deep pockets are out to eliminate 90% of the people on this planet (wake up world) all to save the planets resources eliminating cars and cows and fossil fuels. Please tell me I'm wrong. We are beating around the truth with the fear of scaring the public. Well we need to masses of the public to stop this madness.

Mike

Dame Barbara Mary Stocking,

In response to your essay seeking a compromise on behalf of the WHO + CA , here are some thoughts as to why the negotiations are in a difficult place:

TRUST in all World Organizations and most Governments has been seriously broken during the latest pandemic.

To this day, world citizens have no firm understanding of the origin of the Sars virus, no understanding of Emergency Use to protect pharmaceuticals when other reliable medicines were widely available, no understanding of lockdowns, school closures, mask wearing, mandates and certainly no understanding of seeing our elderly imprisoned until death.

What we do understand though is that the world is freely working on gain of function in labs all over the planet and that there is a much bigger agenda underway.

All in your group have failed to open an independent commission to discover the truth, explain the timeline and debrief in an honest and open manner. Mostly though, no one has been held accountable and yet instead of seeking the truth, you're seeking more power through a neatly packaged compromise!

If you truly wish to resolve the impasse, I suggest you abandon the reach for raw power and clean up with a search for the truth of what happened with Covid. Let's remember history "absolute power corrupts absolutely"!

Should you decide to move outside of your circle, to consult, to ask questions and to listen to others, you will quickly realize that the grand plan for the WHO to control WORLD HEALTH will be rejected by free thinking individuals and will potentially bring unrest instead of better health. Think of the mission - what is the true purpose?

The damage that has been done, the thousands of people lost and injured, surely you can't be serious when you talk about "compromise"?

The best way to achieve a compromise is to take a long step back, respect countries who object to the power grab and abandon the marketing/PR effort to manipulate by inviting so-called neutral parties to bring in the unruly: in my view there is nothing "neutral" here.

I hope that no compromise will be reached and that the countries involved will hold firm: Under no circumstances should we ever invest total power in anyone or any organization.

Best Regards,

SM Roy-Nielsen

Dear Dame Barbara Stocking,

re: Your guest essay in the Geneva Health Files.

This is Whitney Dafoe: @DafoeWhitney

7 sep. 2022:

‘It’s ok that I accomplished nothing today but roll over in bed. It’s ok. I am not what I achieve or produce. I am the same person on a good day when I create works of beauty as I am on a day when I lay in desolate slumber. No matter what I do or achieve I am always glorious.’

(And here I attached a photo of Whitney completely worn out, skin over bones, in his bed. I think he has been like this for the last 15 years).

W.D. is a severe ME/CFS patient and advocate, photographer, filmmaker, artist, creative.

Clearly a WHO CA+ of any consequence, to me personally, would be only possible when we throw over this stack of complex negotiations by delegates and member states and start the discussions again from scratch.

To me, Whitney Dafoe is the symbol of what is happening to humankind: immense suffering has been going on since decades behind closed doors and in silence.

Millions of these young people cease to exist, stop making love, stop making babies, stop living.

The fact that they REMAIN ill means they can’t be helped.

Why is that? Yes, why is that?

Because Dame Barbara, the right questions aren’t asked?

The current WHO CA+, the IHR treaties, the UN Declaration on Pandemic Prevention, Preparedness and Response all explain in detail what we have to do in the situation of a ‘potential’ pandemic. Most of the offered solutions are about vaccinations and the handling of pathogens.

NOT: What is happening to humankind, what is happening to Whitney Dafoe, why are young people chronically ill since the eighties of last centuries and why is this high figure now only added up with more fatal diseases.

And why aren’t they HELPED properly?

I do not read about this in the proposed treaties.

I do not read this in the United Nations General Assembly High-level Meeting on Pandemic Preparedness and Response documents.

Believe me, I know what it feels like to be ill; I was like Whitney once and I dragged myself out of death literally.

I am still not 100%.

Many of my friends and family members have died prematurely in the last two years.

But I know now it wasn’t my fault and it wasn’t their fault;

It IS because the right questions aren’t asked!

What is it with the pollution, the glyphosate, the biowarfare-lab pathogens, the hidden gain of function research, poisonous foods and waters and yes, should we not investigate vaccines further before we push all of this ahead?

When I ask these questions to my own government, the Ministry of Health, they do not answer.

They never have.

It seems that the core language of life and nature, of which we only started to scratch a bit of surface, is pushed aside so that within a strict un-natural and man-made story all living things can be tampered with until everything will be destroyed.

That very anti-nature language is the false world the WHO, the UN and our governments are advocating.

For me, it is NO.

This language is not a very intelligent one.

It won’t help people like Whitney.

I prefer my own doctors, health decisions, locally grown healthy food and healthy natural skies without the spewing foreign airplanes and so much more.

Come on WHO and UN, you should know better than this!

Sincerely,

P. Verschueren

Belgium

Dear Dame Barbara.

For real world data I always deferred to my wife, who started studying homoeopathy over 40 yrs ago under a graduate of the classical Greek School. At the most introductory level students saw global data that blew “vaccines” off the charts as the greatest disaster for humanity. Data that students of allopathic medicine were carefully shielded from. If we care about health the first step is to defund the WHO, keep the pharmaceutical industries well away from health, & stop vaccination programs- until any such pass an actual process of scientific trials.

As I am only a click off 70, I cannot think back to an actual epidemic- or as now re-named, pandemic, although Fergusson of Imperial College & his computer modelling has done his best to invent one, ie the recent “covid” fraud. As our family of course did not vaccinate- or ever wear a filthy unhygienic ‘mask,’ we did not experience “covid-” although those we know that indulged the injection experiment- are constantly sick with what they claim to be “covid;” or dead.

A decade ago the UN admitted a horrifying probability of the next big “epidemic” being an escaped lab experiment- or “bio-weapon.”

Might it not be smart to also stop the pharmaceutical laboratories playing around with ‘gain of function?’

Yours faithfully

Mark & Debbie Hampson

Dear Barbara,

I read your essay with much interest.

It struck me almost immediately that it serves as the perfect microcosm of the acute problem with Public Health in general. That problem, simply stated, is that Public Health is terrible at defining the ACTUAL problem it is trying to solve.

The anxiety you exhibit in the essay is focused on unblocking the negotiations of an exercise for which no rationale has yet been established. It's like arguing with your spouse over who should do the ironing while your house is on fire.

And the house IS on fire...a casual look at the "controversial" WHO responses to h1n1, Fukushima, Ebola historically and Monkeypox, COVID recently are the tinder to understand the point. Let the record state, for example, that countries that did not follow WHO recommendations for COVID had less deaths/1000 than those that did... curious

In short, having failed miserably to perform its primary role, Public Health seems to have decided it needs to perform more miserably in more places and with more control. Your essay argues that making sure this happens is crucial....are you so trapped in the organisational imperative that you can't see this?

Please don't underestimate the level of myopia Public Health is displaying to even the average citizen like myself. You should consider stepping out of your Truman show and really thinking about the problem you are solving for ..

How about spending time and money building and supporting local clinics, providing clean water, nutritional advice, exercise and good hygiene...rather than further entangling the bureaucratic knitting of a failed set of institutions for a future Pandemic?   

I'm sure you are acting in good faith but it is incumbent on everyone, as a life skill, to occasionally step away from the ironing and check where that smoke is coming from...

Regards

CTF 

To break the impasse, the WHO must recognise it can only ever be purely advisory.

Dear Dame Barbara Stocker,

WHO negotiations “are in a difficult place.” because they are founded on the extraordinary and anti-democratic idea that countries should surrender their sovereignty to an unelected body of bureaucrats and that citizens should be stripped of their civil liberties and transformed into serfs. This idea is antithetical to any civilised political engagement.

Those who are involved in these WHO meetings need to face the reality that they are attempting to assume to themselves unprecedented levels of power over unprecedented numbers of people and that they have no moral or democratic justification for this.

Any government which is fit for purpose must rest on legitimate authority and hence needs to be founded on the concepts of accountability to those whom it aims to govern and on subsidiarity; i.e the principle that decisions must be taken at the lowest level possible. 

Consensus can only be legitimately achieved between sovereign nations when they respect each other's sovereignty, the right of their citizens to have decisions taken on their behalf which respect their civil liberties by duly elected representatives who are accountable to those who have elected them.

Hence the WHO can only legitimately function as an advisory body to nation states

The response of each nation state to emerging events whether to do with health or anything else is not a matter for the WHO to determine, but rather is a matter for its government to decide in consultation with its citizens . 

Governments cannot prevent death.. This is not their role . Rather their job is to uphold the civil liberties of their citizens and to decide amongst the measures which respect such liberties which should be adopted in each new situation. In this ongoing process it must never be forgotten that we all die in the end but the important thing is for us all to have the chance to die as human beings and as citizens, taking personal and informed decisions with regard to their health and working and family lives.

The dissenting nations are right. To break the impasse, the other WHO members must recognise that whatever proposals they come up with can only ever be purely advisory. 

Most sincerely,

Karen R,

Cambridge

ThePeoplesDeclaration.com

ExitTheWHO.org

ExitTheWHO.com

StopTheGlobalAgenda.com

StopTheAmendments.com

StopTheWHO.com

ScrewTheWHO.com

MaskCharade.com

RejectDigitalEnslavement.com

HealthFreedomBillOfRights.com

PreventGenocide2030.org

DoorToFreedom.org

James Roguski

The old system is crumbling, and we must build its replacement quickly.

If you are fed up with the government, hospital, medical, pharmaceutical, media, industrial complex and would like to help build a holistic alternative to the WHO, then feel free to contact me directly anytime.

JamesRoguski.com

JamesRoguski.substack.com/about

JamesRoguski.substack.com/archive

310-619-3055

All content is free to all readers.

All support is deeply appreciated.

CLICK HERE TO DONATE