I’ve been listening to your requests and although MANY of you realise that “Covid” is a scam, the question still gets asked: What Is Making People Sick? Here is my 16 minutes worth. Obviously, I can’t cover everything, but I’ve tried to summarise things in a cheeky way đ Let me know in the comments what you think!
Digital identity is well and truly established as one of the most significant technology trends on the planet.
As a result, a revolution in how individuals interact with public institutions and even private organisations is in full swing.
In this report, we’ll highlight the five most transformative digital identity trends set to shape the landscape in 2022 and beyond.
We’ll illustrate these trends with several examples: from Europe to the USA, Australia and New Zealand.
We’ll also see the foundational role of digital identity in the digital economy.
First, let’s start with a definition and look back at some of the landmarks of the past years.
What is a digital identity?
A digital identity is a set of validated digital attributes and credentials for the digital world, similar to a person’s identity for the real world.
Usually issued or regulated by a national ID scheme, a digital identity uniquely identifies a person online or offline.
It can include attributes such as a unique identity number, social security number, vaccination code, name, place, and date of birth, citizenship, biometrics, and more, as defined by national law.
With specific credentials such as an eID card (Germany, Italy, Spain, or Portugal), a derived digital driver’s license on a mobile phone (in several US states), a unique biometric-related ID number like in India, a mobile ID (Finland, Belgium or Estonia) or a Digital ID Wallet (EU initiative, Australia, etc..), it can be used to authenticate its owner.
These credentials may also include a digital identity certificate to sign electronically (give consent), obtain a seal (protect integrity), and a stamp (set time).
This dossier specifically targets sovereign digital identity frameworks piloted or supervised by a national agency.
Trusted Digital Identity for Everyone Everything Everyday
Let’s review the big ideas that gained traction in the past few years before looking at the future.
This overview will provide some reliable indicators as to where we are heading.
National ID schemes increased in number, visibility, and reach
At the ID2020 summit in May 2016 in New York, the UN initiated discussions around digital identity, blockchain, cryptographic technologies, and its benefits for the underprivileged. Four hundred experts shared best practices and ideas on how to provide universal identity to all.
Numerous new National eID programmes (including card and mobile-based schemes unrelated to ID2020) were launched or initiated. Examples include new projects in Algeria, Belgium (mobile ID), Cameroon, Ecuador, Jordan, the Philippines (PhilSys ID), Kyrgyzstan, Italy, Iran, Japan, Senegal, Taiwan, Thailand, Turkey, Ukraine, major announcements in âDenmark, the Netherlands, Bulgaria, the Maldives, Norway, Liberia, Poland, Jamaica, Sriâ Lanka, and Zambia. Some of these programs now include biometrics, the majority in the form of fingerprints.
Schemes such as the Gov.UK Verifyinitiative started in 2016. In August 2021, the government published its new version of its digital identity and attributes trust framework.
Australia launched the first phase of its digital identity program in August 2017.
Germany announced in February 2021that its citizens would be able to store a digital version of their national ID card on their phone and use it as a digital ID (with a PIN for authentication) by fall 2021.
Canada is also progressing with its federal digital identity scheme named Pan-Canadian Trust Framework, piloted by the Digital ID Authentication Council of Canada, a non-profit organisation (DIACCâ). A national proof of concept project for a unified login authentication service called Sign In Canada started in the fall of 2018.
Aadhaar (India’s national eID scheme)crossed the 1 billion users markâ in 2016. At the end of August 2021, over 1,3B Aadhaar electronic IDshave been generated (99% of adults). This digital identity can be obtained based on biometric and demographic data. mAadhaar is the official app available in 13 languages on Android and iOS (2019). It essentially acts as a virtual ID card.
Example of digital identity: Canada’s vision (September 2018)
New technologies and regulations supporting the transformation ahead
The United Nations (UN) and World Bank ID4D initiative aims to provide everyone on the planet with a legal identity by 2030.
Digital driver’s license projects (also known as mobile driver’s licenses) gathered momentum in countries including the USA, Korea, UK, Australia, Denmark and the Netherlands.
In April 2021, the US Department of Homeland Security Office of Strategy and Policy opened a public request for comment for digital ID security standards and platforms. The goal is to enable Federal agencies -The TSA (Transit Security Administration)- to accept these credentials for official purposes across the country.
Tests of blockchain technologies took place: in Estonia, to aid the development of a ground-breaking transnational e-residency program; in the UK, to see how it can be used to help make efficient welfare payments to citizens. Blockchain-based self-sovereign identity has been explored for decentralised digital ID architecture since 2018.
Smart borders and airports emerged at a faster pace. Combined with the 1,2 billion ePassports now in circulation and a strong push behind biometrics (particularly face recognitionâ), they offered travellers a taste of cross-border movement that is as secure as it is swift and seamless.
The security industry has been working hard to enhance IAM (Identity and Access Management) and ID verification solutions with, in particular, new secure onboarding apps, including facial recognition with liveness recognitionfeatures. Progress is visibly impressive. For example, with the help of artificial intelligence, the accuracy of the best facial recognition algorithms has increased by a factor of 50 in less than 6 years.
New ID wallet solutions are set to give a serious push to digital identification schemes worldwide. This recent technology defines a secure mobile app to store digitalised and encrypted versions of ID documents, be it an identity, a driver’s license, vehicle card registration, healthcare credentials etc.âŠ
In other words, citizens can have all their ID credentials at hand in a single, secure source for identification and ID verification services. Such wallets enable citizens to prove their identity and rights online and in-person to law enforcement officers, health professionals, or citizens. Crucially, the wallet allows the holder to share what is necessary to verify a transaction and nothing more.It makes sense when you think about it.In many use cases, what matters is a particular attribute or entitlement â age, address, the right to vote (citizenship) or benefit from welfare programs.
Essential for 500m citizens, the European Union’s Electronic Identification and Signature (eIDAS) regulation came into force in July 2016. It requires mandatory cross-border recognition of electronic ID by September 2018. This means existing, and future national digital identity schemes must be interoperable in the EU. However, member states are not forced to implement a digital ID scheme.
At the end of 2020, 19 digital identity schemes were interoperable in Europe in 15 countries: Germany, Belgium, Croatia, Denmark, Estonia, Italy, Spain, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Portugal, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, and the UK (GOV.UK verify).
In June 2021, the European Commissionhas suggested creating a digital ID wallet that can be used across the EU by more than 80% of the EU population by 2030. Read more about this project below.
New standards emerged, fostering compatibility and interoperability.
A new ICAO working group on digital travel credentials was created, led by Australia. The LDS2 conception phase â ‘the future of the ePassport‘ – was undertaken by the ICAO NTWG Logical Data Structure 2 Sub-Group.
The ISO SC17 WG10 – Task Force 14 “Mobile Driving Licence” started to work on verification standards for Mobile DL and defined the scope of offline verification. 2018 and 2019 saw draft specs of offline and online verification appear for a new work item.
Interoperability tests were organised in Japan (2018), in the USA (2019), in Australia (2019), in the Netherlands and in the USA in 2021. The ISO/IEC 18013-5 standard was finalised and published in September 2021. Initially designed to cover the specifications of mobile driver licenses, this ISO standard goes far beyond as it clearly defines the security and communication protocols for digitalised documents to be verified and trusted. As such, it can be referred to for any mobile document initiatives.
The IATA mobile ID working group started in 2017. In December 2020, IATA launched its Travel Pass, a mobile app that helps travellers store and manage their verified certifications for COVID-19 tests or COVID-19 vaccinations. Its ultimate goal is to integrate travel credentialsusing its One ID principle.
The(US) NIST Digital Identity Guidelines(NIST SP 800-63-3) were published in June 2017 (official edition-.)â The new version -aka NIST Digital Identity Guideline SP 800-63-4- started in 2020 and is in draft mode as of August 2021. These recommendations for open standards could help improve national identity, credentials, and access management.
In addition, industry alliances have defined, and standardised cryptography and protocols in frameworks and technologies such as OpenID connect, W3C Web authentication (FIDO2) and JWTs. These ubiquitous building bricks can help initiate robust digital identity ecosystems.
â
Digital identity – The five forces
âTo start with, don’t expect any slowdown in the momentum we’ve experienced over the past months. In its latest report, ABI Research forecast over 850 million citizens will be equipped with a form of mobile identity by 2026.
The following two years will see some of the most accelerated evolutionary changes experienced so far by public stakeholders and their partners in the field of secure digital identity.
In particular, we think these changes represent essential considerations for authorities that want to make digital mobile identity and online services defining features of their modernisation processes in the years to come.
We expect to see:
More access to the Internet and evenmore mobility
An accelerated shift to digital-first servicing boosted by the COVID 19 pandemic
Greater demand for security and trust
More calls for public supervision of digital identification systems
Even more national ID ââinitiatives and implementations
Let’s dig in.
#1. Easier access to the Internet and even more mobility
ID is getting digital quickly and will become ever more mobile.
Of course, it doesn’t take an expert to recognise we’ve entered an era in which mobile usage and connectivity dominates.
But it’s worth emphasising that the trend shows no sign of abating. And the implications for digital ID are profound.
Government policies, massive investments by telecom operators, falling prices of subscriptions and phones make it all the easier to access the Internet globally.
At the same time, global smartphone penetration is hitting the roof, bringing all the right and necessary infrastructures to launch mobile-based digital identities successfully.
Look at some of the facts:
âââ Google â a company that knows a thing or two about the future of technology – is steadily moving towards a mobile-first world.
Over 5B people already have access to the Internet at the end of 2021. The global online Internet penetration surpasses 66%. Over 92% access the Internet via mobile devices.
55% of global internet traffic is mobile in Q1 2021, according to Statista. Mobile devices are now the primary means of accessing the Internet for users. Mobile connections take the lion’s share of web traffic in mobile-first markets like Africa and Asia.
The global smartphone penetration rate is estimated to have reached over 78% in 2020. This is based on anestimated 6.4 billion smartphone subscriptions worldwideand aglobal population of around 7.8 billion.
According to the GSMA, a new decade of growth has begun for smartphones in Sub-Saharan Africa. Adoption reaching 50% in 2020 and is expected to hit up to 65% by 2025.
The lesson for all digital ID stakeholders is clear: prepare for mobile-first solutions.
#2. An accelerated shift to digital-first servicing
The pandemic accelerated trends such as the digitisation of government, and citizens – left with no choice- embraced technology at levels only anticipated for five or ten years in the future.
Let’s take two examples:
In one year, the number of digital identities issued by the Italian national scheme exploded to 24m as of September 2021 -from 8 in June 2020- according to AGID (Agency for Digital Italy.)
Over 30m users (from 14m in mid-2020) regularly use FranceConnect to authenticate and access 900+ online services as of December 2021.
According to Deloitte, those governments able to address the challenges with success became the most trusted institutions in twenty years for the first time.
Not only more and more governments are fast equipping their citizens with a trusted mobile ID, but they also seem to be accelerating the dematerialisation of public services to enhance the quality of service delivery.
Gartner predicts that by 2023 over 60% of governments will have tripled citizen digital services.
Public agencies have a more mature vision and associated digital strategy and implement digital identity and valuable services in parallel.
Those service-rich online portals offer the necessary tangible benefits to citizens: the assurance they will be able to do more online, have access to almost all available services remotely and will save significant time. Such a virtuous circle will further boost adoption by citizens and encourage government bodies to dematerialise even more.
In Denmark, NemID (soon to be called MitID), the domestic digital ID scheme, is now reaching 100% adoption, which enabled the government to make online access mandatory to public services in the country.
Of course, the scheme was designed to be inclusive in the first place, and as such, offers specific authentication means to the elderly, for instance.
The pandemic presents an opportunity for systemic change and tackle weaknesses such as id theft and fraud.
We need to acknowledge that most existing systems are simply not delivering the progress we need to achieve in secure identification and authentication.
In its March 2021 report, Gartner states that citizen digital identity is one of the top trends that can transform public services in the coming months. The company predicts that standards will emerge by 2024 and make it easier to leverage the technology.
The global pandemic changed digital identity from “nice to have” to “must-have” for governments.
So, here is another takeaway.
Government can seize this moment as an opportunity for transformation.
#3. Greater demand for privacy and trust
The following two years’ key challenge for public authorities will be to create harmonious digital bonds that secure the relationship between new mobile identities and broader society.
This bond is only possible through a general framework of trust built on personal data protection and security guarantees.
In 2018-2021, we had seen those measures taken to bolster security and combat fraud are generally well accepted by citizens. These are, of course, sovereign matters par excellence.â
Robust security measures will respond to new demands for trust in all exchanges between citizens and public authorities.
With the explosion of data harnessed by extraordinary advances in technology and the spread of connected devices, the latest surveys show that citizens are more and more worried.
Users demand robust data privacy processes; they want to control their data and decide on what piece of data they share and with whom.
To address those new needs for privacy, the next generation of mobile ID is coming to the market in the form of a Digital ID Wallet.
Highlighting the significance of this shift, Gartner has positioned ‘Identity Wallets for Citizens’ at the peak of its Hype Cycle Wave for Digital Government Technology in 2021.
What exactly is a digital ID wallet? Quite simply, it is a mobile solution that enables citizens to store, manage and selectively disclose identity-related data from different sources and for other purposes.
Those Self Sovereign Identity friendly wallets are gaining more and more momentum around the world and are taking various flavours and shapes. There is certainly more than one way of doing this!
For example, the ISO 18013-5 standard, which defines specifications of mobile documents, is built-on privacy by design principles and gives citizens the power to select the identity attribute they want to share without disclosing their complete identity.
Decentralised identity schemes and Verifiable Credential standards from W3C are also trying to achieve the same goal, giving more control to citizens over their data.
The recent months saw an avalanche of new regulations regarding privacy protection worldwide.
From Europe to Brazil (Lei Geral de Proteção de Dado has been in effect since September 2020), from India and China to California and Africa (South Africa’s POPIA went into effect on 1 July 2020), privacy laws have been passed or are being updated.
European GDPR
The General Data Protection Regulation of May 2018 (GDPR) for the European Member States represents a significant step toward data protection and privacy. It’s a unique privacy framework impacting twenty-eight countries, including the UK.
California CCPA and CRPA
The California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA), voted at the end of May 2018, is now effective as of 1 January 2020.
It’s is a significant step forward for privacy rights as the state is often seen as a trendsetter in this domain.
CPRA (California Privacy Rights Act), passed into law in November 2020, is another layer that creates new rights and expands existing ones for California residents.
The law is potentially a model for a US (i.e., federal) data privacy law.
In that sense, the CCPA and CRPA have the potential to become as important as the GDPR.
India
In August 2017, India’s supreme court ruled privacy a “fundamental right” in a landmark case, illustrating that biometric data protection is now on top of the regulators’ list in the world’s largest democracy.
Modi’s new government enhanced privacy protection laws in 2019.
A Personal Data Protection (PDP) legislation is being prepared with similarities with the EU’s GDPR and Californian CCPA. The bill is currently being reviewed (December 2021).
We saw in 2018-2021 the emergence of a global consensus on privacy, its fundamental principle being that mismanagement of personal information will not be tolerated and that companies that do not protect data adequately could be hit with massive fines.â
Citizens are expecting greater security and control over their data
New digital identities are taking the form of a Digital ID Wallet
The 2022-2023 period represents a perfect opportunity for public authorities to revitalise the sovereign bond with citizens. In doing so, they can prove it is not some obscure relic of the past but a symbolic, identity-rich vehicle for collective trust
#4. Public supervision will be critical to sustaining growth in the digital economy
Faced with an increasingly challenging economic landscape, governments inevitably search for new sustainable, harmonious growth opportunities.
As regulatory environments take shape, close collaboration between the financial world, central and local public authorities, and digital communications operators will support effective solutions and implement best practices.
Of course, the natural source of new business opportunities is not digital identity itself but the myriad of applications it enables.
This domain is where banks and other operators will see a bottom-line return on investment.
As already outlined, the march of the digital ID is well underway.
Therefore, the focus will be on adopting the new structures and regulations needed to govern the associated services and transactions.
So what does this mean in practice?
The role of public authorities will be to:
Build and nurture national momentum.
Support and coordinate local government investments through which local transformations, close to the community, can operate effectively and efficiently.
Ensure that these multiple local initiatives create a coherent and interoperable spectrum of solutions: mobile citizens will need to find similar service modes wherever they may be.
In the years ahead, the market will follow these initiatives.
#5. More national initiatives and implementations
In the years ahead, the market will follow these initiatives.
How can we be so sure?
Because evidence of the uptake of digital ID and associated services is multiplying.
It gives us the most unambiguous signals that a tipping point is reached.
EU’s proposal: Digital Identity for all Europeans
In its June 2021 proposal, the European Commission specifically suggested creating a digital id wallet.
According to the report (June 2021), digital identities based on digital wallets stored securely on mobile devices were identified as a primary asset for a future-proof solution.
This new form of ID would allow the EU’s 450m residents to access public and private services.
Why a new proposal?
The current eIDAS regulation « falls short » of addressing new market demands, says the Commission.
There’s more. The former regulation was limited to the public sector, complex for third parties and lacked flexibility.
In other words, eIDAS did not reach its potential. Only 60% of EU residents have access to trusted id schemes. Only seven are fully mobile.
By contrast, with this new digital identity framework, at least 80% should use digital IDs by 2030.
The EU id wallet could work across the EU and include electronic attestations of attributes such as ids, driving licenses, diplomas or health certificates and access a broad range of services. It will not be compulsory.
The harmonised wallets issued by the Member States would come in a smartphone app.
Private platforms such as Facebook or Google would be « required » to accept the wallet. Citizens would then use their EU id wallet instead, as Margrethe Vestager, the EU Commissioner for Digital Europe, puts it.
What’s next?
The project will need to be discussed with EU members. An agreement on technical details is expected by fall 2022.
To become a law, the proposed plan will request validation by the EU lawmakers of the European Parliament.
Digital identity and the USA
As congressman Bill Foster puts it in June 2021:” It’s time for the United States to catch up to the rest of the developed world on digital identity.”
The NIST Digital Identity Guidelines are formerly knownâ as NIST SP 800-63-3. NIST published the official edition in June 2017, with an extended edition in 2020 and a new draft this summer.â
The bad news?
The initiative launched by the Obama administration never gained momentum as no service providers adopted the framework.
As CSO online stated, the country lacks a comprehensive digital ID strategy (17 September 2020.)
In summary, the design of a coherent ID scheme in the country would need to tackle the unique aspects of the federalist structure, the role of the private sector and challenging privacy and security aspects.
For the moment, several US states have taken the lead and launched or planning to launch digital driver’s licenses (aka mobile driver’s licenses) with the ability to use id credentials online.
New Zealand’s Digital Identity Trust Framework legislation has been drafted this year. It was introduced to parliament in September 2021. It will define rules for the delivery of digital identity services. Identity providers will then be accredited. (progress of the bill)
Australia has decided to delay launching an enhanced version of myGovID and include facial verification capabilities. Due by mid-2020, the scheme is now operational. More than 6m Australians and 1m businesses are already using the digital identity credentialing app, available since June 2019. My GovID and myGov (online government services) are now connected.
So why is digital identity so important?
The benefits of digital identity
Digital identity is playing a foundational role in our digital economy.
Thomas Renz on vaccines at Ron Johnson’s COVID-19 press conf.
Miscarriages up 300%
Cancer up 300%
Neurological issues up 1000%
This is a very important video where Senator Ron Johnson listens to devastating figures that are being hidden by Fauci and the CDC. This is happening all over the world. This is depopulation on a global level.
I know for many of you that this is extremely difficult to believe, but look at the history of rulers and governments.
We are nothing to these people. We put them in power and now that power is being used against us. Look at my other posts. The truth is hard to imagine, but it is happening.
Klaus Schwab in 2017 at Harvard: “What we are very proud of, is that we penetrate the global cabinets of countries with our WEF Young Global Leaders.”
People don’t believe people like me when we tell them that everything is planned for the great reset. We show irrefutable evidence of everything but it’s just not going in and registering.
The one question I always ask is this,
Why do they use covid RELATED figures when counting the deaths?
I’ve asked this question thousands of times. I have never had an answer. For some reason it’s ignored, it’s like they don’t see the question. There is only one answer for this, and that’s to bump up the death figures. When people realise that this is not normal and realise this, they should (well maybe) start thinking for themselves and start seeing other ridiculous things that’s happening.
The most suspicious government mandate is the NHS being told to have the vaccine or lose their jobs.
Now, they’ve worked for 2 years through the worst of the pandemic, and Omicron is so deadly that they are allowing the 70,000 plus staff to work until April. And on top of that, even if they did have the injection, they can still catch covid and still pass it on. And anyone else who has had it can still catch it and still pass it on. So why can’t people see the absurdity with this?
There is data on the government website in every country proving that the vaccinated are dying and are filling the hospitals. But the media and government won’t show you this because they are trying to blame the unvaccinated so that everyone turns against them in the hope that they will buckle and have the injection.
So Klaus Schwab wrote the book â The Great Reset â I’ve put a free copy on a previous post. This book is the complete guide to everything that has happened, is happening and will happen. But still, people do not believe what you show them.
Anyway, below is the link for the short video on Klaus Schwab explaining how he has placed the right people in the right places.
More than half the newly vaccinated deaths were dumped in the unvaccinated.
Those who have done the slightest bit of research (really not a dirty word), will know that there is no claim of protection after the first dose of the COVID vaccine.
So imagine how you can conflate the vaccine effectiveness stats if you dump all the COVID events (cases, hospitalizations and deaths) that occur subsequent to infection within 14 days of the first dose into the unvaccinated.
Well, now we know for sure from the data published by the Government of Alberta1. Like everywhere else in the world they claim very impressive vaccine effectiveness by following the fraudulent standard set by the drug manufacturers in the pantomime clinical trials, i.e. to ignore the adverse outcomes in the first two weeks post administration.
But then they go one better and actually inflate the unvaccinated numbers too. And this is on top of dumping the events within 14 days of dose 2 in the partially vaccinated as well, of course.
Almost half of all COVID hospitalizations of the newly vaccinated occurred within 14 days which means they were treated as unvaccinated in the stats.
Fortunately, they inadvertently let us in on the magnitude of this duplicity by also publishing the time from dose to infection for each of the events, thereby allowing us to recalculate just how many events in the first 14 days were shifted from the vaccinated to the unvaccinated cohort.
In terms of deaths, the duplicity is even more severe with almost 56% of deaths of the newly vaccinated occurring within 14 days and almost 90% within 45 days.
As usual, if you are interested in public health information, you should be very wary of anything that comes from the public health authorities which is then heralded by the propaganda media and their other shills.
Your life might well depend on it.
Post Script
In reaction to reader comments, I am also including the case data.
It evidently follows the same pattern. However, in the first 14 days we range from 40% of cases, 48% of hospitalizations to 56% of deaths.
I guess it could be possible that the excess hospitalizations over cases and deaths over hospitalizations could be subject to prioritization of the sick but I donât think it really matters. Itâs the sick that needed protection anyway, not the healthy! And if it didnât improve outcome for the sick then what exactly is the point??
Just for the record, here is the full history of cases, annotated with the start of the mass vaccination campaign. Interesting, eh?
So, it turns out Alberta has suddenly scrambled to remove the incriminating data from their website. So, hereâs a copy for the record3. Exhibit A, your honour.
A complaint has been filed in the United States of America on the 17th January 2022, at the Office of Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton. the chief legal officer of the U.S. state of Texas against individuals who are accused of being complicit in murder and crimes against humanity.
The complainant is a resident of Harris County Texas, Jack Boteler who is representing all interested parties who received the Emergency Use Authorization âinvestigational injection of genetic biologic material (mRNA or adenoviral DNA) coding for the Wuhan spike proteinâ
The complaint has extensive, detailed evidence to show that the accused jointly planned and executed the development and release of a biowarfare toxin with the dual objectives of global depopulation, and population control.
Their aim according to the complaint, is to ultimately lead to a one-world government by inducing panic, economic hardship, terror, death, and injury to global populations.
Who Are âTheyâ?
Many of us throughout this two-year period refer to the people that orchestrated the greatest hoax known to man, as âtheyâ. For example. âTheyâ have created a âpandemicâ as a trojan horse in order to usher in a New World Order. Or, âtheyâ are violating our human rights, etc, but who exactly are âtheyâ?
Boteler knows exactly who âtheyâ are and has named names and while the majority of them are the usual suspects, and often cited as the perpetrators, there are a few names here that do not get enough exposure.
While they enjoy their relative anonymity, they are able to continue aiding with the alleged offences with little disruption to their lives. For this reason, the long list of names of the âtheyâ in this complaint are named here, for which I make no apology.
They are:
Any and all officers and/or directors of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”) and affiliates Food and Drug Administration (FDA), National Institutes of Health (“NIH*), National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (“NIAID”), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC”), Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Dr. Ralph Baric and the Board of Regents at the University of North Carolina Chappell Hill. Director General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus of the World Health Organization (“WHO”). Dr. Anthony Fauci. Dr. Francis Collins. Dr. Rick Bright. Dr. Janet Woodcock. Dr. Peter Daszak: Mr. William Gates Junior. Mr. Theodore (“Tedâą) Tumer. Mr. Eli Broad Mr. George Soros. Dr. Deborah Birx. Mr. Richard A. Rothschild. Any Director or Officer of Moderna Inc Any Director or Officer of Pfizer, Inc. Any Director or Officer of Johnson & Johnson Services, Inc. Any Director or Officer of Astra Zeneca PIc Any Director or Officer of the Pirbright Institute Any Director or Officer of John Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. Any Director or Officer of the World Economic Forum. Any Director or Officer of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation Any Director or Officer of the World Bank Any Director or Officer of the International Monetary Fund (“IMF)
Although an already sizable list of defendants, Boteler also includes any other person, governmental, or non-governmental organization, incorporated or not, including both U.S. and international media who knowingly aided and abetted the denial or restriction of access to therapeutic treatments for the Sars-CoV-2 virus and/or promoted or distributed Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) experimental gene therapy injections (Covid 19 Vaccines).
Psychological Warfare
The complaint alleges that the above perpetratorâs employed psychological warfare mechanisms, which include, media reports, public policy, coercion, deceit, mandates, bribes, travel restrictions, employment restrictions, free speech restrictions, liberty restrictions, and other tactics.
These mechanisms were used to induce the global population into receiving the pre-planned experimental gene therapy, an accusation which is supported by data and evidence which, although already vast is said to be only a small fraction of demonstrable, evidentiary material.
Factual Allegations
Much of this evidence is cited within a 30-page document which shows the international events that have occurred over many years which have contributed to the crimes.
Here is just a taster of just some of the events and the individuals involved which are cited in the complaint as factual allegations which include virus origins, vaccine development, and promotion, hospitalisations, and censored therapeutics and physician prerogatives.
Boteler has provided evidence that Fauci took steps as far back as 1986 to create a human dependency on vaccines by lobbying for legislation to relieve the pharmaceutical companies of liability through emergency use authorisation (source).
In 1998 Fauci went on to fund research at the University of North Carolina Chappell Hill (UNC) following Dr. Ralph Baricâs clone of the Corona Virus and amplifying the pathogenic âSpikeâ Protein. A year later, in 1999 the Coronavirus was engineered as a bioweapon paid for by Fauci through NIAID. and later patented by UNC as the Sars Corona Virus in 2002 â a full year before anyone ever heard the name, Sars. (source) (Source) (source).
Between January 2014 and December 2020, Fauci, along with other named and unnamed Defendants, provided samples of biowarfare agents and funding to the Wuhan level 4 biolab for the purpose of continuing âgain-of-functionâ research. Fauci later told congress under oath that the purpose was not gain-of-function, evidence would later prove he lied (source) (source) (source).
Particularly notable is that in 2017 Fauci warned President Trump that he would be âhaving to deal with a major, global pandemic during his first term in officeâ video below
Gates
Bill Gates is well known for his involvement in all things âCOVIDâ related, however, not so well known is the fact he convened a meeting around March 2013, which included Fauci, Eli Broad, Theodore (Ted) Turner, Warren Buffet, Oprah Winfrey, George Soros, William Gates Jr., and other Defendants.
The meeting which was held in New York although framed in less âsinisterâ terms according to the complaint, was for the purpose of planning a mass reduction of the Worldâs population, as evidenced in part by the presence of Dr. Fauci, the only non-billionaire believed there present. (source) (source) (source) (Source).
On the 17th February 2017, Gates predicted a world-wide pandemic at the 53 Munich Security Conference stating, âBioterrorism has become feasible enough that a genetic engineer could use computers to create a synthetic airborne pathogen capable of wiping out a fraction of the worldâs population quickly.
âThe next epidemic could originate on the computer screen of a terrorist intent on using genetic engineering to create a synthetic version of the smallpox virus, or a super contagious and deadly strain of the fluâ (source).
Baric
On the 9th November 2015, Defendant Ralph Baric,from the department of microbiology and immunology of UNC published A SARS-like Cluster of Circulating Bat Coronaviruses Shows Potential for Human Emergence,resulting from his research to create a virulent disease with manufactured âgain-of functionâ
The report which was directed and sent Fauci, stated: âHaving established that the SHC014 spike has the ability to mediate infection of human cells and cause disease in mice, we next synthesized a full-length SHC014-CoV infectious clone based on the approach used for SARS-CoV.â
Baric also states: âto examine the emergence potential (that is, the potential to infect humans) of circulating bat CoVs, we built a chimeric virus encoding a novel, zoonotic CoV spike protein {. . . ] we characterized CoV infection mediated by the SHC014 spike protein in primary human airway cells and in vivo and conclude these results confirm that the DIV vaccine would not be protective against infection with SHC014 and could possibly augment disease in the agedâvaccinated group.â(source).
Peter Daszak has been a relative lesser-known name in comparison to Fauci, Gates, and Rockefeller, yet appears to be very instrumental in the planning of the âPandemicâ
In 2015, Dr. Peter Daszak, who was then CEO of EcoHealth Alliance, in an address to the National Academy of Science, spoke on the need to promote a major pandemic, saying that âuntil an infectious disease crisis is very real, present, and at an emergency threshold it is often ignored.
âTo sustain the funding base beyond the crisis, he said, we need to increase public understanding of the need for MCMâs such as a panâinfluenza or panâcoronavirus vaccine. A key driver is the media, and the economics follows the hype. We need to use that hype to our advantage to get to the real issues. Investors will respond if they see profit at the end of the processâ.(source).
Rockefeller
David Rockefeller seems to be someone who had akways been very open about his plans for the global population, I guess it is true what they say, that the best place to hide is in the open, as although quoted many times for years, his statements never seemed to be taken seriously.
Rockefeller is cited in the complaint from 1984 where he is said to have opined on the need to end self-rule government (source) A decade later, he was still touting the benefits of a one-world government and population control which was quoted from his address at the U.N. General Assembly three years later,
We are grateful to the Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine and other publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subject to the bright lights of publicity during those years. But the world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march toward a world government. . The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries. (source)
In May 2010, the Rockefeller Foundation and Global Business Network published Scenarios for the Future of Technology and International Development, which outlines a scenario whereby World powers utilize a global pandemic, naturally occurring or man-made, that presents an opportunity to technocratically control humanity and reduce the size of the global population.
LOCK STEP Scenario, Narratives, depicted a world of tighter topâdown government control and more authoritarian leadership, with limited innovation and growing citizen pushback (page 18). This publication provided the framework and methodology for the planning and preparation of a planned biowarfare attack on the global population according to Boteler (source)(source).
More Pre-Planning Evidence
Rockefeller was not alone in the preparations for the future âvirusâ or Trojan horse aiding the acceptance of the NWO. T he complaint has also evidenced that the COVID âPandemicâ was pre-planned through:
A 2019, WHO publication a âWorldwide Exercise in the Release of Respiratory Pathogensâ, to facilitate a worldwide acceptance of a vaccine (source).
An Executive Order in September 2019 for a âWarp Speedâ development of a vaccine, Fauci later told congress (Dec 2019), that the Presidentâs E.O. had authorised the mRNA vaccine development.
October 2019, Gates, Fauci, Brix, the NIH, CDC and WHO, and associated conspirators planned, orchestrated and conducted Event 201 a practice run of their global response to their criminal enterprise (Source)
September 2015, Richard Rothschild & the Pirbright Institute developed and patented the âCovid 19â Polymerase Chain Reaction (âPCRâ) test kit, four and a half years before the discovery of the Novel Corona Virus (Source)
January 2018, the World Bank, affiliated financing subsidiaries and associated entities, including the International Monetary Fund (âIMFâ), financed the purchase of Covid 19 Polymerase Chain Reaction (âPCRâ) Test kits for more than 50 countries world-wide.
Factual Allegations â Vaccinations
Additional evidence to suggest the whole event has been preplanned was also shown regarding vaccines. For example, October 2016, Defendant National Institutes of Health, and other parties, filed for US Patent WO/2018/081318 to create an injectable compound to cause the recipient to produce prefusion coronavirus Spike proteins.
This injectable is known as the âModerna Covid 19 Vaccineâ. A recently disclosed 2015, heretofore âConfidentialâ Agreement between the NIAID and Moderna, show that the two jointly owned the vaccine when at the same time sharing the dataset with UNCâs Dr Ralph Baric.(source)
Boteler has also gathered further information regarding how defendants ânamed and unnamedâ but including the CDC, WHO. NIH, fraudulently fraudulently coerced, mandated, tricked and conducted a criminal scheme to increase the fear and terror among the global population by economically rewarding hospitals, physicians, governments, ministries and health service providers with pecuniary rewards up to US $400,000 per case for diagnosing substantially all sickness, morbidity and fatalities as being caused by Covid 19 (Source)
The vaccines were then hailed as being the answer to those fatalities, yet as of January 2, 2022, the VAERS weekly âRed Boxâ Report VAERS reached the âunprecedented milestoneâ of 1,000,227 injuries following coronavirus vaccines. In the 31-year history of VAERS, there are 9,248 reports of fatalities following all other vaccines.
Also, since the start of the coronavirus vaccine campaign there have been 21,002 reports of death following coronavirus vaccines.
It is noted, too, that after approximately 26 reported deaths the Swine Flu Vaccine was stopped. (Source)
The Boteler case, as far as we can see, has it all, and has cited the evidence to support his allegations. We wish him all the very best of luck with his case and thank him for bringing these crimes against humanity to the justice system.
This is session 88 of the CIC which have an international criminal court case in the Hague against many high-class figures in governments and corporations around the world.
There is the risk of violence towards unvaccinated people. You must watch this video and look at what they want to do to unvaccinated.
I can see widespread violence around the world at this rate, which is what they want.
But the corona investigative committee are breathing down their neck.
Detection of the spike protein causing damage has been proved
The Truth Hurts News Share blog 