Search This Blog

Sunday, September 5, 2021

"Show Me Your Papers!" -- The Coming World Digital Documentation for COVID! Part 1

Will you need a vaccine passport to buy food?
Vaccine passports are coming (and already here in some countries) and organizations like the WHO (World Health Organization) are preparing the way for a global mandate.

I saw a Twitter post this morning showing the cover of a 97-page WHO document titled:

DIGITAL DOCUMENTATION OF COVID-19 CERTIFICATES: VACCINATION STATUS.

So I downloaded it and began reading. Sounds like a document from a dystopian novel. Truth these days rivals fiction. My comments throughout are in red!

The acknowledgements at the beginning note the participation of the usual suspects:

This work was funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the Government of Estonia, Fondation Botnar, the State of Kuwait, and the Rockefeller Foundation. The views of the funding bodies have not influenced the content of this document. [If you believe that you just popped out of the egg. Remember the U.S. fascination with eugenics? The Rockefeller Foundation was deeply involved in that and tens of thousands were deliberately sterilized because they were considered unfit or feebleminded by the elitists. History is repeating itself and it's all about control and creating a godless Utopia, for the wealthy and privileged, not you!] 

The executive summary should chill the heart of every freedom-loving person on the planet:

In the context of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, the concept of Digital Documentation of COVID-19 Certificates (DDCC) is proposed as a mechanism by which a person’s COVID-19-related health data can be digitally documented via an electronic certificate. A digital vaccination certificate that documents a person’s current vaccination status to protect against COVID-19 can then be used for continuity of care or as proof of vaccination for purposes other than health care. [Remember when our health care was supposed to be a private matter between us and our doctors? No more. But even more alarming is the fact that WHO seems perfectly fine with using the data "for purposes other than health care." Do I need to spell this out? There is already talk of discriminating against those who refuse the vax. They will not be able to travel, hold a job, shop, enjoy restaurants, sporting events, and other entertainment, etc. And many fellow citizens will applaud that. Demonization of the unvaxed has been escalating with those who refuse labeled selfish fanatics who don't care if people die. We are facing medical apartheid.] 
The resulting artefact of this approach is referred to as the Digital Documentation of COVID-19 Certificates:
Vaccination Status (DDCC:VS). The current document is written for the ongoing global COVID-19 pandemic; thus, the approach is architected to respond to the evolving science and to the immediate needs of countries in this rapidly changing context; for this reason, the document is issued as interim guidance. The approach could eventually be extended to capture vaccination status to protect against other diseases. [And what else?This friends is the establishment of Big Brother by medical tyranny. It explains all the fear mongering used to set people against each other. It explains the current  demonization of the unvaxed in order to make those who agreed to the jab feel superior and willing to join in the persecution of those who would not agree to be guinea pigs for the New World Order.] The document is part of a series of guidance documents (see Fig. 1) [And there are lots of them!] on digital documentation of COVID-19-related data of interest: vaccination status (this document), laboratory test results, and history of SARS-CoV-2 infection. (page 14)...

The document continues with a paragraph no doubt intended to defuse any concerns by the ignorant hoi polloi that the data might be misused. Hey, all it does is take the place of a paper record. Nothing to see here; move along:

The guidance in this document is for a digital record that only shows that a vaccination has occurred. The digital record is not intended to serve as an immunity passport or provide a judgement or decision on what that vaccination means or permits. (page 14)...

And then again:

PROOF OF VACCINATION: Vaccination records can also provide proof of vaccination status for purposes not related to health care. (page 16) [But remember they said two pages earlier that it is "not intended to serve as an immunity passport." wink, wink!]

Who decides the "appropriate use" of the digital doc? The "member states" who are also responsible for protecting privacy rights, etc. All this data will be collected in a "registry service." (page 18) [Do you trust the Biden administration to care about your rights? How about the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and other totalitarian regimes? This is not about health care; it's one more means of control.]

The doc goes on to claim that vaccination passports are "outside the scope" of the guidelines, but discuss using a "passport number" for  "stronger identity binding." (page 20)

It's almost funny reading this document as it outline principles of ethics and identity guarantees, especially when you consider the current administration's policy on identity verification for elections. No need to show proof to vote, but you better show proof of vaccination to go to a football game.

Page 22 has a long list of other WHO documents including several about proving vaccination for international travel and the collection and use of vaccination data. The WHO octopus reaches into many areas of life.

Section 2 contains extensive information about ethical considerations as if WHO cares a hoot for ethics. They are one of the biggest promoters of abortion and contraception under the euphemism of reproductive health. It's laughable to read their objective:

to create and maintain trust in public health activities as part of the health-care system. (page 24) [That horse has already left the barn.]
This paragraph is no doubt meant to lull the fears of those recognizing the likelihood of abuse which past experience confirms. Just think of the use of Social Security numbers which were supposed to be private:
Individual vaccination status is private information, and protections need to be in place to ensure that no individual is forced to disclose or publicly display a DDCC:VS to access any public area or activity (18). Such a practice and/or the lack of a DDCC:VS itself may result in the stigmatization of individuals without a DDCC:VS and may exacerbate the risk of harms. (page 24) [This is a joke. If it were, in fact, the policy of groups like WHO there would be no need for a governor like Ron DeSantis to implement fines for requiring vaccine proof to go to school or patronize a business. This is the velvet glove before the mailed fist! And WHO has a very bad track record on respecting human rights.]

It's instructive to see how people are labeled in the WHO doc. We are all "data subjects" with "data subject rights." Does anyone in their right mind with a knowledge of history really believe WHO cares about the rights of their "data subjects?" Remember Carrie Buck and the black men in the syphilis experiment. This gem is included on page 29:

A list of entities authorized to process personal data in the interest of the application of the DDCC:VS should be made public. [To what point? Can the "data subject" nix the "authorized entity" from using their personal information? Not likely. We're talking about Big Brother here. The past is prologue to the future. We have virtually no privacy rights at this point. Can anyone believe that all the blather about transparency and "data subject rights" will make an iota of difference to government surveillance?] 

Enough for now. I'm going to spend my Sunday in prayer and enjoying my family. We all need to do that while we still can.  

TO BE CONTINUED.... 

No comments: