6 Comments

Indeed, David and I cannot think why a government is even considering surrendering so much power to an unelected body. And one which includes such fine examples of democratic values in its leadership.

Even I understand that the impact of disease is geographical, demographic, climatic and personal- the one size fits all just doesn't work. Anyway, I prefer to make my own assessment of risk...and I believe I should have that right.

Expand full comment

Thanks Panda. Knowing now of gates' major funding of the WHO. Clearly WHO is without merit now.

Expand full comment

This is perfect. Thank you.

Expand full comment

Anybody who thinks that the WHO is anything but a criminal organisation is drinking the Koolaid. All this dancing round the handbags, if it does not stop, will ensure that the bloodshed that results will be the greatest of recent epochs. I, like many others, spent three years spreading information denied to us by the bought media. It is clear that the supply of truthfull information is not the problem -that is the number of people, including the excellent Panda, who would still

prefer not to look things full in the face.

Solzhenitsyn was I think right in his analysis of the Quiet Man. The Quiet Man stays quiet for a long time, until there is no possibility of staying silent; he does this because he knows that if he does not his life will change forever, so God help those who force this to happen.

Expand full comment

*poorly unaccountable institution---needs to be rephrased... otherwise, spot on, as always!

Power tripping plutocrats (with a savior complex?) in cahoots with opportunistic bureaucrats and sycophant hypocrites are more dangerous to our collective wellbeing than anything they purport to save us from...

Expand full comment