In four days’ time, on Wednesday September 20th, our representatives meeting at the United Nations will sign off on a ‘Declaration’ titled: ‘Political Declaration of the United Nations General Assembly High-level Meeting on Pandemic Prevention, Preparedness and Response.’
This was announced as a “silent procedure”, meaning that States not responding will be deemed supporters of the text. The document expresses a new policy pathway for managing populations when the World Health Organisation (WHO), the health arm of the UN, declares a future viral variant to be a “public health emergency of international concern”. The WHO noted in 2019 that pandemics are rare and insignificant in terms of overall mortality over the last century. Since then, it decided that the 2019 old-normal population was simply oblivious to impending annihilation. The WHO and the entire UN system now consider pandemics an existential and imminent threat. This matters, because:
- They are asking for far more money than is spent on any other international health program (your money);
- This will deliver great wealth to some people who now work closely with WHO and the UN;
- The powers being sought from your Government will reimpose the very responses that have just caused the largest growth in poverty and disease in our lifetimes; and
- Logically, pandemics will only become more frequent if someone intends to make them so (so we should wonder what is going on).
Staff who drafted this Declaration did so because it is their job. They were paid to write a text that is clearly contradictory, sometimes fallacious, and often quite meaningless. They are part of a rapidly growing industry, and the Declaration is intended to justify this growth and the centralisation of power that goes with it. The document will almost certainly be agreed by our Governments because, frankly, this is where the momentum and money are.
Whilst the Declaration’s 13 pages are all over the place in terms of reality and farce, they are not atypical of recent UN output. People are trained to use trigger words, slogans and propaganda themes (e.g., “equity”, “empowerment of all women and girls”, “access to education”, “technology transfer hubs”) that no one could oppose without risking being labelled a denier, far-Right or colonialist.
The Declaration should be read in the context of what these institutions and their staff have just done. It is difficult to summarise such a compendium of right-speak intended to veil reality, but it is hoped this short summary will prompt some thought. Wickedness is not a mistake but an intended deception, so we need to distinguish these clearly.
Fomenting darkness behind a veil of light
Put together, the following two extracts summarise the internal contradiction of the Declaration’s agenda and its staggering shamelessness and lack of empathy:
In this regard, we:
PP3: Recognise also the need to tackle health inequities and inequalities, within and among countries…
PP5: Recognise that the illness, death, socio-economic disruption and devastation caused by the COVID-19 pandemic…
‘Recognition’ of devastation is important. SARS-CoV-2 was associated with mortality predominantly within wealthy countries, where median age of Covid-associated death was between 75 and 85 years. Nearly all of these people had significant co-morbidities such as obesity and diabetes, meaning their life-expectancy was already restricted. Most people contributing significantly to economic activity were at very low risk, a profile know in early 2020.
These three years of socio-economic devastation must, therefore, be overwhelmingly due to the response. The virus did not starve people, as the Declaration’s writers would like us to believe. Deteriorating disease control was predicted by WHO and others in early 2020, increasing malaria, tuberculosis, HIV/AIDS and malnutrition. Economic disruption in low-income countries specifically results in more infant and child deaths.
In Western countries, adult mortality has risen as expected when screening for cancer and heart disease are reduced and poverty and stress increase. Knowing this, WHO advised in late 2019 to ”not under any circumstances” impose lockdown-like measures for pandemic influenza. In early 2020, under the influence of its sponsors, it advocated them for COVID-19. The Declaration, however, carries no note of contrition or repentance.
Undeterred by incongruity, the Declaration goes on to describe COVID-19 as “one of the greatest challenges” in UN history (PP6), noting that somehow this outbreak resulted in “exacerbation of poverty in all its forms and dimensions, including extreme poverty”. In fact, it acknowledges that this caused:
(a) negative impact on equity, human and economic development across all spheres of society, as well as on global humanitarian needs, gender equality and the empowerment of all women and girls, the enjoyment of human rights, livelihoods, food security and nutrition, education, its disruption to economies, supply chains, trade, societies and the environment, within and among countries, which is reversing hard-won development gains and hampering progress (PP6)
To restate the obvious, this does not happen due to a virus targeting sick elderly people. It occurs when children and productive adults are barred from school, work, healthcare and participation in markets for goods and services. Economic, social and health catastrophe inevitably results, disproportionately harming poorer people and low-income countries, conveniently far indeed from the halls of Geneva and New York.
No, we were not all in this together.
Not all were negatively impacted by this catastrophe. People and corporations who sponsor much of the WHO’s health emergency work, and that of its sister organisations such as CEPI, Gavi and Unitaid, did very well from the policies they advocated so strongly. Software and Pharma companies made unprecedently high profits while this mass impoverishment played out. The international agencies have also gained; construction and recruitment are strong in Geneva. Philanthro-capitalism is good for some.
The main aim of the Declaration is to back the proposed WHO International Health Regulation (IHR) amendments and treaty (PP26), key to ensuring that viral outbreaks that have such small impact can remain highly profitable. An additional $10 billion dollars per year in new financing is requested to support this (PP29). There is a reason why most countries have laws against scams. The UN and its agencies, fortunately for its staff, are outside of any national jurisdiction.
Based on their sponsors’ assessments, the staff of these agencies are doing their job well. For the rest of humanity, their work is an unmitigated disaster. In 2019 they said never lock down, then spent 2020 defending top-down lockdowns and mandates. For three years, they theatrically pretended that decades of knowledge on immunity, disease burden and the association of poverty with mortality did not exist. Now they write this UN Declaration to fund their industry further through taxpayers they so recently impoverished. Once tasked to serve the world’s vast populations, particularly the poor and vulnerable, the UN vision has been consumed by public private partnerships, the allure of Davos and a fascination with high-net-worth individuals.
When words are used to obscure actions
While the Declaration underlines the importance of educating children during pandemics (PP23), these same organisations backed school closures for hundreds of millions of children at minimal risk from COVID-19. Among them, several million more girls are now being farmed off to nightly rape as child brides, others in child labour. Women and girls were disproportionately removed from education and from employment. They weren’t asked if they supported these policies!
The girls are being raped because the people paid to implement these policies did so. They know the contradiction, and the harm. But this is a job like many others. The only unusual aspects, from a business standpoint, are the sheer amorality and lack of empathy that must be engaged to excel in it.
To justify wrecking African children’s lives, the UN claims out that the continent has “over 100 major public health emergencies annually” (OP4). Africa has a rising burden of endemic diseases that dwarf mortality from such outbreaks – over half a million children die every year from malaria (increased through the COVID-19 lockdowns) and similar burdens from tuberculosis and HIV. By contrast, total COVID-19 deaths recorded in Africa over the past three years are just 256,000. The 2015 West African Ebola outbreak, the largest such recent emergency pre-Covid, killed 11,300 people. MERS and SARS1 killed less than 1,000 each globally. However, induced poverty does cause famine, raises child mortality and wrecks health systems – is this the health emergency that the UN is referring to? Or is it simply making things up?
Through the IHR amendments, these agencies will coordinate the locking down, border closures, mandated medical examinations and vaccination of you and your family. Their Pharma sponsors reasonably expect to make several hundred billion more dollars from these actions, so we can be confident that emergencies will be declared. By claiming 100 such events annually in Africa alone, they are signalling how these new powers will be used. We are to believe the world is such that only the abandonment of our rights and sovereignty, for the enrichment of others, can save us.
The UN and WHO do recognise that some will question this illogic. In PP35, they characterise such scepticism as “health-related misinformation, disinformation, hate speech and stigmatisation”.
The WHO recently publicly characterised people who discuss adverse effects of Covid vaccines and question WHO policies as “far-Right”, “anti-science aggressors” and “a killing force”.
This is unhinged. It is the denigration and hate speech that fascist regimes use. The reader must decide whether such an organisation should control his or her freedom of expression and decide what constitutes truth.
It is not helpful here to give details of all 13 pages of right-speak, contradiction and fallacy. You will find similar rhetoric in other UN and WHO documents, particularly on pandemic preparedness. Straight-talk is contrary to business requirements. However, the first paragraph in the Declaration’s ‘Call to Action’ sets the tone:
We therefore commit to scale up our efforts to strengthen pandemic prevention, preparedness and response and further implement the following actions and express our strong resolve to:
OP1. Strengthen regional and international cooperation, multilateralism, global solidarity, coordination and governance at the highest political levels and across all relevant sectors, with the determination to overcome inequities and ensure the sustainable, affordable, fair, equitable, effective, efficient and timely access to medical countermeasures including vaccines, diagnostics, therapeutics and other health products to ensure high-level attention through a multisectoral approach to prevent, prepare for and respond to pandemics and other health emergencies, particularly in developing countries;
There are 48 more. You paid taxes so that someone could write that!
Those millions of girls suffering at night, the hundreds of millions of children who had their futures stolen, the mothers of those malaria-killed children, and all suffering under the increasing burden of poverty and inequality unleashed by this farce are watching. The Declaration, like the IHR amendments and pandemic treaty it supports, await the signatures of the Governments that purport to represent us.
Dr. David Bell is a clinical and public health physician with a PhD in population health and background in internal medicine, modelling and epidemiology of infectious disease. Previously, he was Programme Head for Malaria and Acute Febrile Disease at FIND in Geneva, and coordinating malaria diagnostics strategy with the World Health Organisation. He is a member of the Executive Committee of PANDA.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
What the whole sorry saga also exposes is the extent to which the judiciary in the UK has become – or perhaps always has been? – corrupt and complicit in stripping people of their rights and transferring power to the state.
At least in the past they mostly managed a veneer of legality.
Whilst the government’s response to the Covid crisis revealed its hidden but latent totalitarian instincts, the response to the Southport murders revealed its raw, unflinching nature.
The Covid crises made society to dig its own grave, Southport made society line up in front of it for execution.
Surely the this information can be subpoenaed, and Starmer and the Police are possibly guilty of withholding evidence?
But the legal system is corrupt right to the top, look at the Simon Dolan challenge thrown out TWICE.
I think the riots/protests would still have gone ahead even if the government had been straight with the public from the outset about this ”Christian, UK-born Welsh boy” being a radicalized Muslim, but the vast majority of British patriots would not have been able to have been jailed because what was needed for that to happen was the lie and false narrative that they didn’t know the motive and it wasn’t terrorism-related, then the subsequent mass cover-up ensued. What is also noteworthy are the lies by the courts for the justification for sending these people down. The judges were accusing all that they sentenced of ”inciting violence/hatred” of others, but how can somebody expressing their sentiments as posts on social media platforms be proven to do this?
If I write words on a screen I am not then responsible for how anybody else interprets these words, let alone how they might subsequently act as a result, so where was the proof that anybody ( particularly the ”keyboard warriors”, who never even attended a protest ) caused anybody else to go out and loot shops or burn buildings? These people have been sent to prison on false allegations. If this ”inciting hatred/violence” is indeed a thing, why has Nick Lowles not been even questioned by police for his blatant lie about a Muslim woman having acid chucked on her? Is this less bad than calling police ”scum” or insisting the attack was indeed a terrorist attack?
”By now we should all know how the leftist playbook works. It is entirely predicable how the narrative will go. First, there is some horrific attack on innocent civilians somewhere in the West. Then the authorities and media will instantly insist that it was not terrorism. And it certainly was not Islamic terrorism.
The usual claim will be, “We do not yet have any motives for this attack.” Anyone who suggest that it sure seems like terrorism and Islamic terrorism are instantly branded as racists, Islamophobes and the rest. But if proof is there (eg., the guy’s name is Muhammad, and he shouted out “Allahu Akbar” as he carried out his assault), then the spin will continue. We will be told that he was obviously mentally ill, and moreover, he of course acted alone.
And then there is the other side of this tired narrative. If anyone does such an attack who is white, or a white conservative, or worse yet, a white conservative Christian, the authorities and the media will be all over it – immediately and passionately. “See, this is what ugly white nationalism is all about. See, this is conservatism in action. We must clamp down on racist Christianity now….”
The double standards here are as plain as day. But we see these scenarios being played out over and over again. I have documented all this dozens of times on my website. But consider the latest example of this. A horrific terror attack had occurred in late July in Southport, England where three children were stabbed to death at a Taylor Swift-themed dance class. At the time a 17-year-old male suspect was arrested. But once again, any talk of this being an Islamic terror attack was quickly squashed by police, the elites, and the mainstream media.
And when large groups of concerned citizens protested this and other attacks happening so often, they were met with a huge police response, plenty of arrests, and the media condemning them as stirring up trouble and engaging in ugly racism. Yep, the same old same old.”
https://billmuehlenberg.com/2024/10/31/covering-up-terrorism/
Except that, come the trial, this little runt is going to make his motive for the attack known: he knows he’s toast anyway and he’ll be a proud Jihadi. Keep the powder dry, but once the case is concluded Starmer and Cooper need to be pinned down and forced to admit whatbthey knew, and when.
And I swear to god, if they allow him to hide behind a mask or in any way cover his identity when he’s on the stand, or even in the courtroom at all, I’ll bust a flaming blood vessel because that is unacceptable on every level. Plus, we know about the ricin and we know about the terrorist training manual, but isn’t it interesting there’s been nothing forthcoming from his own mouth as to his motives on why he did what he did yet? Either it’s because he’s not made a comment or it’s just one big media blackout at the behest of Starmer.
Not necessarily.
For example, I wouldn’t be surprised if the government came up with some reason why the trial must not be conducted in public, let’s say for reasons of national security.
The other thing we might need to consider is that the suspect might be trained what to say. This was a classic method used during the Stalinist show trials where the accused just effectively regurgitated a prepared script. All those months in custody, who knows what’s going on.
Not really, they need to go up against a wall.
This is what I was reading on Twitter just after it happened, but there was no credible source so I didn’t share. All coming out now though;
”This is @HowardCCoxof of FairFuelUK Campaign who tells @danwootton
that the accused in the Southport murders of the three girls, at the time of his arrest used a Jihadi chant.
It seems the cover up by Starmer & Cooper knows no bounds.”
https://x.com/DaveAtherton20/status/1853723321029763450
He knew it wasn’t “inflamed by disinformation” from an early stage. It was merely an opportunity to demonstrate what happens to dissenters from the replacement, I mean diversity plan.
And because all of our institutions are completely captured – totally and utterly lost – it worked.
The Globalists won. The last few governments have largely destroyed the fabric of the nation off the votes of the gullible and ignorant. Personally, my priority is to bank as much as I can while I am still working and then get out and go far away at the earliest opportunity. Too late for salvation now.
Asserting that some case is already lost is a typical tactic of those who are increasingly afraid that they might eventually actually lose it themselves and this case is going to become ever more loster the more they have a reason to be afraid of that. Everything humans did other humans can undo, ie, there are no lost causes for mankind.
Well, I admire the optimism, and certainly over a long enough time frame all that we see happening around us may indeed be undone, but I think that timescale will be too long for me. My kids might see better days though and I have to live with that hope.
The Free World rests on Trump!
And while I am most definitely not of the opinion that he is some sort of Messiah, I also have no doubt that his opponents will stop at NOTHING to ensure he is not elected/does not take power.
Kier-Ching! lied …. and he is a coward, hiding behind “the law; hate speech and Parliamentary procedures.”
The Speaker “has form” when it comes to making Parliamentary rulings that suit the Labour Leadership and which are intended to appease the Top Tier Muslim citizens in this Two-Tier country.
As far as I’m concerned Peter Lynch’s blood is on his hands.
It’s worth repeating that Starmer’s statement about this not being a time for “politics” and about respect for the grieving relatives of the victims instead of … were virtually identical to statements made (in German) by the mayor of Nürtingen, a town of about 50,000 in southern Germany (Baden-Würrtemberg), when a murdered woman was discovered there on 27th of October who had been a language teacher for ‘refugees’ and an Iranian man she had been teaching was arrested as prime suspect.
It’s obviously possible that the guy just copied Starmer but given the many parallells (down to the wording) between statements by English and German authorities during the so-called Pandemic, I still strongly suspect that there’s some central coordination behind government responses to events endangering this or that woke narrative. Ie, that – somewhere – there’s a set of PR professionals coming up with canned responses expected to ‘work’ in face of such occurences which are then handed down to the participating governments and other public institutions.
Thanks for this info.
It seems that we have a system which is coordinated across the West – whenever the imported people murder, rape, or rob our citizens – to divert our attention from the facts, distract us with lies, and deny the reality of what’s actually happening. Obviously this system of organised lying is designed to protect the imported people at all costs. At the same time it places the native peoples of the West in very great danger.
I have been stating for many months that our politicians are not running the country and are in fact being run from elsewhere.
“Nevertheless, he insisted, it was “part of a spider’s web of disruption which caused riots”
And Palestine Marches (some called them hate marches) is not part of a “spider’s web”?
“. The claim that these riots were directly caused by disinformation was always a bold sociological hypothesis at best; thanks to Starmer and his lackeys, it was treated as self-evident.”
That’s why people should always plead NOT GUILTY like the guy did the other day, and got it thrown out.
I’m no fan of Boris but the stopped clock analogy applies; He called Starmer an agent of the ‘Deep State’ before leaving Parliament.
” “whether my dad should’ve been there in the first place”.
They will grow up knowing who the enemy is!
Good.
Lenin, God rot the barsteward understood well enough, the worse it is the better it is.
Even normies are increasingly finding it hard not to see the cesspit of corruption that is the british state nowadays.
After just 100 days it is possible to look back on the 14 years of Conservative misrule that enabled the disaster of labour’s election win, as a quaint incompetent yet well meaning (it wasn’t really) interlude in the journey down the pan begun by the loathsome blair.
Can I ask if there is any news about the Soldier Stabbed outside his barracks just before the Southport outrage ! How is he & what’s happened to the murderous alien who did it ??????
The gist of the riots is obviously the thing that matters for anyone interested in maintaining the health of the country and they know what the gist is, comprised of many factors, and they do everything they can to obfuscate the real gist. These people are worse than complicit. Just think about how much misery they are generating on every level. I have every sympathy with a person who feels that they can’t take it anymore.
How can asking questions about what and when Starmer and Cooper knew prejudice the trial?
I just stumbled on this article about the UK Liebour Government and its wide ranging dystopian plans it has for us. Fits in with the narative being discussed ATL.
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/just-how-dystopian-can-starmers-britain-become