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.
Quickie update from Joel Smalley on excess deaths in Sweden. Yep, totally vindicated. And interesting comments below, including from our Elizabeth Hart, asking the same as me; why on earth did the Swedish government then urge/coerce its citizens to get a jab they demonstrably didn’t need? If they didn’t lockdown, mask up or close schools then they can’t say it was the restrictions which saved them from certain death, but get vaxxed anyway…? Makes zero sense.
https://metatron.substack.com/p/sweden-cant-explain-away-the-fact
Simple.. because it was all about getting that jab of toxins (nanotechnology) into peoples arms..
Hydrogel Interfaces for Merging Humans and Machines – MIT Research Review
I can’t answer your question…but people didn’t always act as we would hope or think…..and that what we see as totally illogical, might not have seemed so to them….??
It’s very difficult to answer…was it money?..a genuine belief they would work?….
Panic? Stupidity? Evil? Collective Insanity? An overriding sense of being seen to do something..even if it was the wrong something? Shame?
Who knows?
This is a good substack from Thorsteinn Siglaugsson….(try saying that fast ten times!! LOL!)
“The Cheerleader Who Demanded Lifelong Quarantine for the Unvaccinated Now Admits Nobody Under 50 Should Have Been VaccinatedWhat is it that prompts Dr. Stefánsson to come forward now, years after it became abundantly clear how useless the vaccines were and how dangerous to the young and healthy?”
…and again, it’s as if they know they were wrong, but just can’t get to actually admitting it wholeheartedly….
https://thorsteinn.substack.com/p/the-cheerleader-who-demanded-lifelong?utm_source=profile&utm_medium=reader2
All you need to know about Sweden in two handy graphs…
Why was Hancock not hauled over the coals at the inquiry when he proudly announced if it happened again, he’d lockdown even harder.
In essence, he stated publicly “I am a Sociopath”
I am slightly mystified by Sweden. Yes, they didn’t lockdown, but they did have huge “care home issues” in the early days (which caused them to look bad compared with other Scandinavian countries), and they did roll out the vaccines quite aggressively (with mandates, I think). Their excess death performance would have been much more understandable (to me, at least) if they had also rejected the vaccines, but they didn’t.
Any thoughts?
Hard to know for sure. There has been at least one study, covered here I think, which analysed adverse “vaccine” events by batch and found huge variations, leading the authors to think that a lot of the batches were close to a placebo. Maybe Sweden got mostly placebo batches, or maybe the vaxx is less harmful to people who had covid before they were “vaccinated”.
One thing is for sure – there won’t be any state connected body doing serious studies into all of this.
“Why was Hancock not hauled over the coals at the inquiry when he proudly announced if it happened again, he’d lockdown even harder.”
This was Handicock announcing to the Davos Deviants:
‘Gissus a job!’
Getting himself in position for the next one.
OFF TOPIC!
any chance of a private members forum for all of us at this amazing place? So we can meet chat, and become friends (or enemies)
should we wish? Toby?
Dinger, if you go to the Forums at the top of the page you’re able to private message people from there. I don’t know how a group one would be set up though.
Oh right, sorry, not up on all this stuff!
thanks mogs
I’ll give it a look
I’ve always enjoyed David Bell’s articles and I’ve always agreed with him. This is a notable exception, as he writes about how the toxic gene therapies should not be removed from the market and people should have the choice to get jabbed or not. I think they should be ditched, but it is rather a moot point anyway given that they’re not going anywhere anyway. Too many vested interests in this lucrative but proven dangerous mRNA tech for them to ever be investigated let alone ditched. Plus, if they were ever removed from the market how will the globalist psychos ever be able to say ”No jab no travel” and all the rest of the restrictions on daily life they have planned for us with the vax pass? These shots are necessary for their agenda to progress.
”Mass vaccination in this context is obviously a flawed policy. Mandating a non-transmission blocking vaccine for immune people at minimal intrinsic risk could only be driven by gross ignorance or corporate profit. The use of behavioral psychology to instill fear and the use of coercion are clearly unethical by any modern ethical standard. The many people who have lost their jobs and homes, and were publicly vilified for standing on principle and refusing to submit to such practice, have a clear right to redress. Those who committed fraud should have to answer for it. Those who abandoned the precautionary principle and informed consent should be required to justify their actions and their right to continue to practice.
None of this should remove the right of the public to make their own decisions on accessing these new genetic vaccines as a currently marketed commodity. Where expected harm clearly outweighs benefit, no medical practitioner should offer it, just as it would be inappropriate to offer Thalidomide to a pregnant woman with nausea. Where there are plausible grounds for overall benefit, if should be available as an option. These individuals can decide, based on the information available. While this group of potential beneficiaries appears diminishingly small, it remains conceivable that elderly obese diabetics with no prior Covid infection may benefit. Market forces can then decide whether the product is viable, rather than authoritarian dictates.”
https://brownstone.org/articles/theres-no-need-to-ban-these-vaccines/
I agree with you that they should be removed from the market – they are purportedly being used in animal “vaccines” and the traditional “vaccines” are being changed to mRNA technology. The stuff is everywhere.
“Why they hate cars”. I have long thought that the view of these smug idiots who tell us cars are not necessary generally live in the leafier parts of London, with everything on the doorstep, and have no concept at all about rural (or even semi-rural) living. We have one bus a week to a local town, that’s it. I would love it if there was an hourly bus to our nearest shopping centre ten miles away, but no bus company would run it because there’s no money in it. In fact, bus services in local areas are constantly being amalgamated and withdrawn due to lack of use.
I remember, with amusement, the person who got a lift into the village for some reason, but then wanted to get out. He approached me near the bus stop (no details of bus times are displayed!) and asked how he could get a taxi. It turns out that he thought he would simply phone for an Uber. He was even more dismayed when I told him that if you want a taxi you have to, generally book it a few weeks in advance. I suggested he stuck out his thumb.
I think they might alter their views if they lived here for a bit.
“Don’t say ‘black’ – say ‘financial’.”
I think I get it:
“This is the worst bank crisis since Financial Monday.”
“The Financial Death wiped out a third of Europe.”
“Justin Trudeau often appears in financial face.”
“Come and see my new financial labrador.”
That should stop the prejudice, eh?
What about the financial box in planes? Some people are great fans of Financial Sabbath Financial seems to be a very popular colour for doors and window frames at the moment. Financial ice is a problem in winter.
Etc. etc.
Makes sense doesn’t it?
Stop that immediately Gefion.. or you’ll end up with an ether delivered financial eye..
You have a down tick! As have I. I wonder what was going in the mind of the downticker. If there is a mind….
Actually, ‘financial’ does sound like a shade Farrow and Ball would come out with.
Wow it gone dark, it’s a financial out!
I’m blinded by the snow, its a white out!
Why one rule for one?
“Don’t say ‘black’ market, say ‘illegal’ instead, Finance U.K. says”
They’ll be coming after Brilliant White next.
Space, the final frontier, is a vast illegal place full of illegal holes and…. I can hear lawsuits being busily prepared on the Enterprise. May the daftness continue…
Not to mention ‘Old English White.’
Please don’t ever mention that again…
‘Whiter than white’
‘Black spot’
‘Black mark’
‘Lily white’
‘White noise’
The list is long!
How about an illegal cab? Might be a few of them on the road. None in Bristol, though; they have to be blue.
A whiter shade of pale?
“Pink noise” is probably “problematic.”
“Nigel Farage says NatWest in ‘panic mode’ after new data request delayed”
They must have run out of printer ink!
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12362697/Greens-senator-Nick-McKim-melts-climate-sceptic-politician-Matt-Canavan-Mate-shut-mouth.html
This is very funny…the Green Party Senator Nick McKim absolutely loosing his marbles over global warming….
The article isn’t behind a paywall and has the video…LOL!
This is a good video, which someone has gone to a lot of trouble to cobble together…
Showing the Democrats doing exactly what they are prosecuting and accusing Trump of doing (election interference and questioning the result)!
Someone commented that the Democrats have clear double-standards..but those are the only standards they’ve got…LOL!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XX2Ejqjz6TA
12 Minutes of Democrats Denying Election Results.
That is very amusing. And all based on the Russian collusion argument that we now know to have been a complete hoax.
I attach a link to a clip on Twitter showing a GB News interview yesterday with a US journalist called Jan Halper-Hayes, where she argues that the latest Trump indictment is a big mistake by the Dems.
“2020 election is going to be RE-LITIGATED over this..they made a huge mistake… Biden is..president of what is now the bankrupt US Corporation..that was a treaty in 1871…Sept 12th 2018 Trump created an Executive Order..specifically for the 2020 election”
https://twitter.com/MaajidNawaz/status/1687361516931092480?s=20
Why the outrage? What else would one expect from the BBC? Who on earth watches their output or pays heed to their pronunciations. Me? R5 & Extra for Sport, occasional R3 (now also hugely dumbed down). Otherwise they may as well not exist. In essence, they are talking to themselves.
We junked our TV nearly 20 years ago. Not missed it for one day.
Admission. I do occasionally switch on Today. Why? To remind me why I never listen to it.
Always works.
Oddly, I’ve never heard the term ‘whitewash’ and took offence based on skin colour. I see it as completely unrelated. Perhaps I have missed a trick here and should be demanding some form of reparations?
Why isn´t Stefánsson in prison or, at least, debarred from practising medicine?
OFF TOPIC!
any chance of a private members forum for all of us at this amazing place? So we can meet chat, and become friends (or enemies)
should we wish? Toby?