WHO Flew Over the Coup-Coup's Nest

The art of lobotomizing agency

Note: One of my recent articles has blessed me with an uptake of subscriptions right after I had reached a small milestone effectively doubling this writer’s Substack. Maybe not so coincidently, it was one of the shortest essays I had written, consequently I took that as a hint that perhaps I need not be so long winded ALL the time. But sometimes, I’ll still just have to. I hope you stick around and engage in the comments because figuring out our current realities is a group project. I want to take this opportunity to welcome all of you and to thank you for being a part of this journey. I will write a proper introduction and my current goals for this Substack soon which will periodically be updated as the lens of our shared reality expands.

Many notable writers have scribed about the recent WHO power grab from various angles and I will do my best to include as many pertinent links as I can. These articles offer details on mechanisms, tactics, and reasons for this take-over in our international public health sector. I wish I could say with certainty that a.) that the WHO is the only institutional control freak out there and b.) that set backs will change its course for dominion over the global human population. I think it will become painfully obvious why we shouldn’t let WHO make medical decisions and create policies that govern our health by the below key takeaways. However my ultimate argument is that taking an active part in your agency crystalizes your reality; by actively making an informed choice, you map out actuality. If you give that inalienable right away to someone else your circumstances will be shaped for you.

You had a choice: you could either strain and look at things that appeared in front of you in the fog, painful as it might be, or you could relax and lose yourself.

Chief Bromden (One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest, Ken Kesey)

This is a pretty obvious point. To which I say, then how does one explain the total and utter docile unearned trust that my fellow citizens display towards ruling authorities while questioning and scoffing at the suggestions to DYOR, self reflect and draw your own conclusions urged on by tin-foil hatting collaborative anarchists like me?

I’m old enough to remember when punk rock was cool, when rebelling against authority was a right of passage for young adults into the realm of self custody. Your conformity to the status quo and participation in rules and regulations was reflective of your deductive reasoning. ‘Coolness’, now, is based on how well you follow the rules; your ‘punkness’ shines in weisenheimer take down comments on social media while you ‘rebelliousness’ salutes those who further contribute to your infantilization.

This is why what I find most inspiring during the last few days of WHO’s 75th Health Assembly is that the so-called Third World (I don’t like the term, because it became synonymous with ‘under developed’, but would like to reclaim it in its original meaning of countries who were associated with neither the First World, i.e. The West nor the Second World, i.e. The East) shook off the ‘WHO’s my daddy’ attitude and achieved proverbial punk rock status by flipping the coup-coup bird. Although this is just a small act of a seemingly inconsequential gesture, I tend to agree with the concept of ‘be the drop that tips the bucket’ and this could very well be the inflection point in which the reign of WHO begins to peter out. You gotta punch the bully on the nose for him to stop beating you up for your lunch money.

In breaking down the reasons behind the current WHO pushback, I seek to rotate around the puzzle pieces and see how they fit into the giant picture. In turn, things come into focus and further inform not only the choices we make, but the choices we are presented with in the first place. Did we even know that abstaining from a top down approach to public health is possible? Who needs the WHO? Let’s lay it out:

1. Founded in 1948, The World Health Organization was born out of the UN’s commitment to global health. It is comprised of delegates from nation member states (which we don’t get to elect) and is “dedicated to the well-being of all people and guided by science…to give everyone, everywhere an equal chance to live a healthy life.” I want to point out here that nowhere in their mission do they claim the right to set policies that member states are obliged to follow in their respective lands. But you don’t get to be a member state unless you also adapt WHO’s constitution. More on that in a bit.

2. Member states pay dues to WHO, but the largest donors are non-State actors such as The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundations and GAVI (which might as well be one and the same) raising questions regarding conflicts of interests. Pushing for aggressive world wide vaccination and ignoring cheap and effective early treatments makes sense if your top stakeholders were jabber-happy because they invested lots of money in vaccines.

   

   WHO’s constitution is an interesting read

3. WHO has been quietly changing the meanings of words and phrases such as ‘herd immunity’ and ‘pandemic’ to fit their narrative. The latter was changed from “…simultaneous epidemics worldwide with enormous numbers of deaths and illness.” to “simultaneous epidemics worldwide” in 2009 with the omission paving the way for the swine flu of that year to be declared as a pandemic after 144 deaths. Governments rushed to purchase swine flu vaccines but the campaign was halted after H1N1 didn’t turn out to be any more serious than the regular flu. By that point, countries like Sweden were already reporting an overwhelming amount of cases of narcolepsy, a side effect of Pandemrix, the newly developed H1N1 vaccine.

4. WHO is supposed to act as a mediary, international hub for information and a public health advisor for its member states, however, the organization has been and still is inching towards becoming a controlling entity which seeks to impose public health measures over the sovereignty of nations.

5. The World Health Organization is governed by the inter-elected (read: we don’t get to elect those people either) World Health Assembly meaning that there is no independent oversight, creating an absence of accountability. WHO-WHA! There’s also a Secretariat and an Executive Board, and what are meant to be oversight committees called the IEOAC and CRE (both unfortunately established by the Board) and if it starts to sound like there’s a healthy tinge of bureaucracy, that’s because there’s a whole lotta accountability that needs to avoid a whole lotta people when WHO fouls up.

6. There are 6 regional offices led by 6 officers who along with the elected (again, not by us) Director-General comprise the leadership of WHO. The current Director is Ethiopian born Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus (not an actual doctor and the only one to not be while holding that office). A few things about Dr. Tedros:

   

   “…transparency, accountability and value for money.” Uhm…

   1. While the acting Minister of Health of Ethiopia, he misclassified and portrayed an active cholera outbreak as AWD (acute watery diarrhea) effectively downplaying the disease and covering up the epidemic. So much for transparency.

   2. He has come under scrutiny for ethnic genocide in his native Ethiopia during his Health Minister tenure for withholding emergency health care from the Amhara people because of their affiliation with the opposition party. This is now the guy who leads an organization that claims equality in global health care. So much for accountability.

   3. His net worth is $1.5 million dollars scraped together on his humble $137,738 net salary per annum. The value of money, indeed.

   4. Ethiopian Army Chief General Berhanu Jula has accused Dr. Tedros of procuring arms for the Tigrey Peoples Liberation Front while serving as the active Director-General of the WHO. This accusation is worthy of investigation if for nothing else to respond to the specific provisions mentioned in WHO’s constitution:

      

   5. It must have felt incredulous to some that Dr. Tedros not only didn’t condemn China’s strict lockdown as a mitigation tactic in 2020, but actively endorsed it around the world and praised the communist country for its transparency. But is it that surprising when it was China that backed Tedros in his 2017 election? That Tedros and Xi are buddies?

   6. Much like most pawns who get moved up to be queen pieces, Tedros’ lack of opposition to his reelection for another 5 year term as the head of WHO guarantees him a spot in the supervillain pantheon.

      

      Tedros with Xi, Billy Gates, and one fine newgenicist Klaus Schwab

7. At the most recent meeting in Geneva, The United States handed 13 amendments to the International Health Regulations over to the WHO, one of which recognizes the Director-General (not-a-physician Dr. Tedros) as the top authority on the declaration of Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC, phonetically ‘fake’) and remove the previous language that included member state governing parties from participating in that declaration. The document was revised and given to member states to vote on in just a few days breaking Article 55 of its own constitution requiring documents be submitted four months in advance. This is where punk rock Botswana read a statement of behalf of 47 AFRO members telling the First World where they can shove their reform. And can you blame them? How many times have their children been used as lab rats in vaccination programs prompting villagers to hide their kin when they see WHO vans pull up?

And this is where we are today. Since the reform failed, it has caused the general consciousness to pay attention to matters it didn’t pay no never mind to before. Huge props go to fellow Substacker James Roguski who has been teasing out all the information coming out of Geneva and raised deafening alarms, including the threat behind the impending Pandemic Treaty that will give WHO legal authority to impose power over all.

PANDEMIC TREATY

The above is a thoroughly resourced article and I encourage you to bookmark it and take your time combing through it. James has provided an avalanche of reasons of why this treaty (only second in WHO’s history, the previous one declaring the importance of reduction of tobacco use) is a Trojan Horse, plenty of links to videos, and suggestions on how to stop the WHO before it lobotomizes our inalienable rights. If shady-past-not-a-real-doctor Tedros has the power to declare an emergency pandemic at his discretion, and the world is legally bound (a treaty is a binding document) to follow the measures WHO imposes bought and paid for by special interests who profit from such measures with no independent oversight, our circumstances will, indeed, be shaped for us. Here are just a few glimpses of what that might look like:

1. WHO insists on its “One Health” approach to all disease and this one-size-fits-all approach ignores individual needs and make-up, geographical limitations or benefits, nation genealogy, geopolitical standing or any other marker that might render their measures ineffective, or worse, damaging. Take monkeypox, for example. And I am not even saying that 2nd Smartest Guy in the World is right and the “outbreak” is covering up spike shot injuries (although I’m not ruling it out. There is compelling evidence that points to VAIDS or vaccine acquired immunodeficiency syndrome that renders the body prone to certain viruses; a few of my friends came down with shingles in the last few months, an anecdotal statistic that I have measured against the zero people I’ve known to have had shingles prior to this year; herpes zoster, shingles, and monkeypox all share very similar visual symptoms; the monkeypox outbreak seems to be concentrated in heavily jabbed First World countries.). But all that aside, let’s assume that WHO’s current stance of “moderate threat” changes to “emergency” in regards to monkeypox. Next thing you know, Belgium declares mandatory quarantine and Britain starts offering smallpox vaccines to their health care workers. Oh, wait, those things already are a go and there isn’t even a declared emergency yet! But seeing how the same people that brought us Event 201 were involved in a simulated monkeypox outbreak scheduled for May 2022, it’s a matter of time before WHO follows the covid-19 playbook and enabled by its new treaty powers jams a mandatory needle in the every man, woman, and child, no matter their need or desire.

1. WHO insists that more money and more trust is placed at their feet and uses their response to covid as the marker for excellence. So, more resources and power to impose more unnecessary lockdowns, harmful masking, damaging injections, asymptomatic testing, superfluous quarantines, and the emergency use authorization of untested therapeutics by profit hungry pharmaceutical companies. The fact that they are under the impression that their covid response was so impressive that it is to be used as a persuasive tool to convince us to hand over funds with which they can strip us of our agency is extra level bold. Like giving Egas Moniz the Nobel for lobotomy bold. It is especially clever that some of these chimeric viruses are tied to lab leaks, yet the WHO covers up for them and pushes zoonoses theories to further its agenda of global control.

2. A digital passport will be utilized for travel that along with your biometrics includes vaccinations and other medical treatments. This technology isn’t designed to recognize medical exemptions or glitches in the system or the millions of people around the world who don’t have access to digital infrastructure. Beyond the fact that this would severely hamper all sorts of leisure travel, the danger of abuse of these technologies should give us pause. If you’re an unjabbed Canadian and you have a dying parent who lives in the States, looks like you’re only able to see them off to the great beyond via Zoom because as of right now, your mobility is severely restricted. So much for the Charter of Rights.

I won’t keep hammering and just remind you to look into James’ #StopTheTreaty post. Because he is brave enough to publish his number, I contacted him to thank him for his work and to ask:

I would like to leave you with this final thought to ponder. In a world torn by violence and stitched together with corruption, where we lack to recognize our interdependence with ourselves and with nature, are we psychologically ready to trust and to have a global centralized authority exercising power over all peoples?