As you may have noticed if you diligently observe the Armageddon Prose ethos, one common thread in the canon is the burgeoning biomedical police state meant to serve as the basis for the technocratic surveillance state.
The organization atop the world Public Health™ hierarchy, the WHO, is now explicit in stating these aims out loud in public, apparently unafraid to flaunt its ill-gotten power to the people it is in the process of fully subjugating.
Via World Health Organization:
One Health’ is an integrated, unifying approach to balance and optimize the health of people, animals and the environment. It is particularly important to prevent, predict, detect, and respond to global health threats such as the COVID-19 pandemic.
The approach mobilizes multiple sectors, disciplines and communities at varying levels of society to work together. This way, new and better ideas are developed that address root causes and create long-term, sustainable solutions.
One Health involves the public health, veterinary, public health [sic] and environmental sectors. The One Health approach is particularly relevant for food and water safety, nutrition, the control of zoonoses (diseases that can spread between animals and humans, such as flu, rabies and Rift Valley fever), pollution management, and combatting antimicrobial resistance (the emergence of microbes that are resistant to antibiotic therapy).
Government officials, researchers and workers across sectors at the local, national, regional and global levels should implement joint responses to health threats. This includes developing shared databases and surveillance across different sectors, and identifying new solutions that address the root causes and links between risks and impacts. Community engagement is also critical to promote risk-reducing habits and attitudes, and to support early detection and containment of disease threats.
WHO formed a One Health Initiative to integrate work on human, animal and environmental health across the Organization. WHO is also working with the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and the World Organisation for Animal Health (WOAH) as a One Health Quadripartite.”
Dovetailing with this One Health machination is the recent announcement by the WHO of its intentions to fight an “infodemic” of “misinformation” whether it is “factual or not” – in laymen’s terms, a censorship campaign to suppress information that counters their narrative even if it is factual.
Via the Preparedness and Resilience for Emerging Threats (PRET) document:
“People have now access to an enormous amount of information (which increases during crisis) from many different sources, traditional or digital, including for instance online platform offering pre-print access to scientific articles. Health institutions are not anymore, the only provider of information. This new information ecosystem has generated a new “Health Threat” that accompanies epidemics and pandemics, called infodemic.
Infodemic is the overabundance of information –accurate or not– which makes it difficult for individuals to adopt behaviours that will protect their health and the health of their families and communities. The infodemic can directly impact health, hamper the implementation of public health countermeasures and undermine trust and social cohesiveness. Infodemic cannot be eliminated it can only be managed. This is why WHO and partners have developed the approach of infodemic management which encompasses Risk Communication and Community Engagement adding additional tools and approaches to manage it more efficiently in the 21st century.”
“Accurate or not”!
The truth used to be a universal defense in terms of public speech in Western civilization. No longer. WHO technocrats are not versed in the tradition of civil liberties because civil liberties are inconvenient to social control.
As I have argued elsewhere, this regime altogether represents the greatest effort in history by a single entity to simultaneously subvert national sovereignty of nations in a global coup – all without firing a shot.
The question becomes: what can be done to combat all of this by average people, alone or in cooperation with like-minded individuals? It came up in a recent interview I did with Alison Steinberg for her show In Focus on One America News Network to discuss the state of affairs.
Full-scale revolt is the answer. WHO acolytes must be ostracized from polite society. The funding through the federal government not just to WHO but to all such entities must be cut off. Nuremberg-style prosecutions, starting with COVID warlord Anthony Fauci himself, must commence so as to deter any future Faucis from picking up where he nominally left off (although he’s still very much active in the maintenance of the regime).
In the OAN interview, I note that Trump got the US out of the WHO –an achievement for which he deserves credit that he doesn’t tout enough on the campaign trail — only to have his decision reversed by the Brandon entity. No one, save for the most masochistic child-masking NPCs in DC suburbs, Brooklyn etc., wants the government to use their money to facilitate their own enslavement. In a similar vein, the GOP-controlled house recently proposed defunding the WHO as part of its proposed budget for the upcoming fiscal year.
Unfortunately, what these moves lack is staying power and steely resolve. They are too tepid and half-measured to count for much. Entirely too many Republicans andDemocrats take entirely too much money from the pharmaceutical industry and related industries to feel properly incentivized to change anything fundamental about the iron grip these pernicious quasi-governmental and corporate forces have on American and global politics.
What we need is a real, visionary leader who understands fully the threat the WHO poses to human freedom and well-being.
Is that man RFK Jr.? I don’t know for sure, but I do know he’s the best we’ve got on this front.
Ben Bartee, author of Broken English Teacher: Notes From Exile, is an independent Bangkok-based American journalist with opposable thumbs.