New World Order

.
"The WHO’s Pandemic Treaty And A Bird Flu Crisis Are Both Arriving At The Same Time"

https://endoftheamericandream.com/t...th-arriving-at-the-same-time/#google_vignette

Begin quote

Health officials are issuing very ominous warnings about the potential for an H5N1 pandemic among humans at the same time that the WHO is preparing for a vote on the global pandemic treaty at the 77th World Health Assembly at the end of this month. The global pandemic treaty will give the World Health Organization far more authority than it had during the last pandemic, and a lot of people are deeply concerned about how that power will be used during the next major health crisis. As you will see below, two more human cases of the bird flu have just been confirmed. If the bird flu mutates into a form that can spread easily from human to human, that will create an enormous amount of fear, and the death toll could potentially be catastrophic. In such an environment, what sort of extreme measures would the World Health Organization decide to institute?

In recent weeks, negotiators have been feverishly working to finalize the global pandemic treaty. The following comes directly from the official WHO website…

Governments of the world today agreed to continue working on a proposed pandemic agreement, and to further refine the draft, ahead of the Seventy-seventh World Health Assembly that starts 27 May 2024.

Governments meeting at the World Health Organization headquarters in Geneva agreed to resume hybrid and in-person discussions over coming weeks to advance work on critical issues, including around a proposed new global system for pathogen access and benefits sharing (i.e. life-saving vaccines, treatments and diagnostics); pandemic prevention and One Health; and the financial coordination needed to scale up countries’ capacities to prepare for and respond to pandemics.

Here in the United States, the mainstream media has been strangely quiet about this treaty, but it is a really big deal.

If this treaty passes, when the next pandemic erupts the WHO will be running the show, and most people in the general population do not realize this.

And the next pandemic may be a lot closer than most of us think.

Meanwhile, we just learned that H5N1 is responsible for the deaths of four more cats…

This is not good.

If cats start getting sick and dying on a widespread basis, it is probably just a matter of time before the same thing starts happening among humans.

We don’t know all of the details about these latest cat deaths, but it was being reported that cats that previously died from H5N1 in Texas experienced “brain hemorrhaging” and “blindness”.

Does H5N1 have the potential to do that same sort of damage to humans?

We need an answer to that question, because more human cases are popping up all the time.

In fact, there has now been a confirmed human case in Australia…

Since 2003, more than 50 percent of the humans that have tested positive for H5N1 have died.

Can you imagine the fear that will erupt if millions of people suddenly get infected?

Global pestilences will play a major role in the era of great chaos that is coming.

Just think about the panic that we witnessed during 2020, 2021 and 2022.

If the next pandemic has a far higher death rate, the panic that we will see will be so much worse, and that is really bad news for all of us.

End quote

 

So WHO is going to replace our governments and form of Government with WHO Regulations and controls behind a Forever Emergency......like Forever??????

Da Tovarich??????


Be Warned these Ishmaelites at work.......One Ring to Rule them All.....


My non Ishmaelite .02,
Watcherchris

 

Feline corona virus has killed thousands of cats on the (beautiful) island of Cyprus. Viruses are every changing, remarkable life forms really and I'd say we've got off lightly for the last few hundred years in terms of nothing really nasty killing us off in droves.

Attacks from Russia/North Korea/China don't worry me at all, we're prepared for that. What worries me is a new strain of virus which we are not prepared for.

 

This TED talk by Bill Gates is ten years old but much of what he says is still valid today, well worth watching

https://www.ted.com/talks/bill_gates_the_next_outbreak_we_re_not_ready?language=en

 

.
"Why Bill Gates’s Philanthropy Is a Problem"

"If you learn to look past Gates’s PR halo, you will see his greed, hubris, and superiority complex."

https://www.thenation.com/article/society/bill-gates-philanthropy-misanthropy/

Begin quote

Thousands of news stories have profiled Bill Gates’s generosity over the last two decades. Essentially every day, headlines remind us of his private foundation’s largesse: a million dollars here, a billion dollars there. These are mind-bending sums for most of us—but they have also effectively short-circuited our brains. The one-sided storytelling about Gates’s selfless philanthropy has created a dangerous mythology that misunderstands who Bill Gates really is and what he is actually doing.

A sober analysis of Gates shows he is just as worthy of the titles of hoarder and miser as he is philanthropist and mensch. Relative to his vast wealth, Gates is giving away a tiny amount of money—that he doesn’t need and that he could never possibly spend on himself. So the question is: Instead of celebrating the million-dollar gifts his foundation donates, why aren’t we interrogating the $184 billion that Gates isn’t giving away? Why aren’t we asking: How is it that the world’s most generous philanthropist is becoming richer and richer, year over year?

A growing group of Gates’s intended beneficiaries today criticize him as doing more harm than good, and some have explicitly asked him to stop helping. “Bill Gates Should Stop Telling Africans What Kind of Agriculture Africans Need,” noted the headline of an op-ed in Scientific American, authored by Million Belay and Bridget Mugambe from the Alliance for Food Sovereignty in Africa. From farmer organizations in sub-Saharan Africa to public health experts around the globe to public school teachers in the United States, critics cite the high opportunity costs of Gates’s charitable crusades and the vast collateral damage they leave behind.

No one elected or appointed Gates to lead the world—on any topic. Gates simply asserted his vast wealth to take power. He has put his hands on the levers of the world, trying to remake how we feed, medicate, and educate poor people according to his own narrow neoliberal ideology. The Microsoft founder even faces long-standing allegations of destructive monopoly power in his philanthropic ventures, as he has planted his flag and sought to take over fields like malaria research and health metrics.

There are few words that better describe this model of power—where the richest guy gets the loudest voice—than “oligarchy.” And no one has done more to normalize and institutionalize oligarchy than Gates. By masking his money-in-politics efforts under the banner of charity—instead of, say, lobbying or campaign contributions—Gates commands tax benefits, endless accolades, and public applause. Philanthropy has been very, very good to our “good billionaire.”

End quote

==============================================

"The Gates Foundation is becoming an oligarchy"

https://unherd.com/newsroom/the-gates-foundation-is-becoming-an-oligarchy/

Begin quote

"Melinda French Gates has this week further distanced herself from ex-husband Bill Gates, stepping down from the foundation the power couple built together over 25 years. It’s a major shake-up that signals growing instability in the world’s most influential charitable organisation, which spends $8 billion a year trying to remake how we feed, educate and medicate children around the world.

While Melinda French Gates has made empowering women her philanthropic focus, under her leadership the Gates Foundation struggled internally with institutional inequality. The foundation’s board of directors, for example, has been dominated by men since its formation. When Melinda officially departs next month, only two out of seven board members will be women.

Multi-billionaire investor Warren Buffett also stepped away from a top leadership position at the foundation in 2021, distancing himself from the scandals that engulfed Bill Gates in the aftermath of his divorce. The news media, though normally quite friendly to Gates, has taken a keen interest in unearthing the details of his association with sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, while also investigating allegations of Gates’s misconduct toward women. Gates denies any wrongdoing, but the allegations nevertheless diminished his moral authority around the world. And they invariably made Melinda French Gates’s work — trying to present the foundation as a champion for women — very difficult.

Though Bill and Melinda Gates have long insisted that their foundation is a vital force for positive change, and though it generously funds academics and journalists who amplify this narrative, a growing body of independent experts, and some of the foundation’s own intended beneficiaries, argue that their philanthropy is doing more harm than good. Across the African continent, for example, farmer organisations are petitioning the foundation to stop its charitable crusade because it hasn’t delivered the yield increases and hunger reduction promised, and because it has crowded out better solutions. Over the past two decades, the foundation’s efforts to shape other fields, from public health to the pandemic to public education, have generated similar criticism: just because the Gates Foundation is giving away large sums of money does not mean it is helping the world.

It is a criticism that will follow Melinda French Gates as she embarks on her independent philanthropic career. Her separation agreement from the foundation entitles her to a $12.5-billion philanthropic fund of her own, which she will likely spend in ways that are indistinguishable from the Gates Foundation: namely, using charity to buy a seat at the decision-making table, to make her voice heard above others, and to exercise her influence over all manner of public policy. The word we should use to describe such activities is not philanthropy — it’s oligarchy.

End quote

==========================

And let's not forget that Bill Gates is one of the self-appointed gods (the people never elected this mega-rich, megalomaniac crew of oligarchs) who funded and used his influence within government to impose the mRNA vaccine upon the people of this planet. Now we know that the vaccine was insufficiently tested and has killed thousands ( tens of thousands ... ???) of people who didn't need to get the vaccine in the first place.

 

So OG your another Gates hater...your getting predictable

 

.
Being a mature person, I am predictable.

I'm not wishy-washy. I do not simply give-in. I'm not some steer to be herded nor corralled. I still have my pair attached.

And I will fight and support those who fight against the Borg.

I certainly do hate this Gates, Soros, and the rest of the oligarchy who consider themselves above the "little people". They are narcissistic, control-freaks. They support large centralized governments that attempt to micromanage the daily lives of the people. They are at the top of the list of core enemies of sacred Liberty.

I'll fight to the death to remain a free man and not kowtow to Big Brother -- me and tens of millions of other Americans.

If one says those who cherish the Constitution are currently angry, know that's an enormous understatement.

 

"Quantitative Brainwashing"

by Jeff Thomas

https://internationalman.com/articles/quantitative-brainwashing/

Begin quote

We’re all familiar with the term, “quantitative easing.” It’s described as meaning, “A monetary policy in which a central bank purchases government securities or other securities from the market in order to lower interest rates and increase the money supply.”

Well, that sounds reasonable… even beneficial. But, unfortunately, that’s not really the whole story.

When QE was implemented, the purchasing power was weak and both government and personal debt had become so great that further borrowing would not solve the problem; it would only postpone it and, in the end, exacerbate it. Effectively, QE is not a solution to an economic problem, it’s a bonus of epic proportions, given to banks by governments, at the expense of the taxpayer.

But, of course, we shouldn’t be surprised that governments have passed off a massive redistribution of wealth from the taxpayer to their pals in the banking sector with such clever terms. Governments of today have become extremely adept at creating euphemisms for their misdeeds in order to pull the wool over the eyes of the populace.

At this point, we cannot turn on the daily news without being fed a full meal of carefully- worded mumbo jumbo, designed to further overwhelm whatever small voices of truth may be out there.

For millennia, political leaders have been in the practice of altering, confusing and even obliterating the truth, when possible. And it’s probably safe to say that, for as long as there have been media, there have been political leaders doing their best to control them.

During times of war, political leaders have serially restricted the media from simply telling the truth. During the American civil war, President Lincoln shut down some 300 newspapers and arrested some 14,000 journalists who had the audacity to contradict his statements to the public.

As extreme as that may sound, this practice has been more the rule in history than the exception.

In most countries, in most eras, some publications go against the official story line and may very well pay a price for doing so. But, other publications go along with the official story line to a greater or lesser degree and are often rewarded for doing so.

It should come as no surprise, then, that media outlets often come to report the news in a less than accurate manner.

Mark Twain is claimed to have said, “If you don’t read the newspaper, you’re uninformed. If you do read the newspaper, you’re misinformed.” Quite so.

Still, only fifty years ago, much of the then “Free World” enjoyed a relatively objective Press. Even on television, reporters such as Walter Cronkite, Huntley and Brinkley, etc. presented the news in a bland manner. It wasn’t very exciting, but at least it was relatively balanced and, to this day, most people who were around then still have no idea as to whether reporters like Walter Cronkite were liberal or conservative. Although he was a committed Democrat, he never allowed that to significantly colour his reporting.

But today, we have a very different corporate structure as regards the media. The same six corporations hold the controlling interest of over 80% of the media. And those same corporations also own a controlling interest in the military industrial complex, Wall Street, the major banks, Big Pharma, etc.

What we’re witnessing today is media having been transformed into something more akin to a three-ring circus than journalism of old. This is no accident.

Well, as it happens, people tend not to like governments dominating their lives – simple as that.

And yet, the primary objective of any government is to increase its size and power as rapidly as the populace will tolerate it. The only reason that they rarely do this quickly, is that they can’t get away with it. Like boiling a frog, it takes time to lull the populace into submission, bit by bit.

Once having had enough time to do so, there comes a point at which the government becomes woefully top-heavy, as well as unworkably autocratic. At such times, all that’s necessary to make people rebel is an economic crisis.

Such is the case in much of the world today – the EU, the US, Canada, etc.. Even in their arrogance, the powers that be have to be aware that they’re right at the tipping point. An economic crisis would almost certainly push the situation over the edge.

When truth threatens to undermine machinations for self-aggrandizement, individuals tend to obfuscate in order to delay the inevitable fallout. Governments are no different.

Thus do we see the journalistic equivalent of Quantitative Brainwashing, in which the inevitable realization is delayed for as long as possible.

And, in order to make sure that the public do not figure out what’s been done to them, the news reporting becomes Orwellian in its endless repetition of a false narrative.

It is, however, true that, “You can’t fool all of the people all of the time.” Eventually, the Band-Aid peels back to reveal an infection that’s far beyond what had been generally perceived. It then falls away in layers, as increasing numbers of people become aware that they’ve been scammed – that the media is entirely corrupt and that the media’s owners – big business - have, with the enthusiastic compliance of the government, robbed them on a wholesale basis.

Historically, that’s when the jig is up. What happens then is a matter of historic record.

End quote

============================

Old Gzr:

When the "jig is up", the people can just vote the bums out, right?! Nope.

Not when elections are rigged.

What to do?

Currently, Americans are buying guns and ammo hand-over-fist. And, government is doing its best to disarm them.





----------------------------------------------------------