wiki - dictionary - home

Who's Who in WHO (General)

by dulan drift, Thursday, April 23, 2020, 18:46 (223 days ago)

As Dan pointed out, what we know as WHO, is a collection of 'member states' - a political body - the people we hear from are the staff. This report shines some light on the inner-workings:

"China argued against declaring an emergency on 22 January, but could not have carried the argument alone. The other emergency members and advisers were experts from the US, Thailand, Russia, France, South Korea, Canada, Japan, Netherlands, Australia, Senegal, Singapore, Saudi Arabia, Sweden, and New Zealand.

Their advice is confidential, but for the vote to have been split, several western, or western-aligned, representatives must have voted with Beijing."

Not sure why that's confidential information - the world's citizens aren't allowed to know how their world body voted at such a crucial juncture?

Failing that, i can take a guess. Apart from China you'd need 6 more countries to force a tie - Senegal, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Thailand, Russia? maybe not - Russia was one of the first countries to close the border with China - maybe Canada on the grounds of that car crash interview by Dr Bruce Aylward? Still needs one more...

Who's Who in WHO

by dulan drift, Saturday, April 25, 2020, 08:10 (221 days ago) @ dulan drift

"During the 2018-2019 two-year period, the U.S. share came to about $893 million in assessed dues and voluntary contributions, while China paid $86 million, according to publicly available WHO data.

Despite its status as the world’s No. 2 economic power, China has historically contributed far less than donors such as the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the United Kingdom and Germany."

That begs the question - How does China wield so much influence? Seems it's more to do with which countries are in your political pocket than anything related to health or financial contribution to the organization.

Who's Who in WHO

by dulan drift, Tuesday, April 28, 2020, 18:55 (218 days ago) @ dulan drift

Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus: WHO Director General 2018-

An interesting character who carved out a career as an Ethiopian politician before being elected WHO chief. He served as Health Minister then Foreign Minister in the Ethiopian Government from 2005-2016.

Credited with significant improvements to Ethiopia's overall health profile, he was also "accused ... of covering up three cholera epidemics in his home country, Ethiopia, when he was health minister." The accusations came during the campaign period for the top WHO spot in 2017.

"In an interview, Dr. Tedros ... denied covering up cholera. Outbreaks occurring in 2006, 2009 and 2011, he said, were only “acute watery diarrhea” in remote areas where laboratory testing “is difficult.”
W.H.O. officials have complained privately that Ethiopian officials are not telling the truth about these outbreaks. Testing for Vibrio cholerae bacteria, which cause cholera, is simple and takes less than two days.
During earlier outbreaks, various news organizations, including The Guardian and The Washington Post, reported that unnamed Ethiopian officials were pressuring aid agencies to avoid using the word “cholera” and not to report the number of people affected.
But cholera bacteria were found in stool samples tested by outside experts. As soon as severe diarrhea began appearing in neighboring countries, the cause was identified as cholera.

United Nations officials said more aid could have been delivered to Ethiopia had the truth been told."

Who's Who in WHO

by dan @, Tuesday, April 28, 2020, 19:11 (218 days ago) @ dulan drift

What a scumbag.

It raises the question of who is profiting or otherwise benefiting from this virus.

Who's Who in WHO

by dulan drift, Wednesday, April 29, 2020, 07:40 (217 days ago) @ dan

It raises the question of who is profiting or otherwise benefiting from this virus.

Surveillance - or those behind the data centralization would be near the top of the profit column in terms of power consolidation.

Losers are the Hong Kong protesters - or any protesters really. When the protest was gathering steam i wondered how on earth China was going to reel that back in without a Tiananmen Square type massacre.

Who's Who in WHO

by dulan drift, Friday, May 08, 2020, 18:21 (208 days ago) @ dulan drift

"On Thursday foreign ministry spokeswoman Hua Chunying, said China supported WHO efforts to investigate the source of the virus, and “are always open to cooperate with the WHO on matters, including on the question of origin”."

I'm sure they are! Co-operated fine before when we covered it up - let's keeping going!

No - that can't be the way it unpacks. There has to be an independent investigation - a transparent one. WHO needs to stay the fuck away - stop tampering with the evidence. Same for any other UN body. This can't be a political narrative version of what happened. We jneed to know what actually happened. How can we stop it happening again.

Who's Who in WHO

by dan @, Friday, May 08, 2020, 19:38 (208 days ago) @ dulan drift

Apparently China's censorship reach extends to your neighborhood:

Who's Who in WHO

by dulan drift, Saturday, May 09, 2020, 09:03 (207 days ago) @ dan

Yes, the whole overseas university student thing in Australia is a scandal waiting to be uncovered. Universities make (used to anyway) truckloads of money from overseas students - most of which come from China. Money talks.

I'd also like to know but haven't seen figures for how much Chinese money is involved in funding various research projects. A couple of months ago i mentioned my sister sent me a petition doing the rounds in Lancet denouncing questions about the Wuhan lab as 'conspiracy theories' and expressing 'solidarity' with China's handling of the outbreak. At the time i thought it was dumb for scientists to be going out on a limb to support China - it looks even worse now. Here are extracts from that statement:

We have watched as the scientists, public health professionals, and medical professionals of China, in particular, have worked diligently and effectively to rapidly identify the pathogen behind this outbreak, put in place significant measures to reduce its impact, and share their results transparently with the global health community. This effort has been remarkable. (No, it hasn't.)

The rapid, open, and transparent sharing of data on this outbreak is now being threatened by rumours and misinformation around its origins. We stand together to strongly condemn conspiracy theories suggesting that COVID-19 does not have a natural origin. (Actually it's the opposite way 'round - rumours spread because of a lack of transparency)

We sign this statement in solidarity with all scientists and health professionals in China who continue to save lives and protect global health during the challenge of the COVID-19 outbreak. ('Global health' wasn't protected.)

Conspiracy theories do nothing but create fear, rumours, and prejudice that jeopardise our global collaboration in the fight against this virus.
We support the call from the Director-General of WHO to promote scientific evidence and unity over misinformation and conjecture. We want you, the science and health professionals of China, to know that we stand with you in your fight against this virus.

Firstly it's not a conspiracy theory to ask a question about the origin - it's just a question. It's revealing that some people get so uptight because someone asks a question. In my experience that always points to insecurity.

Secondly, all Chinese scientists working on the virus have been silenced. It's absurd to be saying they're "sharing their results transparently". That's a straight out lie - coming from scientists who are waffling on about how they care about 'scientific evidence'.

I don't necessarily blame the scientists and health professionals of China and WHO - i don't know the level of complicity in blocking the release of information - i assume it's orders from above. But for a bevy of scientists to be angrily saying that there's 'remarkable transparency' coming out of China - that boils down to two possible explanations - either astonishing naivety/stupidity - or corruption. I can't think of a third explanation. Either way, don't be surprised if people stop listening to you.

Who's Who in WHO

by dan @, Wednesday, May 13, 2020, 18:55 (203 days ago) @ dulan drift

And then I see headlines like this:

Scientists: 'Exactly zero' evidence COVID-19 came from a lab

What the article fails to mention is that there is exactly zero evidence that it came directly from nature. In fact, they have no evidence at all, zero, of where it came from. There is inference, yes. There is extrapolation, yes. But no evidence at all. Zero. And yet, their headline suggests that it has been determined that it didn't come from a lab, which is not the case.

The article spends a lot of time supporting the argument that the virus was not engineered, but even if that's true, it is still quite possible that a 'natural' virus escaped from the lab. Nowhere in the article (though I read it very quickly) do they discuss the fact that SARS has escaped from labs previously.

Who's Who in WHO

by dulan drift, Saturday, May 16, 2020, 10:50 (200 days ago) @ dan

Here's the situation in Australian Universities: successive governments have cut back funding and encouraged unis to develop their own revenue streams - namely foreign students.

At The University of Melbourne, which consistently ranks among the top two or three unis in Australia, foreign students make up 38.7% of all students on campus. Several other unis are operating with 50% foreign students.

An estimated 50% of these students are from China though universities don't release breakdown figures by country. The above linked Financial Times article estimates that Chinese students contribute $410 million to Melbourne University's coffers each year and $534 million to Sydney University. This amounts to 16% of all revenue at Melbourne uni and 23% at Sydney. As such, it raises questions over transparency as well as the morality of the industry in terms of degrees being for sale - even when academic standards are not me.

"According to Professor Babones, who teaches sociology at the University of Sydney: "Some students don't read and write English well enough and don't understand what to do.
"It's an unspoken but widely understood rule in humanities and social sciences that we are expected to help students pass. Or at least not expected to be failing them.
"People are getting degrees who probably shouldn't.""

For China, which flaunts its power to turn this income stream off or on, common sense tells you it wants something for its money. Couple that with numerous reports of CCP infiltration of major universities across Australia and NZ in terms of funding think-tanks, monopolizing student bodies, intimidating critics and you have a serious in-place foreign power block operating in Australian universities.

So all this needs to be factored in when you see academics, be they from WHO or universities coming out supporting the CCP's position regarding the source of the virus.

I want to take a closer look at one of those papers purporting to 'debunk the lab origin theory' such as Dan mentioned in this light - i'll do that in the next post.

Who's Who in WHO

by dulan drift, Friday, July 17, 2020, 08:53 (138 days ago) @ dulan drift

Recently a new 'investigation team' of 'scientific experts' embarked on a trip to China.

Here's the thing - the names of the 'experts' have been kept secret.

All we know is that they are Geneva-based, there are two of them, an epidemiologist and a zoologist, and it's an advance party.

The last WHO mission to China was led by Bruce Aylward, a Canadian epidemiologist, famous for the car-crash interview about Taiwan with a HK reporter. He came back with a glowing report about China's response and transparency.

The talk surrounding the investigation suggests the focus will be on finding a wildlife scapegoat.
According to Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus:
“The mission objective is to advance the understanding of animal hosts for COVID-19 and ascertain how the disease jumped between animals and humans.” That sounds like they've got a predetermined discourse in mind.

For what it's worth, here's what i think that narrative will be:

1. Natural origins from bat which may include intermediary species.

2. Original infections occurred in Southern China (possibly Yunnan) then infected person travelled to Wuhan - or- original infection occurred in Hubei province when person ate intermediary species.

3. If from Yunnan, some story about why it didn't take off in Yunnan first or anywhere along the route from Yunnan to Wuhan.

4. No evidence that it leaked from a Wuhan lab.

Who's Who in WHO

by dulan drift, Friday, July 17, 2020, 09:12 (138 days ago) @ dulan drift

This guy, Peter Daszak, the president of EcoHealth Alliance in New York City- he is up to his eyeballs in Chinese money and research collaborations - whatever he says i immediately think about the opposite. Regarding the current investigation he says:

“It will be the first unbiased effort to communicate with Chinese scientists and public-health leaders on this very sensitive and politicized issue.”

How on earth can you classify two nameless 'experts' from WHO, approved by China, as being unbiased?

WHO members accused of sexual assault

by dulan drift, Wednesday, September 30, 2020, 08:26 (63 days ago) @ dulan drift
"WHO and other aid agency staff were accused by 50 women (from DR Congo) in a joint investigation by two news agencies. Local women were allegedly plied with drinks, "ambushed" in hospitals, forced to have sex, and two became pregnant.
The allegations cover the period between 2018 and March this year.
The New Humanitarian news agency and the Thomson Reuters Foundation have carried out an almost year-long investigation."

There's a dark, unaccountable underworld going on in these global organizations such as WHO.

We've seen it with the Olympic Committees, FIFA, other UN agencies - they are non-democratic bodies whose high-paid members wield tremendous power. The sexual abuse is a symptom of what they think they can get away with it.

Systemic sexual abuse by UN organizations has long been a problem. In response to exposure of abuse in Haiti two years ago, WHO loudly pledged a policy of "zero tolerance, rigorous training for staff and proper reporting systems."

What a crock that turned out to be. Now WHO is promising a "robust investigation" into the latest allegations - that their "proper reporting systems" failed to detect for two over two years.

Hands up all those who think that investigation will be anything more than a cover-up job.

WHO blocks the word 'Taiwan' on it's FB page

by dulan drift, Saturday, November 14, 2020, 12:48 (18 days ago) @ dulan drift

After again blocking Taiwan from admission to the World Health Assembly, WHO officials even blocked the mention of the word 'Taiwan' from its FB site.

People posting on discussion forums in relation to the decision to bar Taiwan were branded as being part of an "onslaught of cyber-attacks" which were supposedly preventing people from discussing health issues.

Given WHO is the world champion at 'preventing people (from Taiwan) from discussing health issues', that is really a bit rich.

WHO officials said:

“The aim is to enable our users to avoid being spammed through cyberattacks ... and to find a balanced way to keep information and conversation flowing.”

That is the exact opposite of what they are doing by suppressing any reference to Taiwan - still the world's leading country in controlling Covid.

WHO is actively 'finding imbalanced ways to prevent information and conversation flowing'.

This is the same tactic they have employed since Covid began. WHO is a political body and a China puppet - whatever they say is automatically subject to those two principles.

Sham WHO-CCP investigation into Covid Origins

by dulan drift, Sunday, November 15, 2020, 10:01 (17 days ago) @ dulan drift

This smacked of being a cover-up job from the get-go. Now that details of the investigation have been released (paywall) that initial impression is confirmed. The details were snuck out under cover of the US election.

Promoted as an 'independent, transparent investigation by scientific experts', the actual investigation is the opposite of that.

In fact there's a distinct pattern emerging with WHO's pronouncements - whatever they say you can assume the opposite is true.

Here are some facts about the investigation:

1. Most of the scientists are Chinese - appointed by the CCP.

2. Those foreign scientists that have been accepted to participate were appointed by WHO and vetted by the CCP.

3. Even then, those foreign scientists are not allowed in the country! They are conducting their 'investigation' via Zoom calls with the Chinese scientists. They may be allowed in later

4. WHO refuses to release the names of the foreign scientists involved. (Nobody, including Nature, seems to think that's weird.)

5. Investigation of a possible leak from an Wuhan lab is strictly forbidden.

6. The investigation will also focus on origin scenarios outside China. (Nothing necessarily wrong with that but worrying considering the ban on investigating lab leaks inside China)

7. All 'findings' must be approved by the CCP.

The origins of the most destructive, disruptive event of our times will be reduced to a narrative writing exercise. A handful of anonymous CCP-approved foreign scientists, who have long since sold-out any ethical fortitude to the CCP, will rubberstamp it. It will then be presented to the world as a definitive, independent, transparent investigation.

The narrative will include a fanciful speculation of transmission through an intermediate species, possibly outside China. (It's interesting to note that it's taken as fact that SARS originated from civets - even though there's no definitive proof of that - it was just a hypothesis that gained traction. In fact Batwoman still maintains that it probably came directly from bats.)

The media will faithfully print the narrative and label anyone who raises questions as conspiracy theorists. We will be told to listen to the (anonymous) experts. The media will refuse to print dissenting voices (expert or otherwise). End of story.

Sham WHO-CCP investigation into Covid Origins

by dan @, Sunday, November 15, 2020, 16:14 (17 days ago) @ dulan drift

This is astounding.

Regarding #4. "WHO refuses to release the names of the foreign scientists involved." Why wouldn't they release their names? How can anything be reviewed, much less peer reviewed, if we don't know who we're reviewing?

"An international team of epidemiologists, virologists and researchers with expertise in public health, animal health and food safety will lead the WHO’s COVID-19 investigation. The agency has not released their names."

The other points you make are even more disturbing. Assuming this really is a weaponized virus that escaped, it means we're truly in for a long period of disruption. One quality of this virus that keeps popping up is its ability to get a foothold in a population and spread surreptitiously, mainly be spreading unnoticed in a large segment of the population. This means it has real staying power. If its death rate was higher, 10% or something, it would burn out quickly. If it were much lower, akin to that of the flu, it wouldn't be much of an issue. But it has that sweet spot of somewhere between 2-4% that causes havoc, on top of all the hospitalizations of people who do pull through but have lasting, and now it appears, perhaps lifelong symptoms.

And it results in authoritarian policies being justified, invasion of privacy, and general loss of freedoms.

But what you're touching on is something altogether more horrifying, the coordinated coverup by international organizations that are meant to protect us.

Sham WHO-CCP investigation into Covid Origins

by dulan drift, Sunday, November 15, 2020, 20:44 (17 days ago) @ dan

Yes, what possible reason could there be for not naming the scientists involved?

My guess is they're worried someone might search their names and find they're up to their eyeballs in CCP influence.

I wonder if any of the guys from the Proximal Origins paper are on the team? Lipkin and Holmes would be prime candidates who can be relied on to make up/sign off on/sell whatever bullshit narrative is cooked up.

Bruce Aylward would almost certainly be a part of it - the guy who gave the Taiwan car-crash interview to a HK journalist. He led the first 'investigative' tour back in Jan or Feb where they returned singing the praises of China. My money has him as leader of the foreign contingent again.

Another would be Dr Bernhard Schwartländer of Germany, WHO Chef de Cabinet and WHO’s representative in China since 2013. Before that he was UN Coordinator on AIDS in Beijing. Sadly, anyone who has been involved with China and WHO for that long is immediately suss. It shouldn't be like that - but it is.

The frustrating thing is that they just keep saying 'listen to the experts' - and hey presto they get away with it - no-one bothers to actually check the validity/logicality of what's being said.

I'm reading a book by Arthur Koestler called The Act of Creation. He makes some interesting points about scientists - one is that the 'boring, impenetrable fog of scientific loftiness' is a crock made up by scientists to avoid scrutiny. Unfortunately it works.

RSS Feed of thread
powered by my little forum