|
ANTI-DISCLAIMER
These are most definitely the thoughts
and opinions of Simbolin.
Any and all references to individuals
and/or
corporations / institutions whether
implied or
otherwise, is intentional and deliberate.
Choke it down.
|
|
FROM FORCES INTERNATIONAL:-
World Health Oppression
In recent years, the World Health Organization
has launched a major assault on scientific integrity and freedom of choice
to further the interests of the international anti-tobacco cartel. The
identical scheme of computer-generated lies and falsifications created in
the United States is now applied globally, and presented to the nations of
the world as if it were real. Instead of concentrating almost exclusively
in the fight against malaria, which kills one child per minute, as well as
AIDS and tuberculosis, this organization has embraced the politically
fashionable and equally criminal agenda of lies and persecution already
going on in Canada, Australia, United States, and England.
The ministries/departments of health of many countries tend not to demand
detailed verification of the WHO's claims, nor do they look beyond
official rationales to discover the crooked methodology used to create an
"epidemic" that simply does not exist.
This is an insult to the trust that the world puts in an organization that
unfortunately rides on glory and decorum that are long past.
In typical health Nazi fashion, the WHO will use the strong arm of the
World Bank to impose its will, and to force weak countries to accept the
political agenda of the international anti-tobacco cartel and its package
of frauds and exaggerations. Our organization will do what it can to
denounce and fight a once-trusted organization that has so diminished
itself as to become the world enabler of a powerful international lobby
group.
A STRONG INTERNATIONAL ACTION is necessary not just to join voices in
protest, but to legally, morally and politically address the problem of
the WHO's falsifications, and help return this valuable organization to
its charitable origins, and back to the path of integrity. It is about
time to put an end to the infiltration and to the arrogance of the bullies
of the "health" establishment, who use the WHO to fulfill ambitions that
have now become global, and include super-taxation of tobacco, limitations
of freedom of expression, interference in the internal affairs of nations,
control over media and Internet, suppression of civil liberties, and the
control of individual behavior by the medical establishment.
WHO'S GLOBAL ANTI-TOBACCO AGENDA
It must be said that for about 25 years the WHO
has tried to achieve a firm control on tobacco. However, because of
tobacco's immense economic importance, the member nations were lukewarm
about the effective implementation of tobacco control measures.
Moreover, the anti-tobacco cartel had not yet gained momentum and finances
sufficient to tip the hand of the WHO itself, so its propaganda and
falsified information about tobacco, smoking, and smokers went mostly
unheard.
All that has changed now. The United States, Canada, Australia, and other
countries have been permeated by the cartel, which has now achieved firm
control over the various departments of health, and especially over the
public money-dispensing machinery.
In 1998 the cartel was successful in planting Gro Harlem Brundtland in
the" Direktorat" of the organization. Mainly because of the political and
financial support of the fanatically anti-smoking US administration, Gro
Harlem Brundtland managed to wedge the anti-tobacco agenda ahead of the
real epidemics the WHO is supposed to take care of, and obtain the
allocation of sizeable funding to the anti-tobacco agenda.
So the powerful anti-tobacco industry now has control over this
authoritative organization.
The fight against scientific and moral corruption has now become truly
global.
The WHO's global anti-tobacco agenda is to rush all member nations into an
agreement that is legally binding, and that forces the member nations to
start a systematic persecution of smokers under the pretense of "helping
them," while forcing huge taxation on the victims of this persecution.
The "help-the-smokers" pre-emptive move is eminently important because it
provides moral and political justification for the actions of the
executioners of truth and freedom, labels scientific opposition as tobacco
industry lobbying, and nullifies the objections of smokers.
In fact, those objections will be perceived as coming from people "who are
addicted victims of the tobacco industry, and must be helped," -- thus
what those "victims" say or do cannot be regarded as a matter worthy of
consideration, but simply as a manifestation of their disease. This
creates a perception very much like the one of a nurse working in a
psychiatric hospital, who knows not to take seriously what the patient
says and to proceed with the cure regardless of the patient's willingness
to take it. It is also perfectly legitimate to punish the patient who
refuses the cure. And we all know what the admission to a psychiatric
hospital does to the reputation of a sane person.
By using propaganda lies to convince smokers that they are sick, and using
the resistance offered by those smokers who refuse to swallow the
propaganda as a demonstration of their addiction to a product legally
offered by the tobacco industry, the perpetrators will deflect any outrage
that may arise against them towards that industry, clearing themselves
from any backlash and furthering, unpunished, their agenda of control.
This totally irresponsible -- actually, criminal -- and deliberate
formulation preamble is extremely dangerous and insidious, and it is now
at the foundations of the anti-tobacco cartel's political presentation. It
was first implemented in Canada by the British Columbia Ministry of Health
to deflect any rational objection to the persecution of smokers and to the
looting of the tobacco industry.
With an almost regal contempt directed to those suspected of "not
supporting health" the WHO will exert tremendous pressure and will
embarrass reluctant countries, so that they cave in and implement a policy
of prohibition and taxation, while allowing the WHO and its partners to
interfere with and even coordinate the internal affairs of those
countries.
The fatal error that the member countries will probably make is to go
along -- for political reasons and even if not convinced -- with an agenda
that is based on scientific fraud while hoping to stall and delay, waiting
for political winds to change in the West. But in the meantime, the
pharmaceutical multinationals and the interests they represent will have
installed themselves and the anti-tobacco cancer, with all the social,
political, and economic devastation it carries, will be unstoppable.
Strong political opposition must be directed towards unmasking this
world-size fraud. Not for the first time, a powerful and paternalistic
health establishment is seeking inappropriate social and political control
in the belief that its ideas represent the only rational and legitimate
perspective on progressive human governance. Through the WHO they seek to
extend this vision through "globalization" of health policy. In other
words, they want power and they want it NOW. But, as the WHO itself says,
prevention is better than cure -- and a campaign of education and
information, coupled with legal mechanisms to curb politically unhealthy
behaviors, could turn the tides.
QUOTE: "Specific protocols to be agreed within the convention will address
cigarette pricing policies, antismuggling measures, advertising and
promotion (including promotion on the internet), and cigarette labeling."
Notice the reference to the Internet. The anti-tobacco cartel's successful
effort to control media information on tobacco in certain countries did
not work for the Internet because of its global nature. By pressuring all
the governments of the world to participate in the persecution of tobacco,
the WHO and the cartel it represents intend to control the only media
where voices of dissent can be heard at a planetary level. By delegating
the control of the Internet servers to the member nations, the WHO will be
able to effectively eliminate not just the promotion of tobacco, but
especially the exposure of the frauds that the WHO itself promotes. Sites
like FORCES will be silenced or restricted because perceived as
tobacco-promoting sites. Another important side effect will be the
elimination of the free flow of that freedom-oriented mentality that tends
to support personal choice. As is the case in most of the Unites States
media, dissenters will have no voice and will be unaware of each other's
activities, thus fragmenting and eventually losing significance and
disappearing. How the WHO Is Funded
The World Health Organization is funded by
assessments levied on its 191 member countries and by donations. Its
"regular budget" is the total of the members' assessments and its "extra
budgetary funds" [EBF] are the total of voluntary donations by member
countries, as well as by public and private entities. Thus it is partially
funded rather like a private club (membership dues) and partially funded
like a charity (donations).
From its founding in l948 until the early l980s the WHO relied almost
exclusively on member assessments, but increasingly donations have played
a bigger and bigger role in its financing. "Between l984-85 and l992-93
the real value of the EBFs apparently increased by more than 60%, and in
the l990-91 biennium expenditure of extra budgetary funds exceeded the
regular budget for the first time," (Vaughan JP, Mogedal S, Druse S, Lee
K, Walt G, de Wilde K, "Financing the World Health Organization: global
importance of extra budgetary funds," Health Policy, l996
Mar;35(3):229-45). And WHO's reliance on donations has increased
throughout the l990s, with an astounding 50% growth in EBFs between
l996-97 and l998-l999 (from a total of $658,012,975 to an estimated total
of $956,000,000).
This means essentially that the WHO is up for grabs to the highest donors,
and that it must set its health policies and projects on those issues,
which will bring in the most donations. In other words, its global health
priorities are now being determined by what appeals to its biggest donors
rather than by the actual needs of the world's poorest and sickest
populations, the very population WHO was set up to serve.
Is it any wonder, then, that WHO has followed the lead of the United
States and made the eradication of cigarette smoking one its top
priorities rather than, say, the eradication of tuberculosis? After all,
tobacco's where the money is since the politically correct of the
developed world have turned "anti-tobaccoism" into a cause celébre.
Disease-ridden, fly-bespecked, starving children in some remote corner of
the world just aren't sexy enough as a cause to draw in the big bucks. As
its balance sheets attest, the big bucks for the WHO are in AIDS and
reproduction (sex) and tobacco.
And so WHO has gone from being a noble institution which helped eradicate
smallpox from the world to being just another money-grubbing health
"charity" which squanders more money on "administrative costs" and
meetings and public relations than it does to ameliorate disease and human
suffering.
The Regular Budget: Member Assessments
WHO's 191 member nations are assessed yearly fees on a sliding scale.
Small, poor countries pay only a few thousand a year (e.g. Belize is
assessed only US $3,290). Wealthier countries pay a good deal more (e.g.
in l999 Germany is being assessed just under US $40 million a year). The
United States is far and away the biggest funder of the "regular" budget,
and its l999 assessment is a cool US $108,371,585. It is followed by Japan
at US $81,158,895.
Obviously the U.S. is a very powerful political force in the WHO since it
holds such a very big stick in the funding for the regular budget.
WHO's regular budget for l998-99 was US $842 million.
Donations: Extra Budgetary Funds (EBFs) [To view
the documents on EBFs on the WHO site, Click here]
WHO receives donations from a myriad of sources -- from member countries,
from other United Nations agencies such as UNICEF and the World Bank, from
cities, states and provinces, from public and private universities, from
private organizations, associations, foundations, corporations and even
from individuals.
Basically WHO divides its records on EBFs into two categories by donors:
Voluntary funds from member countries and voluntary funds from other
contributors. Each of these is in turn divided into: "Voluntary Fund for
Health Promotion" and "Other Funding."
It will come as no surprise that once again the United States is the
biggest total contributor of voluntary donations among the member
countries, making up more than one-quarter of the total in l998. This
means, of course, that the WHO will do whatever it takes to keep the U.S.
happy. The U.S. is promoting global "tobacco control," so WHO will follow
suit if it wants to keep its most powerful and generous benefactor happy.
Funds contributed by donors other than member countries come primarily
from corporations and organizations, though there are some sizeable
contributions from individuals. It can be noted from looking at the list
of these donors that virtually all the world's major pharmaceutical
companies (and their subdivisions) are among the corporate donors, though
no single one is among the biggest donors. No doubt their more recent
contributions will increase, given that WHO is providing what amounts to
global promotion for the smoking cessation product manufacturers in its
cessation theme for this year's World No-Tobacco Day.
It is clear that individuals as well as corporations and other private
entities can purchase influence with WHO by donating money.
This year Dr. Sid E. Williams of Life University in Marietta, Georgia had
the honor of delivering the opening address to the Non-Governmental
Organizations [NGO] Forum on Health at the WHO's 52nd Session of the World
Health Assembly in Geneva (May l7-26, l999).
One might well ask who on earth Dr. Sid E. Williams is and what Life
University is. Dr. Williams is the founder and president of Life
University, home of the world's largest school of chiropractic (according
to its PR at least). And just how did WHO come to select Dr. Williams to
address the NGO forum? It seems that Life University is a co-sponsor of
the event, where a number of presentations on the WHO's Framework
Convention on Tobacco Control will be made. Further, Life College School
of Chiropractic has donated US $165,160 to WHO, with contributions of US
$39,550 in l998 alone. These sums may not seem large until they are
compared with say Harvard University, which has given a total of only US
$3,000 to WHO or the London School of Economics, which has given a total
of US $29,258.
When former Norwegian politician Gro Harlem Brundtland took over as the
Director-General of WHO in Jan. l998, she immediately made tobacco control
a global priority for the organization. Obviously she was aware of its PR
and financial potential. She formed WHO's Tobacco Free Project and began
to close ranks with the pharmaceutical corporations, the World Bank, and
the big private non-profits.
Nine months later she announced that she was confident WHO could secure
proper funding for its global anti-smoking campaign. "With regard to
tobacco, I am confident that it will be possible to mobilize millions of
dollars," ("WHO pinpoints smoking as huge global health threat,"
Christopher Follett, Reuters, 9/17/98).
And she was quite right. In return for making smoking cessation the theme
of WHO's l999 World No-Tobacco Day, the International Federation of
Pharmaceutical Manufacturers Associations and the World Self-Medication
Industry provided the financial support and help with public relations for
the event.
Obviously money talks at WHO at every level, and what the money is saying
these days is "Go after tobacco." THE WHO'S
PARTNERS IN THE GLOBAL REPRESSION OF SMOKING: THE WORLD BANK, BIG
PHARMACEUTICALS, THE U.S. GOVERNMENT
How does an organization that spends 65% of the
money received in internal administration costs manage to get more money?
What are the interests at play?
Why isn't the WHO shut down, and replaced with a more efficient (and
honest, we may add) new body capable of channeling most of its income
against the diseases that are ravaging the world?
One of the many reasons, of course, is politics. All countries need to
show each other that they support health, and though there may be domestic
objections in the background in each country, the official voice of all is
supportive of the WHO. A recent example is the unanimous support of the
mandate to the WHO for an international treaty against tobacco, even
though a large part of the economy of many countries, and millions of
jobs, depend on tobacco.
The notion (politically successful but false) that to be "progressive" it
is necessary to suppress personal choice, and the liberty to enjoy tobacco
(a notion based on junk science and health paternalism) has rooted itself
in too many countries. The combined action of the World Bank (now on board
the WHO bandwagon), and lobbies and commercial treaties from nations
endorsing the anti-tobacco cartel, is forcing reluctant, weak countries to
go along with the anti-smoking charade.
Another very fundamental shift of the WHO is its alliance with the
pharmaceutical industry. In exchange for substantial contributions, the
WHO ruffians will abuse the organization's authoritative voice and, just
like the anti-smoking cartel in each nation, will peddle nicotine patches
and other smoking cessation devices to the world as remedy against an
epidemic that simply does not exist.
As this happens, the pharmaceutical multinationals will attempt to replace
the tobacco industry with themselves while firmly taking root in the
target countries to expand marketing of all their products, while the
profits are channeled back home.
Ladened with an enormous bureaucracy, the WHO is now a totally political
entity that seeks more control and expansion in order to survive and
satisfy its ambitions. And if this is achieved at the cost of prostituting
integrity, truth, science, and repressing freedom, personal choice, and
private enterprise, well, that's what politics are all about. |
