(LifeSiteNews) — Previous articles emphasized that many people often do not use reasoning to refute the suggestion that evil people in the government would do very evil things. Such people often do not research or study the subject, but instead simply say, “Nobody would ever do that!”
It is not clear if such people really believe that “Nobody would ever do that!” or if they are only telling themselves that “Nobody would ever do that!” to avoid being proved wrong or because the subject is so evil that people would rather just ignore it and attempt to remain oblivious to the evil.
For example, if one studies the actions of the FBI and local secret police, one discovers that such entities have secretly committed some very horrible evils. Several of those evils included hoaxes, ruses, ploys, and lies about a targeted person, including claiming that such FBI and local secret police operations were “investigations.” As one former U.S. senator implied, they were not investigations, partially because investigations do not go “on and on and on.” (Pages 5 and 16)
The FBI and local police actions were instead a type of torture that involves continuous intense and coordinated stalking by members of the community, which is falsely labeled as an “investigation” so community members would be more likely to participate.
The WHO Pandemic Treaty looks set to be one of the biggest power-grabs in living memory, with unelected globalists seeking the power to declare pandemics, and then control your country's response.
But it's not too late to do something about it.
SIGN and SHARE this special petition telling Director General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus that the WHO will never usurp your nation's sovereignty.
The past two years have been rife with infringements on personal liberties and civil rights by national governments, but now the World Health Organization is seeking to appropriate those same abusive powers to itself at a global level.
194 member states representing 99% of the world's population are expected to sign pandemic treaties with the WHO that would allow Tedros, or any future Director General, to dictate exactly how your nation would respond to a new disease outbreak which they consider a pandemic.
This attack on national sovereignty will come as no surprise to those who for years have listened to elites like Klaus Schwab and Bill Gates discussing their vision for the centralization of power into globalist organizations like the World Economic Forum (WEF), the WHO and the rest of the United Nations.
SIGN this petition against the WHO's Pandemic Treaty, before it's too late.
Ludicrously, 20 world leaders calling for the treaty, including Tedros, Boris Johnson and Emmanuel Macron, compared the post-Covid world to the post-WWII period, saying similar co-operation is now needed to "dispel the temptations of isolationism and nationalism, and to address the challenges that could only be achieved together in the spirit of solidarity and co-operation - namely peace, prosperity, health and security."
Australian PM Scott Morrison is the latest leader to express support for a “pandemic treaty”.
The stated intention of the WHO is to “kickstart a global process to draft and negotiate a convention, agreement or other international instrument under the Constitution of the World Health Organization to strengthen pandemic prevention, preparedness and response.”
The wheels are already in motion, with the Biden administration officially proposing the initial steps towards handing global pandemic control to the WHO.
Biden's representatives have submitted amendments to the WHO's International Health Regulations (IHR), which would give the Director General the right to declare health emergencies in any nation, even when disputed by the country in question.
These amendments, which would be legally binding under international law, will be voted on by the World Health Assembly (the governing body of the WHO) at a special convention running from May 22-28 and set the stage for a fully-fledged pandemic treaty to be passed.
SIGN and SHARE the petition telling the WHO that you won't accept any pandemic treaty
The ball has been rolling since the last World Health Assembly meeting in December, where the United States launched negotiations "on a new international health instrument on pandemic prevention, preparedness, and response," a U.S. statement read.
"This momentous step represents our collective responsibility to work together to advance health security and to make the global health system stronger and more responsive.
"We look forward to broad and deep negotiations using a whole-of-society and whole-of-government approach that will strengthen the international legal framework for public health/pandemic prevention, preparedness, and response and enable us to address issues of equity, accountability, and multisectoral collaboration evident in the COVID-19 pandemic.
"We know it will take all of us working together across governments, private sector, philanthropy, academia, and civil society to make rapid progress towards a long-term solution for these complex problems," the U.S. statement added.
SIGN the petition today to show the WHO that you won't accept this attack on national sovereignty.
These are precarious times in which freedom and self-determination must be defended from those who would ride rough-shod over your civil rights.
We do not want to go back to global lockdowns, vaccine mandates and propoganda.
Sign the petition - speak up now!
For More Information:
Biden hands over American sovereignty with proposed WHO treaty - LifeSiteNews
Pandemic Treaty is a backdoor to global governance - LifeSiteNews
Dr. Robert Malone on the WHO's power-grab - LifeSiteNews
**Photo: YouTube Screenshot**
Now, in this example, if the FBI or local secret police ask a person in the community, Church, etc. to participate in such false investigations, another person might tell them that the FBI or local police might actually be lying to those participating in the investigation in that the FBI or local secret police might actually be targeting them as a trap or entrapment.
And here is where the “Nobody would ever do that!” response is often given — implying that the FBI or local secret police would not lie to people to get them to participate in a false investigation, hoax, ruse, coordinated stalking scheme, etc.
Then one might say, “look here where it says in U.S. federal law that law enforcement, which includes local police and the FBI, may ‘convey false or misleading information.’ Most people might simply say this is the FBI or local police ‘lying.’ And the law also apparently implies that the FBI and local police might even pre-plan and commit hoaxes or other falsified schemes!”
Then, one might provide the FBI’s guidelines which say that the FBI might “supply falsely sworn testimony or false documentation in any legal or administrative proceeding” (page 7) or make “untrue representations … concerning the activities” of any person “without that individual’s knowledge or consent.” (Page 8)
Thus, the reasonable person might say to another, “there, you see, U.S. federal law at least implies, and the FBI’s guidelines clearly say, that the FBI and local police might lie to you. If a person or group says they might lie to you, especially if they are employed by the government, then you might not want to believe anything they say. If the FBI or local police say, ‘we lie to you’ and then say, ‘you need to participate in this investigation of that person. Don’t worry, you can trust us,’ well, then, you might not want to trust them.”
Even after providing the FBI and local police laws and regulations suggesting that their operations might include lying, one might still get the response, “You are crazy, nobody would ever do that!”
Thus, one might conclude that it is not that such people don’t believe the reasoning or information provided; instead, it might be that such people simply do not want to believe, for whatever reason, that the FBI or local police might commit hoaxes or otherwise lie.
U.S. Democrat suggested falsifying pandemic in 2008?
Now, one suggestion that often gets the “You are crazy! Nobody would ever do that!” response is the suggestion that COVID-19 might be a hoax pandemic or pandemic exercise. Previous articles discussed this subject more thoroughly than it is going to be discussed in this article. Basically, one possibility is that the coronavirus that supposedly causes COVID-19 is merely a common cold causing virus which has been infecting humans for many years.
Government officials might have simply planned a hoax, ruse, or ploy which they might have attempted to label as a secret “National Exercise” or “Federal Exercise,” which U.S. federal law describes. Some national level exercises may be “without notice” and as “realistic as practicable”; the law apparently suggests that those involved may never be told that they were participating in an exercise and that the exercise may include government officials lying to those involved. If the government falsified a pandemic, government officials would be lying to Americans in the news and through other communications. And Americans would never be told that they were participating in a “national” or “Federal” exercise.
Thus, falsifying a pandemic would require many lies by U.S. government officials. One lie might have been that it was a new coronavirus, when it might not be a new virus. Another lie might have been that it is deadly, when most of the time it simply causes the common cold. Other lies might include lying about the number of people who were dying and otherwise falsifying deaths (and falsifying funerals; this is off-subject but one might ask, does true repentance for the serious sin of falsifying a funeral in a Catholic Church require the person, or the person’s family, publicly stating that the death and funeral was falsified? U.S. federal law apparently suggests falsified deaths as a possibility: “establish a new identity” and a similar law enforcement exemption (e); establishing a new identity might include a falsified death and funeral of the real identity).
Different government officials or entities might have different reasons for supporting such a major lie as a falsified pandemic. Some government officials might support a new type of injection which they (again, using a lie) describe as a “vaccine.” Some government officials might have simply wanted to do an international human experiment with an injection that may or may not be a vaccine. There are scientists who do not care about other human beings and simply see them as potential research equipment. Or, there could be some who overly trust vaccines and wrongly think that a worldwide vaccine scheme might make the common cold nonexistent.
Of course, most people would not choose to risk dying or seriously debilitating arthritis or other injury from a vaccine for the common cold, which does not harm most people. Thus, the government would have to lie about the severity of a virus in attempt to cause public fear and/or forcibly inject or otherwise attempt to “intimidate or coerce a civilian population” to get people vaccinated against coronaviruses and/or the common cold.
Again, some, possibly many, might say, “You are crazy! Nobody would ever do that!” Well, there again, such people are likely wrong. In fact, the idea of falsifying a pandemic as a “national exercise” or to be part of the federal exercise program for vaccine distribution schemes was apparently discussed publicly by U.S. government officials in 2008.
The following discussion appears to include the suggestion that the U.S. government use a “national exercise” or federal exercise program with seasonal influenza falsely publicized as a pandemic. The conversation occurs during an official U.S. House of Representatives hearing that was then published as a government document entitled “Emerging Biological Threats and Public Health Preparedness: Getting beyond Getting Ready.”
The hearing took place in 2008. However, the Presiding Chairman of the Committee was Representative James Langevin of Rhode Island. He was a U.S. representative for the Democratic Party until only a few months ago, in 2023. He did not run for re-election in 2022.
The conversation to be quoted in a moment is between Mr. Langevin and Dr. Craig Vanderwagen. At the time of that Hearing, Dr. Vanderwagen was the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response (ASPR). A complete discussion of the ASPR’s responsibilities cannot be provided in this article. However, one of his main responsibilities is to
Carry out drills and operational exercises, in consultation with the Department of Homeland Security, the Department of Defense, the Department of Veterans Affairs, and other applicable Federal departments and agencies, as necessary and appropriate, to identify, inform, and address gaps in and policies related to all-hazards medical and public health preparedness and response […]
Thus, one of Dr. Vanderwagen’s main functions was carrying out U.S. government “operational exercises” for pandemics and other “all-hazards.” And pandemic exercises and “vaccine distribution schemes” is the subject of the discussion between the Democratic Rep. Langevin and Dr. Vanderwagen from the 2008 Hearing.
Read it for yourself and determine if the Democratic representative suggested falsifying a pandemic as a national exercise. An excerpt of the discussion is as follows with emphasis provided:
[Langevin speaking]: Dr. Runge and Dr. Vanderwagen, when we conduct exercises, obviously, it’s important to be as realistic as possible to the extent that we can and use current requirements to show us how well we might do in a future situation.
During a pandemic, DHS and HHS obviously will be the lead, with Federal agencies managing the response. At a hearing I held last September I stated that we should test our systems now using seasonal influenza as a proxy for pandemic influenza.
Dr. Vanderwagen, starting with you, I also asked you to take last year’s influenza season and make a concerted effort to see how many people we could vaccinate in the shortest period of time, basically, intending that seasonal influenza is actually pandemic influenza. The way I see it, we should be testing our distribution systems now, stressing our organizations in these sorts of real-time, real-world contexts while improving the health of our citizens throughout the Nation.
You agreed, and you also—I also told you that I’d be asking about this again. So here we are at this hearing. Did HHS do this? If so, how? What was the outcome? If not, why not? […]
[Dr. Vanderwagen speaking]: Yes, the primary event that can be tested in seasonal flu that would approximate pandemic is immunization practices and immunization access. In the first instance, that’s going to be the primary event response. In fact, many States and localities have done extensive testing and evaluation of various modalities from drive throughs to on-work site to the standard go to the County Health Department approaches.
We believe that there are best practices out there, but increasingly we’re engaging with local business to participate in these processes as well, that they can become dispensing sites and capture a significant number of people in those events.
That’s not only useful for pandemic flu, but it’s also useful for management of distribution of prophylactic antibiotics and in other biological event, the use of antivirals if we can expand to prophylactic, post-exposure prophylaxis use. So a wide variety of those were tested last year. Again, folks have been driving this train pretty hard, depending upon where they are.
We’ve put it into the requirements for hospital preparedness program and it’s built into the FEP [apparently referring to the Federal Exercise Program or National Exercise Program] as well, that they test and exercise these [vaccine or drug] distribution schemes. What is problematic is what about alternate care sites? That’s the next frontier, if you will, of exercising what are those alternate care sites? What will the standards of care be that are applied in those kind of environments? That’s a little different than the logistical challenge of how we get drugs into people’s arms. (Pages 38-39)
That ends the excerpt from the 2008 U.S. government hearing. Now, it is obvious that the discussion is on pandemic “exercises” and vaccines. Mr. Langevin’s statement is what apparently mentions possibly falsifying a pandemic. He states:
I also asked you to take last year’s influenza season and make a concerted effort to see how many people we could vaccinate in the shortest period of time, basically, intending that seasonal influenza is actually pandemic influenza. (Page 38)
Now, what does it mean to intend “that seasonal influenza is actually pandemic influenza” to “see how many people we [the U.S. government and other entities] could vaccinate in the shortest period of time”?
It sure appears to mean that the U.S. government would have to falsify a pandemic by claiming that influenza which goes around every year is actually a pandemic influenza as a falsified exercise to “see how many people we [the U.S. government and other entities] could vaccinate in the shortest period of time” and to test “our distribution systems now, stressing our organizations in these sorts of real-time, real-world contexts while improving the health of our citizens throughout the Nation.”
The statement almost necessarily has to be suggesting for the U.S. government to falsify a pandemic by falsely claiming that seasonal influenza is not what it really is. This almost necessarily has to be what Mr. Langevin is suggesting because influenza vaccines have never been required; the government would have had to create fear, panic, or otherwise coerce “as many people as possible” to attempt to get vaccines.
An important fact that some might not know is that seasonal influenza is not pandemic influenza; the U.S. government makes a major distinction between seasonal flu and pandemic flu. (Not all of the previous reference is endorsed.)
One major distinction the U.S. government makes is that “few people have immunity” to pandemic influenza. Thus, the representative suggesting to intend that “seasonal influenza is actually pandemic influenza” is apparently to falsely imply that many people do not have immunity and thus would need a vaccine. This is a major point to keep in mind throughout this article.
He begins the segment by saying that “when we conduct exercises, obviously, it’s important to be as realistic as possible.” Thus, he is talking about “realistic as possible exercises.” He then says that he suggested “that we should test our systems now using seasonal influenza as a proxy for pandemic influenza.” Thus, his statement is referring to using seasonal influenza as a “realistic as possible” exercise for “pandemic influenza.”
Then he says to “see how many people we could vaccinate in the shortest period of time, basically, intending that seasonal influenza is actually pandemic influenza.” And this appears to be where the suggestion of falsifying a pandemic as an exercise is suggested. Seeing “how many people we could vaccinate in the shortest period of time, basically, intending that seasonal influenza is actually pandemic influenza” requires forced vaccination and/or a Nation or public which is in fear to the point of nearly every person in America wanting a vaccine in a short amount of time. (U.S. government officials apparently discussed causing “public fear” with national exercises prior to what was described as the COVID-19 pandemic.)
His next statement then reiterates the concept: “stressing our organizations in these sorts of real-time, real-world contexts.” To “stress our organizations” in “real-time, real-world contexts” implies that Americans are basically surging into hospitals, clinics, or other locations, apparently implying that they are in a sense desperate for vaccines. His suggestion appears to imply that this fear is to be caused by “intending that seasonal influenza is actually pandemic influenza.” And, as he says, this is to be “as realistic as possible” and in the “real-time, real-world” context.
Finally, he says that this “intending seasonal influenza to be pandemic influenza” with the intention of vaccine distribution and “stressing our organizations” is also “while improving the health of our citizens throughout the Nation.” The last few words suggest that the Democratic representative thinks that influenza vaccines necessarily “improve the health.”
The statement also appears to suggest forced or otherwise coerced vaccination of citizens “throughout the Nation.” This is especially due to the previous statement which suggests “testing” vaccine distribution and “stressing our organizations.” It implies a different approach to influenza than what was currently used at that time. One could probably reasonably say that it very clearly suggests falsifying a pandemic by claiming that the commonly occurring seasonal influenza is actually the uncommonly occurring pandemic influenza; however, this article is going to take a cautious approach and say it “appears to suggest” falsifying a pandemic.
There are not many other ways to interpret what Mr. Langevin suggests. Some might say, “he did not mean government lying to Americans by saying that seasonal influenza is actually pandemic influenza.” The problem with this suggestion is the rest of his statement which was already explained above but which almost necessarily implies the government creating a chaotic, “stressing our organizations” situation by the U.S. government “intending that seasonal influenza is pandemic influenza” and distributing real vaccines for “the health of our citizens throughout the Nation.” That is much different than the government simply pretending to themselves that seasonal influenza is pandemic influenza.
And he is not the only former U.S. government official who suggested that the U.S. federal government use force and potentially deception against Americans to support the vaccine industry and/or vaccine distribution schemes. A former high-ranking U.S. federal government official said the U.S. government pushes “to vaccinate everybody, as many people as we can, every year for the seasonal flu” to keep vaccine factories funded and open for a potential future pandemic.
Such statements are a big deal and should not be ignored; the statement suggests U.S. federal government entities like the HHS, FDA, CDC, etc. might not be telling Americans the truth about influenza vaccines or COVID vaccines. Basically, one probably should keep in mind that government officials might be falsifying information to coerce Americans. The above statements are some of the only pieces of information that one should need to determine that, “Yes, government officials and others would really do that.”
It is not clear if Congress is going to be trying to “determine the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic” or if such suggestions were just more examples of government officials lying. However, if such people were being honest, they might look at the U.S. federal government’s, FEMA’s, or other national exercise programs for the origins of COVID-19, or what might be more accurately described as a falsified COVID-19 pandemic. One might expect government officials to have those documents securely hidden with very few people given access.
Or, as a separate article might explain more thoroughly, why not require the publication of all government “exercises,” hoaxes, propaganda, or other falsified occurrences? If those documents are merely boring events or prove that “Nobody would ever do that!” then why not require all of them, including the classified and/or secret ones, to be published?