People are quick to forget that the WHO/UN/WEF are busy positioning themselves to marry the climate change narrative to the public health narrative. It’s called having control of the whole kitten caboodle.
As evidence of the “intent” behind this marriage of convenience one need look no further t…
People are quick to forget that the WHO/UN/WEF are busy positioning themselves to marry the climate change narrative to the public health narrative. It’s called having control of the whole kitten caboodle.
As evidence of the “intent” behind this marriage of convenience one need look no further than the following, which appeared in the Lancet:
And if you need further confirmation of where this is all headed....have a look at what Janes Madeira of the AMA has to say on the subject....he was hired @2011 as the CEO of the AMA and clearly has been leading that organization to embrace the climate change/public health union.
that's the beauty of this. And of course, all of this is really done to continue to elevate and support physicians. We'll have other crisis. We have an emerging climate crisis, which is really important and probably going to be hugely impactful. We'll be paying great attention to that. Again, our arcs are agnostic to the environment. They can shift to the environment if the climate change impacts, for example, chronic disease, which it will, we will have that arc incorporate the consideration of climate disease in that arc. So I think we're really well-positioned for whatever comes at us with our strategic framework.”
Best to listen to the whole thing to understand that health will soon encompass whatever the WHO chooses to define as the domain of public health....”climate disease.”
Do you suppose they will consider gun violence as a public health issue that requires global action?
Make no mistake....climate change narrative goes hand in hand with the public health narrative they WANT and will ENSURE evolves from the COVID plandemic.
Psst...Go see what Madara was doing before he became head of the AMA. Private equity investing.
The other thing people need to understand is the social impact markets that will accompany the merger of healthcare/climate change whereby human affairs (with the aid of CBDC that allows tracking and tracing from cradle to grave) are dictated by the new financial system and social impact markets and pay for success programs, designed to hand our governance over to the technocrats. After all, they own the machines and the means that they want us entirely dependent upon. But hey, don’t worry they’ll remake the education system in the process so they can train us for their gig economy.
IT IS ALL CONNECTED....and if Kennedy, Malone, Kirsch, Nass or any of the others don’t want you talk in depth about social impact markets and the planned intersection of public health and climate change then it is because they either don’t have a good enough handle on the bigger agenda (unlikely since the process to be fighting the Davos manifest) or they have some interests in fighting only part of the agenda.
And incidentally, they seem to be focused on the vaccine and as of late we also should note they seem to be leaving a lot of room for the off ramp that consists of saying the affair was a colossal bungle by bureaucrats due to capture and corruption.
Yeah, don’t think so. To me that translates to certain MFM individuals wanting us to trust them without verifying. I’ll pass.
I feel like I am shouting into the wind most days.
Are you the Sandra that Celia Farber latched onto the clip of Alison McDowell to say there are some who are overdosing on red pills?
That whole row was depressing. Felt like Celia Farber was just wanting everyone to fawn over RFK, Jr. And then there is Tessa Lena doing the same dance.
Yes, I'm the one who committed wrong think by expressing concerns about RFK Jr. and posting a short clip of Allison's where she made some extremely important points about the first chapter of his book. I was reprimanded for not joining the group think/hopium bandwagon and for not accepting him as our savior. It was truly shocking!! I've never seen anything like that before--all of the sudden a number of substacks flipped from being places for sharing opinions without drama, to full blown propaganda outlets for political campaigns. I'm not familiar with Tessa Lena doing the same (I think I recently became a free subscriber to her substack and then there was a strange post questioning whether the person you support is with the CIA)
I saw that too. Strange. I think the reference was that whoever “Margie” is sometimes comes up as a different name. I was saying she had a right to ask questions without being vilified. Tessa was defending Malone and Nass. And it was over the top with her suggesting that anyone asking questions is doing damage to the “unity” of the MFM. I believe there are some definite legitimate questions that need answering. And I am not CUA. Lol. Tereza ended up quoting me in her substack using my response to Tessa. Celia banned me from her substack for defending Alison. And then let me back on—although I said I’d pass. CosmoAgent may have asked her to do that. But I don’t want to be part of groupthink so that is a hard pass for me.
Tereza Caraggio had a good post yesterday, where she posted a video and read some of her comments to Tessa Lena--she made a lot of good points in it, basically saying that given all that hangs in the balance, we should not prioritize false unity in the MFM over asking serious questions. Truth be told, I don't know how anyone could support Malone. It truly seems like the MFM is being sabotaged from within (Diana West had a good post on that). As for Celia, I can't say I'm shocked at her banning you. She also apparently banned a guy named "Allen," who I don't know, except for reading some of his comments which are excellent and make valid points. After taking the time to respond to Celia's insanity (e.g. those who question RFK are deceived, working for someone or full of despair) and never getting a response, I realized that nobody over there was actually interested in a rational discussion of serious issues. It was just a massive group think operation. And fwiw, I'm actually a clinical psychologist, and I've never seen that amount of gaslighting, manipulation, deception and outright dishonesty--it was really shocking. So, obviously, I never went back.
It IS part of the COVID fraud/chronicles....
People are quick to forget that the WHO/UN/WEF are busy positioning themselves to marry the climate change narrative to the public health narrative. It’s called having control of the whole kitten caboodle.
As evidence of the “intent” behind this marriage of convenience one need look no further than the following, which appeared in the Lancet:
https://www.nih.gov/news-events/news-releases/nih-s-climate-health-initiative-tackles-global-health-effects-associated-changing-climate
And if you need further confirmation of where this is all headed....have a look at what Janes Madeira of the AMA has to say on the subject....he was hired @2011 as the CEO of the AMA and clearly has been leading that organization to embrace the climate change/public health union.
https://www.ama-assn.org/practice-management/sustainability/james-madara-md-future-medicine-2022
In Madara’s words (pay close attention people):
“So
that's the beauty of this. And of course, all of this is really done to continue to elevate and support physicians. We'll have other crisis. We have an emerging climate crisis, which is really important and probably going to be hugely impactful. We'll be paying great attention to that. Again, our arcs are agnostic to the environment. They can shift to the environment if the climate change impacts, for example, chronic disease, which it will, we will have that arc incorporate the consideration of climate disease in that arc. So I think we're really well-positioned for whatever comes at us with our strategic framework.”
Best to listen to the whole thing to understand that health will soon encompass whatever the WHO chooses to define as the domain of public health....”climate disease.”
Do you suppose they will consider gun violence as a public health issue that requires global action?
Make no mistake....climate change narrative goes hand in hand with the public health narrative they WANT and will ENSURE evolves from the COVID plandemic.
Psst...Go see what Madara was doing before he became head of the AMA. Private equity investing.
The other thing people need to understand is the social impact markets that will accompany the merger of healthcare/climate change whereby human affairs (with the aid of CBDC that allows tracking and tracing from cradle to grave) are dictated by the new financial system and social impact markets and pay for success programs, designed to hand our governance over to the technocrats. After all, they own the machines and the means that they want us entirely dependent upon. But hey, don’t worry they’ll remake the education system in the process so they can train us for their gig economy.
IT IS ALL CONNECTED....and if Kennedy, Malone, Kirsch, Nass or any of the others don’t want you talk in depth about social impact markets and the planned intersection of public health and climate change then it is because they either don’t have a good enough handle on the bigger agenda (unlikely since the process to be fighting the Davos manifest) or they have some interests in fighting only part of the agenda.
And incidentally, they seem to be focused on the vaccine and as of late we also should note they seem to be leaving a lot of room for the off ramp that consists of saying the affair was a colossal bungle by bureaucrats due to capture and corruption.
Yeah, don’t think so. To me that translates to certain MFM individuals wanting us to trust them without verifying. I’ll pass.
Thank you for taking the time to post such a thorough comment--I completely agree with you on all of this!
I feel like I am shouting into the wind most days.
Are you the Sandra that Celia Farber latched onto the clip of Alison McDowell to say there are some who are overdosing on red pills?
That whole row was depressing. Felt like Celia Farber was just wanting everyone to fawn over RFK, Jr. And then there is Tessa Lena doing the same dance.
Yes, I'm the one who committed wrong think by expressing concerns about RFK Jr. and posting a short clip of Allison's where she made some extremely important points about the first chapter of his book. I was reprimanded for not joining the group think/hopium bandwagon and for not accepting him as our savior. It was truly shocking!! I've never seen anything like that before--all of the sudden a number of substacks flipped from being places for sharing opinions without drama, to full blown propaganda outlets for political campaigns. I'm not familiar with Tessa Lena doing the same (I think I recently became a free subscriber to her substack and then there was a strange post questioning whether the person you support is with the CIA)
I saw that too. Strange. I think the reference was that whoever “Margie” is sometimes comes up as a different name. I was saying she had a right to ask questions without being vilified. Tessa was defending Malone and Nass. And it was over the top with her suggesting that anyone asking questions is doing damage to the “unity” of the MFM. I believe there are some definite legitimate questions that need answering. And I am not CUA. Lol. Tereza ended up quoting me in her substack using my response to Tessa. Celia banned me from her substack for defending Alison. And then let me back on—although I said I’d pass. CosmoAgent may have asked her to do that. But I don’t want to be part of groupthink so that is a hard pass for me.
Tereza Caraggio had a good post yesterday, where she posted a video and read some of her comments to Tessa Lena--she made a lot of good points in it, basically saying that given all that hangs in the balance, we should not prioritize false unity in the MFM over asking serious questions. Truth be told, I don't know how anyone could support Malone. It truly seems like the MFM is being sabotaged from within (Diana West had a good post on that). As for Celia, I can't say I'm shocked at her banning you. She also apparently banned a guy named "Allen," who I don't know, except for reading some of his comments which are excellent and make valid points. After taking the time to respond to Celia's insanity (e.g. those who question RFK are deceived, working for someone or full of despair) and never getting a response, I realized that nobody over there was actually interested in a rational discussion of serious issues. It was just a massive group think operation. And fwiw, I'm actually a clinical psychologist, and I've never seen that amount of gaslighting, manipulation, deception and outright dishonesty--it was really shocking. So, obviously, I never went back.