Posted on 02/08/2006 7:07:51 PM PST by Calpernia
"We believe that mental health is just as important as physical health maybe even more so."5 Donna Shalala, former Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services
"Mental health refers to how a person thinks, feels, and acts when faced with life's situations." National Mental Health Services Knowledge Exchange Network [link now obsolete]
"The challenge to humanity is to adopt new ways of thinking, new ways of acting, new ways of organizing itself in society in short, new ways of living."20 Our Creative Diversity, UNESCO
Don't be deceived by nice sounding labels such as Healthy Start, Healthy People, Healthy Families, Healthy Communities, and Healthy Cities. These and other "local" campaigns for public and mental health follow a global blueprint. They all fit into a worldwide system of health management and surveillance led by the World Health Organization, a UN special agency that equates faith with hate and truth with intolerance.1 The goal is conditioning the masses to willingly conform to new "universal" values, environmental guidelines, and a global management system.
Dr. David Satcher, U.S. Surgeon-General and Assistant Secretary for Health, gave a progress report at a National Healthy People Consortium in November 1998 "We have a clear blueprint in place," he announced. "Currently, 47 states are actively involved in Healthy People 2000 and 'Healthy City and Healthy Community' initiatives are being pursued throughout the country. Hundreds of national organizations have reviewed the Year 2000 objectives and have adopted them as their own."
Dr. Satcher then drew the connection between Healthy Start,2 Healthy People, mental health and the World Health Organization:
"Every child should be given the opportunity for a healthy start... No priority yet has generated as much interest and enthusiasm as this one on mental health..." "...our efforts will be focused on maintaining a system of global health surveillance...
"Healthy People 2010 is the United States' contribution to the World Health Organization's call to the nations of the world to renew their commitment to health for all."
A NEW WAY OF THINKING
In a 1996 speech at The National Children's Mental Health Initiative, Donna Shalala, Secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), said,
"From fully immunizing children by age two... to stopping domestic violence, we're working to improve the lives of young people from the cradle to young adulthood. And a strong part of our vision is the mental health of children. We believe that mental health is just as important as physical health ...maybe even more so..." 5
As head of the DHHS, Shalala helped organize The National Mental Health Services Knowledge Exchange Network (KEN). Ponder its definition for mental health:
"Mental health refers to how a person thinks, feels, and acts when faced with life's situations. It is how people look at themselves, their lives, and the other people in their lives ...and explore choices." 6
Do you wonder what Dr. Shalala and her network of health planners would consider good thinking? Or bad thinking? This definition doesn't tell us. How do they want people "to look at themselves" or "explore choices"? The answer is clear when you study UNESCO's psycho-social strategies for conforming the minds of our children to its anti-Christian world view. But without background information, these ambiguous, open-ended phrases hide the true intentions.
However, Dr. Shalala and other self-proclaimed "change agents" do tell us that the old ways "a person thinks, feels, and acts" must change. They don't fit the new global ideology or the consensus process. According to Professor Benjamin Bloom, called the Father of OBE, the new "purpose of education and the schools is to change the thoughts, feelings and actions of students."7 So it's not surprising that UNESCO's Commission on Culture and Development in its report, Our Creative Diversity, wrote that -
"The challenge to humanity is to adopt new ways of thinking, new ways of acting, new ways of organizing itself in society, in short, new ways of living." 8
Referring to the management and monitoring of its education program, the Kansas State Board of Education made a similar statement, "QPA [Quality Performance Accreditation] is a process which demands new thinking, new strategies, new behavior, and new beliefs."
"New beliefs" and "new thinking" are key to the global management system. Adults as well as children must trade truth, facts, and logical thinking for myths, UN values, and the consensus process. The masses must learn to see themselves, not as individuals, but as part of a greater whole: a group, a community, the planet. Finally, the United Nations is nearing its goal: to create a unified, socialist world made up of compliant world citizens ready to adapt to what Al Gore called "a wrenching transformation of society." 9
THE WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION (WHO)
In 1946, the first head of WHO laid the foundation for today's mental health program. Having implied that Christian parents indoctrinated "their defenseless children" with "poisonous certainties" that cause war and conflict, Canadian psychiatrist Brock Chisholm, added,
"The problem is no longer the germ of diphtheria, but rather the attitudes of parents who are incapable of accepting and using proven knowledge...
"Surely the training of children in home and schools should be of at least as great public concern as their vaccination.... Individuals who have emotional disabilities of their own--guilts, fears, inferiorities--are certain to project their hates on to others... [S]uch reaction now becomes a dangerous threat to the whole world....
"We must be prepared to sacrifice much.... If it cannot be done gently, it may have to be done roughly or even violently..." 10
Half a century has passed since Dr. Chisholm called for UN controls that would abolish divisive Christian "certainties". Today, WHO commands an international networking agency that helps nations around the world change and monitor the ways their people think, choose, and act. Called Nations for Mental Health, it links each member state to the UN agenda and promises to steer each nation toward the UN goal:
"Governments will be assisted to formulate, implement, monitor and evaluate mental health policies.
"Mental health policies should enable all individuals whose mental health is disturbed or whose psychological balance may be compromised to obtain services adapted to their needs, and to promote the optimal development of the mental health of the population." 11
To develop "the mental health of the population" and to prevent dissent and conflict from blocking progress, everyone must participate in the consensus process. Assessments for all -- young and old -- will show who might be "at risk" of not meeting the new mental standards for healthy communities.
For a glimpse at the vast network already in place, look at some of the mental health partners in the WHO agenda:
*
World Health Organization (WHO) *
Nations for Mental Health *
Dept. of Health and Human Services *
National Mental Health Services Knowledge Exchange Network (KEN) *
Healthy Cities *
Healthy Communities *
Healthy Families *
Healthy People *
Healthy Start
Children, in private as well as government schools, practice compliance by signing the Healthy Practices Pledge. It sounds innocuous at first -- just promise to "brush with a fluoride toothpaste," choose "snacks such as fruits and vegetables," and "make our home a smoke-free zone," then sign the pledge. But the contract is open-ended. It suggests that other "healthy" behaviors will be added later. 12 What if the next contract adds "cooperation with" and "tolerance for" something that conflicts with a child's faith? What if a refusal to sign the contract brings ridicule and persecution? Is your child ready to follow God, even when pressured to conform?
HEALTHY CITIES AND COMMUNITIES
The Healthy Cities project was launched by WHO in the early eighties. Its web site explains its purpose: "The Healthy Cities Project helps change the ways in which individuals, communities, private and voluntary organizations and local governments think about, understand and make decisions about health." 13
Today, its guidelines are followed by leaders across America -- whether they use the label "Healthy City" or not. Remember Dr. Satcher's report at the 1998 Healthy People Consortium:
"'Healthy City and Healthy Community' initiatives are being pursued throughout the country. Hundreds of national organizations... have [adopted] the Year 2000 objectives... Healthy People 2010 is the United States' contribution to the World Health Organization's call to the nations of the world to renew their commitment to health for all. 14
It's no accident that the last three words, "health for all," sound like UNESCO's 1990 World Conference on Education for All (EFA). The latter introduced the same six education goals President Bush announced in 1991. EFA's counterpart in the health arena is WHO's Health for All (HFA). And, like Goals 2000, the US branch of UNESCO's outcome-based education system, "a Healthy City is defined in terms of process and outcome."
WHO's Healthy Cities program works with America's Coalition for Healthier Cities and Communities, whose members may or may not use the WHO labels. But they must all follow the Total Quality Management process which calls for continual monitoring of change and progress. They must also agree to:
*
"measure our progress. " *
"address the root causes of problems." *
"promote a broader definition of health that includes physical, mental, social, and spiritual dimensions." *
"focus on prevention, wellness and change incentives."
PREVENTING CONFLICT AND MENTAL PROBLEMS
The key to prevention is continual and controlled training, monitoring, and remediation.15 As Clinton suggested at the 1997 White House Conference on Hate Crimes,
"There would almost have to be some sort of club or organization at the school, because if you think about it, your parents are still pretty well separated ... We have to find a disciplined, organized way out of this so that we reach every child in an affirmative way before something bad happens."
In the UN plan for Healthy Cities, prevention becomes a personal duty. Since the group counts more than the person, friends and neighbors would be asked to report on one another -- just as in Nazi Germany.
"I challenge our young people to realize their important role in this seamless system," said Donna Shalala. "Many times, you as friends are the strongest link in the chain of contact. You know best when your brother, your sister or your friend is facing problems..."5
President Clinton suggested the same tactic during the above hate-crimes conference: "The Justice Department will make its own hate crimes training curriculum available. A lot of hate crimes still go unreported... If a crime is unreported, that gives people an excuse to ignore it." Then he announced a Justice Department website which invites children to tell "trusted adults" about "hateful" or exclusive attitudes they see in their relatives at home or in friends in school.
Hard to believe? It all makes sense when you consider the United Nations' hostility toward traditional values. Ponder the words of Federico Mayor, Director-General of UNESCO:
"The mission of UNESCO... is that of advancing... international peace and the common welfare... We have witnessed... the resurgence of nationalism, the growth of fundamentalism and of religious and ethnic intolerance. The roots of exclusion and hatred have shown themselves even deeper and more tenacious than we had feared... Peace... requires, in the words of the Constitution, 'the intellectual and moral solidarity of mankind'."16
MOLDING THE MINDS OF THE MASSES
Children who refuse to conform may be considered handicapped. According to a Teacher Training Manual from the National Training Institute for Applied Behavioral Science,
"Although they appear to behave appropriately and seem normal by most cultural standards, they may actually be in need of mental health care in order to help them change, adapt, and conform to the planned society in which there will be no conflict of attitudes or beliefs."17
Conflict must be replaced with solidarity, and -- as in the USSR -- everyone must be monitored for compliance with the new global beliefs and values. Such a surveillance system is at the heart of President Clinton's Executive Order 13107 (See "Trading U.S. Rights for UN Rules." It establishes "an Interagency Working Group on Human Rights Treaties", and its functions include:
*
the monitoring of the actions by the various States for their conformity with relevant treaties, *
the provision of relevant information for reports and other monitoring purposes, and *
the promotion of effective remedial mechanisms;" 18
Monitoring the progress of mental Health for All (HFA) is essential to the process of managed change. Non-compliance or dissent must be spotted, reported, and corrected before it spreads. Even "a substantial risk" of failure to conform could bring preventative correction. Remediation, conflict resolution, and other mind changing strategies include these steps:
*
challenge traditional values *
evoke strong feelings *
produce cognitive dissonance, a form of mental and moral confusion *
dialogue to consensus *
elicit a response that
1. demonstrates a change in attitude
2. can be measured
3. becomes part of a child's individual electronic data file
The goal of brainwashing in the Soviet Union was to create the new "Soviet Man."19 The UN goal is to mold global citizens so committed to the new ideology that they cannot be turned back even by the most logical arguments. UNESCO's 1995 report, Our Creative Diversity, said it well:
"Education must inform... but it must also form, it must provide them with a sense of meaning to guide their actions...
"Education should promote 'rational understanding of conflict, tensions, and the processes involved, provoke a critical awareness... and provide a basis for the analysis of concepts that will prevent ...chauvinist and irrational explanations from being accepted.'...
"Its primary task is to provide information, explain and analyze problems and subject them to criticism... "It should cover adults as well. The principle of lifelong education should be the aim of all societies." 20
Edward Hunter wrote the book Brainwashing, an insightful report on the experience of prisoners who survived Soviet brainwashing strategies in Communist Countries during the fifties. His warnings should shine a red light into our foolish presumptions that this process couldn't be used in our nation. 21 Compare his words with the above UNESCO report written over four decades later:
"Even when he stands by himself, the truly indoctrinated communist must be part of the collective. He must be incapable of hearing opposing ideas and facts, no matter how convincing or how forcibly they bombard his senses. A trustworthy communist must reach in an automatic manner without any force being applied." 22
Yeah, that is the money. Being filtered in through the NGOs.
What about us?
And I'm sure the centralization of our medical records feeds this beast.......
Please see: http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=109_cong_bills&docid=f:h2234ih.txt.pdf
Ping to Badray. This is why they want to conduct mental health screenings in school. I'm too far gone for "help."
Oops, the text didn't post...
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1567623/posts
UN plans to release untapped wealth of $7 trillion (and solve the world's problems at a stroke)
The most potent threats to life on earth - global warming, health pandemics, poverty and armed conflict - could be ended by moves that would unlock $7 trillion - $7,000,000,000,000 (£3.9trn) - of previously untapped wealth, the United Nations claims today.
The price? An admission that the nation-state is an old-fashioned concept that has no role to play in a modern globalised world where financial markets have to be harnessed rather than simply condemned.
In a groundbreaking move, the UN Development Programme (UNDP) has drawn up a visionary proposal that has been endorsed by a range of figures including Gordon Brown, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and Joseph Stiglitz, the Nobel Laureate.
It says an unprecedented outbreak of co-operation between countries, applied through six specific financial tools, would slice through the Gordian knot of problems that have bedevilled the world for most of the last century.
If its recommendations are accepted - and the authors acknowledge this could take years or even decades - it could finally force countries to face up to the fact that their public finance and growth figures conceal the vast damage their economies do to the environment.
At the heart of the proposal, unveiled at a gathering of world business leaders at the Swiss ski resort of Davos, is a push to get countries to account for the cost of failed policies, and use the money saved "up front" to avert crises before they hit. Top of the list is a challenge to the United States to join an international pollution permit trading system which, the UN claims, could deliver $3.64trn of global wealth.
Inge Kaul, a special adviser at the UNDP, said: "The way we run our economies today is vastly expensive and inefficient because we don't manage risk well and we don't prevent crises." She downplayed concerns over up-front costs and interest payments for the new-fangled financial devices. "The gains in terms of development would outweigh those costs. Money is wasted because we dribble aid, and the costs of not solving the problems are much, much higher than what we would have to pay for getting the financial markets to lend the money."
The UNDP is determined to ensure globalisation, which has generated vast wealth for multinational companies, benefits the poorest in society.
It urges politicians to embrace some groundbreaking schemes put in place in the past 12 months to tackle global warning, poverty and disease, based on working with the global markets to share out the risk.
These include a pilot international finance facility (IFF) to "front load" $4bn of cash for vaccines by borrowing money against pledges of future government aid.
The scheme, which is backed by the UK, France, Italy, Spain, Sweden and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, was born out of a proposal by Gordon Brown for a larger scheme to double the total aid budget to $100bn a year.
In an endorsement of the report, Mr Brown said: "This shows how we can equip people and countries for a new global economy that combined greater prosperity and fairness both within and across nations."
The UNDP says rich countries should build on this and go further. It proposes six schemes to harness the power of the markets:
* Reducing greenhouse gas emissions through pollution permit trading; net gain $3.64trn.
* Cutting poor countries' borrowing costs by securing the debts against the income from stable parts of their economies; net gain $2.90trn.
* Reducing government debt costs by linking payments to the country's economic output; net gain $600bn.
* An enlarged version of the vaccine scheme; net gain (including benefits of lower mortality) $47bn.
* Using the vast flow of money from migrants back to their home country to guarantee; net gain $31bn.
* Aid agencies underwriting loans to market investors to lower interest rates; net gain $22bn.
Professor Stiglitz, the former chief economist of the World Bank and a staunch critic of the way globalisation harms the poor, said: "Globalisation has meant the closer integration of countries, and that in turn has meant a greater need for collective action.
"One of the most important areas of failure is the environment. Without government intervention, firms and households have no incentive to limit their pollution." He said a global public finance system would force countries to acknowledge the external damage their policies had, "the most important being global climate change".
Solving the environmental crisis tops the UN's $7trn wish-list. It calls for an international market to trade pollution permits that would encourage rich countries to cut pollution and hit their targets under the Kyoto protocol.
But - and the UN admits it is a big "but" - the US would have to sign up to Kyoto and carbon trading to achieve the $3.64trn that it believes the system would deliver over time.
"We are dealing with a global problem as pollution can only be dealt with internationally," Ms Kaul said. Richard Sandor, the head of the Chicago Climate Exchange, added: "Many encouraging signs are emerging. When the business case is clear, private entrepreneurs step forward."
But, the proposal is unlikely to get support from some green groups who believe that action to curb consumption, rather than market incentives, are the way to reduce carbon emissions.
Andrew Simms, director of the New Economics Foundation, said it left unanswered questions over how these markets would be managed and how the benefits and costs would be distributed. "We have nothing against markets so it would be missing the point to get into a pro- or anti-market stance. The point is how you distribute the benefits."
"I'm getting freep mail with people wondering if I'm a DU sleeper waking up. "
OMG!!!!!!!!
Calpernia, you're stating facts. UNESCO and it's DANGEROUS goals, bush wants to rejoin UNESCO. it speaks for itself....
don't let the association with "du sleeper" intimidate you from speaking the truth.
An amicus brief is filed not by one of the parties, but by a 'friend of the court.'
>>>>And I'm sure the centralization of our medical records feeds this beast.......
All the hospitals that signed onto the Healthy People 2010 program have their records copied to the same corporate digital library created by:
Monsanto Company
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1573646/posts ,
Monsanto is a Corporate Partner of World Business
Council
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1572207/posts
It gets masked as being Monsanto with the partnerships created through the NGO's and federal offices.
Vision of the Annointed is a great book. Must read for all.
Here's more UN infiltration into US sovereignty...
UN Threatens to Trump US Land Policy
The ITTA, a U.N. measure the United States signed July 1, 1999, and accepted Nov. 14, 1996, created an organization that controls the world’s production (and consumption) of timber. The agreement, overseen and administered by the U.N. Conference on Trade and Development, labels nations as either timber producers or consumers and allots voting quotas based on levels of production versus consumption – with more voting weight granted to the former. The United States, a consumer, therefore does not possess the same ability to control - via ballot - the application of this agreement, as many of the producing nations do (e.g. Indonesia or Malaysia).
http://www.abetterearth.org/article.php/796.html
That is why they are tagging trees.
http://www.cfr.washington.edu/research.pfc/presentations/rfid_seedlings/pages/slideA_gif.htm
More at link
Well SHAME ON THEM! And I mean it!!!!
I'm wondering if it is the same people that had thecabel's post 35 removed.
I didn't see it...
That anyone could accuse a well-known freeper such as you of being a DU plant is ridiculous.
It was about Michael New.
Sorry Cal, I have so much UN crap archived that I keep stumbling upon more, but it is completely relevant...
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1335656/posts?page=1,50
Big Media Won't Touch Agenda 21
I keep waiting, and waiting, and waiting for Bill O’Reilly or Shaun Hannity or Oprah Winfrey or somebody…..anybody, who has daily access to the multitudes, to say the words, “Agenda 21.” I’m still waiting, and for the life of me, I don’t understand the refusal to talk about the greatest threat to America that has ever existed. However, it dawns on me that wrapping a brain around Agenda 21 requires time, effort, interest, and a lot diligence. No one told me about Agenda 21. I found it by accident on the Internet. Then I went to the U.N.’s website and read Agenda 21. From there I went to Buenos Aires, The President’s Commission of Sustainable Development, my local sustainable development commissions and planners, to local visioning commissions, ecology conglomerates, and then back to the U.N.. After about six months of reading about a whole lot of global, national, and philanthropic organizations, I started documenting and keeping running lists because, I discovered, Agenda 21 was huge, highly developed, and a done deal. “How is it,” I asked myself, “that in 50 years, I never heard of any of this before? Where were my trusted newscasters? And why hasn’t my President, or the previous Presidents, ever talked about Agenda 21, the meetings in Buenos Aires, and Agenda 21’s connections to the World Trade Organization, World Bank, and a thousand other global organizations?”
So, I kept researching the Net. And lo and behold, I finally realized that Agenda 21 would never be publicized to Americans. It really can’t be.
As my running lists were now becoming encyclopedic, I also realized that there was no way to explain Agenda 21 easily. It’s too big, profoundly sophisticated, intentionally masked and hidden by corporate agendas and ecological ideologies that are, themselves, exploited by corporate agendas. But more than that, I realized that for Americans to understand Agenda 21, they would have to come to terms with a truth that, I fear, they won’t believe. What would that truth be? Let me try to say it in one sentence: Agenda 21 is the end of America.
As I read that sentence I think, “Well, Nancy, now everyone is going to think you are an extremist and no one will believe anything you say from now on. Everyone knows there can be no end to America….”
I'm not worried about it. I'm worried about this topic though. What the heck do we do???
>>>The World Conference on Global Governance....
World Business Council
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1572207/posts
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
