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
It is signed on. Go look at my post one. That Healthy People act. They merged with the CDC and share a database.
So, if President Bush was filing an opinion, it wasn't necessarily to eminent domain our property?
Hold my hand. Where was my answer?
"So, if President Bush was filing an opinion, it wasn't necessarily to eminent domain our property?"
i already explained it (i thought).
the administration CONSIDERED filing a petition on behalf of eminent domain (this means they WANTED the gov't to be able to take your property to sell to other developers in order to increase tax revenues)
Here's the one I was thinking of: The New Freedom in Mental Health Commission
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/1209754/posts
It looks like Healthy People 2010 predated Bush. The "New Freedom in Mental Health Commission" is more recent.
This is part of the Healthy people 2010 program
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/1561077/posts
Animal Tagging and SCHOOL LUNCHES???
(snip)
One of the Amendments Codey signed into law is the Model School Nutrition Program.
http://www.state.nj.us/agriculture/PolicyQA.pdf
I became curious because it seems to be an initiative of the USDA. I always thought it was the FDA that dealt with foods and labeling.
Anyway, the School Nutrition Policy is an effort of another initiative called Healthy People 2010. The Model School Nutrition Program is the first implementations of the Healthy People 2010 Project.
The USDA, State and Local levels are presenting this as a FEDERAL program.
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/about/otheract/hpdata2010/abouthp.htm
The CDC says it is a Non Governmental Organization.
http://www.healthypeople.gov
The Goal of the Healthy People 2010 Project is to have all our health and food safety needs tracked in a National Database by 2010. The school children's lunches are the first steps.
(snip)
I've since learned it is NOT a 'national' database.
It is an corporate digital library built 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
They were dicussing on the radio here in Northern Colorado the other day. Of course it was one of those crazy, conspiracy theory, patriot radio stations (WHNC). The MSM never does any reporting on this type of thing. Most people wouldn't believe it anyway.
ping
>>>the administration CONSIDERED filing a petition on behalf of eminent domain (this means they WANTED the gov't to be able to take your property to sell to other developers in order to increase tax revenues)
I'm just making clear I understood.
But, why would the administration need to do that if the SOCUS already ruled eminent domain as constitutional?
Yes it did predate President Bush. It was started in Clinton's administration. See my post 1.
"I am scared. Why are these programs in our governmental departments???"
This is something that spans both of our political parties. They couldn't do it without help from our own government. They also want to control the water out here in the west.
No, they don't believe it. Trust me, I have tried to explain the school lunch part to the other mom's in school. A UN agent will be coming into our schools come September to audit our files and ensure there is no sugars. Zero tolerance for all.
Yeah...this thread needs the *PING!* Posse of Americans!
Gang, get a load of the meat on this article...let it sink in REAL good and deep!
Then clean your guns to calm down...(well, it works for me, anyway...)
Remember this each time an OBL-er, or one of the annoying 'Bots appears on the threads...remember my pic of the Cattle Car...
Then remember...it's us or them that will be riding in it...I know where I want to be!
Not just the water. They are microchipping trees.
Now try to explain that too someone!
RFID tagging our plants and trees.
http://www.cfr.washington.edu/research.pfc/presentations/rfid_seedlings/pages/slideA_gif.htm
Ron Paul lets you know how they are going to enforce NAIS+all the other "social services"
http://www.house.gov/paul/tst/tst2005/tst100305.htm
October 2005
Last month at its “World Summit” in New York, the United Nations took another big step toward destroying national sovereignty - a step that could threaten the United States in the future. The UN passed a resolution at this summit that, among other things, establishes a “Peacebuilding Commission,” creates a worldwide UN “democracy fund,” and most troublingly codifies the dangerous “Responsibility to Protect” report as part of UN policy. The three are certainly interrelated.
I have been concerned for some time about the establishment of a UN Peacebuilding Commission, an idea I first found so troubling when the International Relations Committee marked-up the UN Reform Act containing this provision earlier this year.
According to the UN, this commission will bring together the UN Security Council members, major donor states, major troop contributing countries, United Nations organizations, the World Bank, and the International Monetary Fund to develop and integrate conflict prevention, post-conflict reconstruction, and long-term development policies and strategies. The commission will serve as the key coordinating body for the design and implementation of military, humanitarian, and civil administration aspects of complex missions. Think of this as the core of a future UN army that will claim the right to intervene in any conflict anywhere.
The misnamed “Democracy Fund” created at the World Forum may well provide the funding for this UN army. We must ask ourselves whether this “global democracy fund” will be used to undermine or overthrow elected governments that do not meet some UN-created democratic criteria. Will it be used to further the kinds of color-coded revolutions we have seen from East Europe to the Middle East, which far from being genuine expressions of popular will are in fact fomented with outside money and influence? Could it eventually be used against the United States? What if the US is determined lacking when it comes to UN-defined democratic responsibilities such as providing free public housing or universal healthcare?
Most disturbing, however, is the UN adoption of the “Responsibility to Protect,” a report of the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty (www.iciss.ca/report-en). Whenever the UN names a commission to study intervention and state sovereignty you can bet that it is to promote the former and undermine the latter. This “Responsibility to Protect” report adopted by the UN commits member states to intervene in the internal affairs of other sovereign states if the state in question does not protect its population from “genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing, and crimes against humanity,” or does not protect its population from the “incitement” to such crimes. Who determines the criteria for this policy of global pre-emption? The UN, of course.
While it may be true that the United States exerts considerable control over the United Nations at present, this may not always be the case. It is certainly conceivable that at some future date a weakened US may face a financially and militarily stronger China, for example, that demands UN action within US borders after determining that the US has not lived up to its “responsibility to protect.” This is the lesson for conservatives who are cheering on a “reform” process that is actually strengthening the United Nations. What will happen when the sovereignty we undermine through measures like this turns out to be our own?
Is Donna Shalala really Jimmy Hoffa in a dress? In any case, the US does not need the UN's Babelism..
"Alcohol's for drinkin' and water's for fightin' over"
Cowboy Proverb
One World Ping
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.