WHO Excuses for the Ebola Failure

KinFree made a comment on yesterday’s post:

“a damning independent report, commissioned by the WHO itself.”

but it doesn’t suggest sacking those responsible, or suggesting a re-assessment of operational or organizational efficiency / effectiveness etc. Surprise surprise – instead it suggests they should be given more money.

“The report suggests an immediate contribution from all member countries towards a $100 million special outbreak response fund”

it stinks!”

Clearly, the WHO and similar organisations regard themselves as ‘entitled’. I mean that not only in the sense of ‘worthy of support’ but also in the sense of ‘titled’:  IE, Aristocratic. If the WHO was a person, it would be ‘Baron’ WHO, or ‘Lord’ WHO. It would be ‘titled’ and ‘entitled’. That is how it sees itself.

I was vaguely wondering how much Greece could save if it stopped its contributions to the WHO. The answer is very little. According to the WHO list, Greece’s contribution in 2012 was US$660,000. That sounds a lot, but is little as compared with, say, the UK – US$116,000,000. Even so, if Greece stop those payments, and payments to the UN and all the other leaches, it could perhaps remove not only the direct costs but also the indirect costs, such as maintaining a useless ambassador to the UN.

You see, I firmly believe that government cutting its costs does not depend upon sweeping general cuts in budgets. It requires thousands and thousands of directed cuts. Generalised cuts are just as likely to hit the wrong target as to miss the right target. In that case, the attempt to cut costs is as likely to make things worse as to better them.

But surely Cameron and co can see that the WHO has lost its way? How can the Sec Gen attend a meeting in Moscow about prohibition and persecution of smokers to attain a benefit in 30 years time when thousands of people are dying here and now from Ebola? Why has she allowed her priorities to be skewed so much that the original objective of the WHO, being the alleviation of contagious disease in the 3rd world and elsewhere, no longer matters as compared with unproven non-contagious ‘harms’ from the enjoyment of tobacco?

As KinFree says, “It stinks”.


But I would go further. I would say that the UK’s contributions to the WHO are illegal. Why? Because it is a matter of fact that the UK Government is required to know and reveal what taxpayers’ funds are being used for.

The UK Government has got itself into a Catch 22 situation – a paradox, if you like. It is giving away billions of pounds to the EU Aristocrats without having any control over the use of those taxpayer funds. The EU set-up requires that uncertainty because of the number of member states. And yet, the whole idea of treaties is that the ‘quid pro quo’ should be as clear as possible.

Is it any wonder that the EU is supported by pillars made of mud? What would you expect from idealists who are wide open to take-over by thugs and robber barons?

But there are plenty signs of weakness on the horizon. PP, for example, is a weakness. Emphasising huge pics of diseased gums and claiming that those diseased gums are the result of smoking flies in the face of FACTS as revealed in the NHS pamphlet which I was given by the dentist. In that pamphlet, no claim was made that smoking causes any cancer in any place in the mouth – it merely claimed that smoking exacerbates conditions. So what caused the conditions? That question is ignored.


‘Erosion’ is what we smoking bloggers are looking to achieve. As we have described before, the citadel of TC has weak foundations, and we scratch away at them. I shall not respond to the consultation on the implementation of the Tobacco Directive. There is no point. It is an imposition intended to harass and persecute smokers. The sooner that we all go underground, the better.

But ‘going underground’ does not mean the same as it used to. We do not need to be secretive because we have the world-wide internet. We can hide in full view. We can hide in the swarm. Each of us, as an individual, is not worth demonising. What ‘going underground’ means is not bothering with ‘public consultations’ and such. It means not bothering with YouGov surveys. It means exaggerating your smoking when you fill in a ‘survey questionnaire’ at the dentists. It means buying your tobacco from the cheapest possible source. When laws and regulations become unjust, in your own mind, you have the right to oppose them physically. Not a lot of people know that. Laws about ‘tobacco product duties’ are not laws which concern private individuals going about their legitimate business of being as self-sufficient as they can be. Being self-sufficient is a human right ‘par excellencé’ (forgive misspelling). Laws could be passed to outlaw self-sufficiency, but they would be inhuman and fascist/totalitarian in character. “You are not permitted to grow tomatoes because they contain nicotine, but you can grow potatoes even though they contain nicotine. We Aristocrats have decreed. So be it”. But modern day Aristocrats depend entirely upon Fanatics in governments. The Aristos encourage and fund the Fanatics using either Big Pharma funds or Charity funds.

Frankly, the whole scenario is comical. The universally discredited and considered ‘unfit for purpose’ WHO continues to be funded massively by governments throughout the world which DO NOT need a drag and waste of resources, such as the WHO, to waste their money and drag their economies down. How stupid can nations get?


What must happen, with the WHO, is thorough cleansing. But what nation actually gives a shit? The most important nation is the USA. Judging from its current centenary, give or take a bit, of PROHIBITION, and its renewal of that eugenicist ideal, it is hardly likely to clamp down on WHO corruption.


Stick with the basics. We smokers do no harm to others. SHS danger is is fraud and always has been. Ecigs are irrelevant to the question of the enjoyment of tobacco itself since they do not contain or burn tobacco. Good luck to vapers. I’m glad that you are happy to believe that you have escaped the laws of physics in that you believe that the accumulated damage of smoking over decades can be instantly reversed by a single puff of an ecig. That is magic.

But I support vapers. A line must be drawn somewhere. Vaping must be the line. The idea that vaping should be banned by law, either directly or indirectly, ignores the great difference between inhaling tobacco smoke and inhaling harmless vapour. It is like equating the quaffing of alcohol with orange juice.


There are lots of ‘ebolas’ in Africa. On my own tiny blog, I have noticed that I get hits from all over the world. But the vast continent of Africa is black. Not a single hit from anywhere other than, very occasionally, South Africa. ‘The Dark Continent’ is appropriate.

It is all very sad.



2 Responses to “WHO Excuses for the Ebola Failure”

  1. beobrigitte Says:

    But surely Cameron and co can see that the WHO has lost its way?
    I thought he&co would. Errare humanum est.

    I do remember the WHO declaring that financial donors can and do specify the area their money is to be used.
    Naturally, I do have a question regarding:
    but is little as compared with, say, the UK – US$116,000,000.
    Did the UK specify it’s contribution to the WHO only to be used for tobacco control’s interests? If not, WHY did the WHO point it’s finger to about every country, lamenting their lack of financial support when being criticized for their non-existent reaction to the Ebola Epidemic?
    The death toll of this (still ongoing) epidemic has been stated to have reached 11 000. Considering the first case was to have occurred in December 2013 this is alarming.

    That does remind me; how much are we being informed about the current MERS outbreak in Asia?

    THAT is really not much.

    But then, just mentioning a virus that is still found in the FIRST WORLD: Rabies.

    There are a lot of myths about rabies. I should know, after all, I grew up with the yearly warning sign “Rabies affected area” going up next to my parents’ house.
    No, the animals (and people) affected by this disease ARE NOT aggressive, they are disoriented and in a lot of pain. If you do not approach rabies affected e.g. foxes and quietly retreat, nothing is going to happen.
    It also makes sense to leave bats where they are.

    To state that the virus is always deadly is not quite correct. In my mother’s generation there was one survivor. In my youth I do remember one case of rabies, but as I was very young, I can’t remember whether there was a funeral or a survivor in the village.

    The WHO on rabies:

    Key facts

    – Rabies is a vaccine-preventable viral disease which occurs in more than 150 countries and territories.
    – Infection causes tens of thousands of deaths every year, mostly in Asia and Africa.
    – 40% of people who are bitten by suspect rabid animals are children under 15 years of age.
    – Dogs are the source of the vast majority of human rabies deaths.
    – Immediate wound cleansing and immunization within a few hours after contact with a suspect rabid animal can prevent the onset of rabies and death.
    – Every year, more than 15 million people worldwide receive a post-exposure vaccination to prevent the disease – this is estimated to prevent hundreds of thousands of rabies deaths annually.

    The key words are in the last sentence: POST EXPOSURE!

    There is no rabies vaccination programme for people, only for pets.

    Needless to say, there are many, many more micro-organisms which can decimate the human race considerably – and they sure will be just doing this.

    And what does the WHO do? Attends a lavish 5 day secret conference in Moscow in order to ostracise smokers and vapers further from society. And Bill Gates specifies that his donation was only to be used for this? He can’t be serious when he expects a pad on the back for donating $450 000 for hamster ovary cell research in order to produce an Ebola vaccine that is much quicker and much, much cheaper produced in a simple tobacco plant?

    Perhaps it is more than high time to dissolve this ineffective WHO club.

    • junican Says:

      Good points, Beo. As I understand it, States contribute a specific amount of money to keep the WHO going. In addition, States (and others) may contribute funds for specifics.

      Had the WHO stuck to its ‘area of competence’, being contagious diseases, rather than involving itself in bribery and corruption via ‘stakeholders’ like Big Pharma and Bates, etc, it might have done some real good. It has now collapsed into a lobby group.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: