Jeffry John Aufderheide
vactruth.com
11/30/09

(Part I)

(vactruth.com) When President Barack H. Obama signed a national pandemic emergency on Friday, October 24th, 2009, the media barely mentioned that “a declaration of emergency for the H1N1” had been signed.  A huge red flag should have gone up: Why was there was no reference to specific act or document? Initially, not even the White House web page had information about the pronouncement. Did Obama’s emergency proclamation, under sections 201 and 301 of the National Emergencies Act, imply that martial law was imminent?[1]

To answer that question, we first must see how the World Health Organization put Obama in such a position. The answer may surprise you.

The Department of Homeland Security(DHS), Federal Emergency Management Agency(FEMA), the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), Center for Disease Control (CDC) and United States Northern Command (USNORTHCOM) will be the focus of a future release of this series called “Approved Chaos” that will answer questions about their status, readiness preparations and participation in the H1N1 emergency including:

• What happens when a national emergency is declared?

• Who is really in charge?, and most importantly,

• What does this H1N1 emergency mean for me?

Moreover, the media portrays the government as a passive participant in the swine flu pandemic. Digging deeper, it appears there is a much different story. The previous bird flu “pandemic” was, in fact, utilized to clear many legal obstacles in orchestrating the current, coordinated effort to establish global controls.

The WHO Sets Up for Control

Fowl! Bird Flu: It's Not What You Think - Book

In 2005, the threat of a killer avian flu pandemic shouted across the airwaves. The media whipped up a complete hysteria over the H5N1 virus. The Trust for America’s Health (TFAH), funded by the Rockefeller Family Fund was a big player in the frenzy.[2] Specifically, they predicted up to 1 million deaths could be caused by the H5N1 bird flu virus.[3]   Remarkably, official WHO reports document that between 2003 and 2009, only 262 people have died worldwide from H5N1 Avian Flu.

For a great review of the pandemic that never occurred, read Dr. Sherri Tenpenny’s book, FOWL: Bird Flu: It’s Not What You Think. Prophetically, it also explains 90 percent of what is happening today with the currently hyped H1N1 pandemic.
The 2005 H5N1 fear tactics worked well. Out of the panic created by TFAH and a long list of similar organizations, the WHO released a global “Pandemic Plan” that was obediently adopted by Americans and the rest of the world. In the United States, the Federal Pandemic Plan was incorporated into what is known as the the National Response Plan, under Homeland Security Presidential Directive 5.

The States Join In

In 2005, following the WHOs lead, the United States released a final draft of a multi-year pandemic planning project. States were required to prepare pandemic plans as a condition of their federal bioterrorism preparedness grants.

A group named Association of State and Territorial Health Officials (ASTHO) assisted in molding the state response plans. ASTHO’s exclusive list of “Corporate Alliance Partners” includes vaccine manufacturing giants such as GlaxoSmithKline, Merck & Co., Henry Schein, Pfizer, Roche, and Sanofi Pasteur.[5] Their participation in the pandemic planning efforts can be seen in a 2002 document entitled, “NATURE’S TERRORIST ATTACK: PANDEMIC INFLUENZA”. [6]

The State emergency response plans were heavily guided by officials at the CDC and HHS. A comprehensive checklist was spoon-fed to state health officials who were maneuvered into compliance by the Federal “mandate”. The DHS and HHS were instructed to withhold federal grants and monies for public health initiatives if states did not act in accordance with government plans. The word ‘ransom’ should come to mind.

Implications of International Health Regulations

We have now come full circle. All forms of government, federal, state and local, have adopted the World Health Organization ’s Pandemic Standard Operating Procedures. A pandemic plan in itself is not the problem. The issue is understanding the WHO’s incremental power grab via International Health Regulations.

Under the guise of preventing the international spread of disease, the Constitution of the WHO allows the World Health Assembly the authority to adopt regulations they see fit to accomplish the stated goal. By example, six diseases were originally identified by International Health Regulations for quarantine. However, in 1969 this number was reduced to three (yellow fever, plague and cholera). [7] With the current media hype surrounding the 1918 pandemic, it is especially surprising the World Health Organization to not include influenza on this list.

If we fast forward in time, major efforts can be seen to modify the scope of the Regulations from 1995 through May of 2005. On May 23rd the World Health Assembly struck gold. The language in the regulations were unified to include, “any specific disease or manner of transmission, but covering illness or medical condition, irrespective of origin or source, that presents or could present significant harm to humans”. [7] When the entire situation is put into context, the timing of a ‘killer’ bird flu pandemic was impeccable.

The International Health Regulations of 2005 were signed into force and effect in 2007. At that critical point, WHO was given authority to ‘direct’ and ‘govern’ activities “that protect the global community from public health risks and emergencies that cross international borders.” [8] The Director-General of the World Health Organization, Margaret Chan, declared a public health emergency of international concern for the first time under International Health Regulations in April, 2009. [9]

The implications of international health regulations and this emergency declaration are far reaching. International Health Regulations are legally binding agreements for all international members of the WHO. This is a major story ignored by the press and not understood by most citizens. The WHO international health regulations by-pass the checks and balances established by the U.S. Constitution and our Founders. George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and Benjamin Franklin are rolling in their graves.

We have a serious problem as a nation. This scheme was not implemented as the media portrays: benign and harmless. It was devised incrementally by very powerful people with no input from our elected representatives. Never before has there been such an orchestrated effort to give a world organization jurisdiction over our lives in America. The WHO has emerged as the global “H1N1 Mafia” and is accountable to no one.

Part II of this series covers Obama’s H1N1 emergency declaration. Was martial law declared? Stay tuned.

[1] Declaration of a National Emergency with Respect to the 2009 H1N1 Influenza Pandemic. October 24, 2009. URL: http://www2a.cdc.gov/phlp/docs/2009H1N1%20prc%20rel.pdf

[2] Trust For America’s Health. Year in Review, 2001; 33. URL:http://healthyamericans.org/about/review2001.pdf

[3] Trust For America’s Health. “A Killer Flu?”, June 2005; 19. URL: http://healthyamericans.org/reports/flu/Flu2005.pdf

[4] School of Public Health and Health Services and the Homeland Security Policy Institute. “The H1N1 Influenza A Virus: A Test Case for a Global Response”, May 2009. URL:http://www.gwumc.edu/sphhs/about/rapidresponse/download/Rapid_SwineFlu_Final.pdf

[5] The Association of State and Territorial Health Officials (ASTHO). “2009 ASTHO Annual Report”, 2009; 28. URL: http://www.astho.org/About/09-Annual-Report/

[6] Association of State and Territorial Health Officials (ASTHO). “Preparedness Planning for State Health Officials: Nature’s Terrorist Attack: Pandemic Influenza”, November 2002. URL: http://www.astho.org/Programs/Infectious-Disease/Emerging-Infectious-Diseases/Pan-ASTHO-Pandemic-Influenza-2002/

[7] World Health Organization. “International Health Regulations, 2nd ed.”, 2005; 8. URL: http://whqlibdoc.who.int/publications/2008/9789241580410_eng.pdf

[8] World Health Organization. “Ten things you need to do to implement the IHR”. Accessed November 29^th, 2009. URL: http://www.who.int/ihr/about/10things/en/

[9] School of Public Health and Health Services and the Homeland Security Policy Institute. “The H1N1 Influenza A Virus: A Test Case for a Global Response”, May 2009; 4. URL: http://www.gwumc.edu/sphhs/about/rapidresponse/download/Rapid_SwineFlu_Final.pdf

Jeffry John Aufderheide
VACTRUTH
October 30th, 2009

(vactruth.com) Many believe that forced vaccination for the H1N1 flu is a stones throw away. Evidence is beginning to support such a hypothesis as it came to my attention that contained within the current “heath-care” bill are plans to use elementary and secondary schools as likely venues to vaccinate children with the H1N1 vaccine. (Thank you CL!)

Additionally, it is hardly surprising that federal funds are being dangled as carrots to an already money-starved education system in exchange for participation. There should be much concern in America especially when the director of the CDC will be calling the ’shots’, or rather, who will be getting them and which ones.

It would be likely that your child would be forced to receive the H1N1 vaccine under this provision. It is a plausible story since many folks now are outright rejecting the unproven and quick-to-market H1N1 shot.

The link to the bill can be found here: http://docs.house.gov/rules/health/111_ahcaa.pdf (page 1391)

SEC. 2524. NO CHILD LEFT UNIMMUNIZED AGAINST INFLUENZA: DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM USING ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY SCHOOLS AS INFLUENZA VACCINATION CENTERS.

There’s also some language that sounds to me like the director of the CDC will decide which immunizations will be included under preventative care for CHIPS and Medicaid.

Subtitle B—Prevention

SEC. 1711. REQUIRED COVERAGE OF PREVENTIVE SERVICES. (Page 1043)

‘‘(B) vaccines recommended for use as appropriate by the Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; and
(1) in subsection (c)(2)(B)(i), by striking ‘‘the
advisory committee referred to in subsection (e)’’
and inserting ‘‘the Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’’;

Section 2524 is also eerily reminiscent of a recent white paper RAND Corporation published in which ‘barriers’ to mass vaccinating (low income) children were identified. One road block specifically named were parental consent laws on a state level.

A recommendation was made to Sanofi Pasteur, who coincidentally manufactures vaccines, to find a way around these state consent laws which could only be interpreted as leveraging the Federal Government to put into law such a mandate.

It would be curious to discover if there was influence on Capitol Hill to add this provision? I’m not a betting man, but I suspect there was.

(link) http://vactruth.com/2009/08/26/rand-advises-pharmaceutical-company-on-strategies-in-vaccinating-low-income-students/

2. Learn more about vaccines at http://www.vaccinationeducation.com

http://docs.house.gov/rules/health/111_ahcaa.pdf

(a) PURPOSE.—The Secretary of Health and Human
19 Services in consultation with the Secretary of Education,
20 shall award grants to eligible partnerships to carry out
21 demonstration programs designed to test the feasibility of
22 using the Nation’s elementary schools and secondary
23 schools as influenza vaccination centers.
24 (b) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall coordinate
25 with the Secretary of Labor, the Secretary of Education,

State Medicaid agencies, State insurance agencies, and
2 private insurers to carry out a program consisting of
3 awarding grants under subsection (c) to ensure that chil4
dren have coverage for all reasonable and customary ex5
penses related to influenza vaccinations, including the
6 costs of purchasing and administering the vaccine in7
curred when influenza vaccine is administered outside of
8 the physician’s office in a school or other related setting.

9 (c) PROGRAM DESCRIPTION.—
10 (1) GRANTS.—From amounts appropriated pur11
suant to subsection (l), the Secretary shall award
12 grants to eligible partnerships to be used to provide
13 influenza vaccinations to children in elementary and
14 secondary schools, in coordination with school
15 nurses, school health care programs, community
16 health care providers, State insurance agencies, or
17 private insurers.
18 (2) ACIP RECOMMENDATIONS.—The program
19 under this section shall be designed to administer
20 vaccines consistent with the recommendations of the
21 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Advi22
sory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP)
23 for the annual vaccination of all children 5 through
24 19 years of age.

1 (3) PARTICIPATION VOLUNTARY.—Participation
2 by a school or an individual shall be voluntary.
3 (d) USE OF FUNDS.—Eligible partnerships receiving
4 a grant under this section shall ensure the maximum num5
ber of children access influenza vaccinations as follows:
6 (1) COVERED CHILDREN.—To the extent to
7 which payment of the costs of purchasing or admin8
istering the influenza vaccine for children is not cov9
ered through other federally funded programs or
10 through private insurance, eligible partnerships re
11ceiving a grant shall use funds to purchase and ad
12minister influenza vaccinations.
13 (2) CHILDREN COVERED BY OTHER FEDERAL
14 PROGRAMS.—For children who are eligible under
15 other federally funded programs for payment of the
16 costs of purchasing or administering the influenza
17 vaccine, eligible partnerships receiving a grant shall
18 not use funds provided under this section for such
19 costs.
20 (3) CHILDREN COVERED BY PRIVATE HEALTH
21 INSURANCE.—For children who have private insur22
ance, eligible partnerships receiving a grant shall
23 offer assistance in accessing coverage for vaccina24
tions administered through the program under this
25 section.

1 (e) PRIVACY.—The Secretary shall ensure that the
2 program under this section adheres to confidentiality and
3 privacy requirements of section 264 of the Health Insur4
ance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (42
5 U.S.C. 1320d–2 note) and section 444 of the General
6 Education Provisions Act (20 U.S.C. 1232g; commonly re7
ferred to as the ‘‘Family Educational Rights and Privacy
8 Act of 1974’’).
9 (f) APPLICATION.—An eligible partnership desiring a
10 grant under this section shall submit an application to the
11 Secretary at such time, in such manner, and containing
12 such information as the Secretary may require.
13 (g) DURATION.—Eligible partnerships receiving a
14 grant shall administer a demonstration program funded
15 through this section over a period of 2 consecutive school
16 years.
17 (h) CHOICE OF VACCINE.—The program under this
18 section shall not restrict the discretion of a health care
19 provider to administer any influenza vaccine approved by
20 the Food and Drug Administration for use in pediatric
21 populations.
22 (i) AWARDS.—The Secretary shall award—
23 (1) a minimum of 10 grants in 10 different
24 States to eligible partnerships that each include one

1 or more public schools serving primarily low-income
2 students; and
3 (2) a minimum of 5 grants in 5 different States
4 to eligible partnerships that each include one or
5 more public schools located in a rural local edu6
cational agency.
7 (j) REPORT.—Not later than 90 days following the
8 completion of the program under this section, the Sec9
retary shall submit to the Committees on Education and
10 Labor, Energy and Commerce, and Appropriations of the
11 House of Representatives and to the Committees on
12 Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions and Appropria13
tions of the Senate a report on the results of the program.
14 The report shall include—
15 (1) an assessment of the influenza vaccination
16 rates of school-age children in localities where the
17 program is implemented, compared to the national
18 average influenza vaccination rates for school-aged
19 children, including whether school-based vaccination
20 assists in achieving the recommendations of the Ad21
visory Committee on Immunization Practices;
22 (2) an assessment of the utility of employing el23
ementary schools and secondary schools as a part of
24 a multistate, community-based pandemic response

1 program that is consistent with existing Federal and
2 State pandemic response plans;
3 (3) an assessment of the feasibility of using ex4
isting Federal and private insurance funding in es5
tablishing a multistate, school-based vaccination pro6
gram for seasonal influenza vaccination;
7 (4) an assessment of the number of education
8 days gained by students as a result of seasonal vac9
cinations based on absenteeism rates;
10 (5) a determination of whether the program
11 under this section—
12 (A) increased vaccination rates in the par13
ticipating localities; and
14 (B) was implemented for sufficient time
15 for gathering enough valid data; and
16 (6) a recommendation on whether the program
17 should be continued, expanded, or terminated.
18 (k) DEFINITIONS.—In this section:
19 (1) ELIGIBLE PARTNERSHIP.—The term ‘‘eligi20
ble partnership’’ means a local public health depart21
ment, or another health organization defined by the
22 Secretary as eligible to submit an application, and
23 one or more elementary and secondary schools.
24 (2) ELEMENTARY SCHOOL.—The terms ‘‘ele25
mentary school’’ and ‘‘secondary school’’ have the

1 meanings given such terms in section 9101 of the
2 Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965
3 (20 U.S.C. 7801).
4 (3) LOW-INCOME.—The term ‘‘low-income’’
5 means a student, age 5 through 19, eligible for free
6 or reduced-price lunch under the National School
7 Lunch Act (42 U.S.C. 1751 et seq.).
8 (4) RURAL LOCAL EDUCATIONAL AGENCY.—
9 The term ‘‘rural local educational agency’’ means an
10 eligible local educational agency described in section
11 6211(b)(1) of the Elementary and Secondary Edu12
cation Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 7345(b)(1)).
13 (5) SECRETARY.—Except as otherwise speci14
fied, the term ‘‘Secretary’’ means the Secretary of
15 Health and Human Services.
16 (l) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—To carry
17 out this section, there are authorized to be appropriated
18 such sums as may be necessary for each of fiscal years
19 2011 through 2015.

Jeffry John Aufderheide
VACTRUTH
10/08/2009

(vactruth.com) A newly launched video by Dr. Andrew Moulden is available on his Brainguardmd.com website. The movie is self explanatory. If you are truly interested in understanding how every single vaccine is affecting you and your loved ones, watch and learn with your very own eyes what is happening to our children.

Moreover, Dr. Andrew Moulden provides a ’see for yourself’ format in which parents can see the damage with their very own eyes.

Be patient as the video takes time to load.
Dr. Moulden’s website is http://brainguardmd.com.