Why Hasn't Anyone Talked About-A Possible Cancellation?

Oh no don’t mention Bill Gates, that name brings out the wackos in droves


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Oh no don’t mention Bill Gates, that name brings out the wackos in droves

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

All Hail Bill Gates!! One of us one of us.

Is there a particular reason why you don't trust WHO?

Basically echoing Pervis' comments.

For me it's the massive funding they get from China, and how that seemed to influence what they said about China at the outset of this pandemic. Clearly, they were carrying the water for the Communist Chinese government.

Basically echoing Pervis' comments.

Where did you guys get that information from? I did some research and my findings shows that China isn't even #1 contributor to the WHO's funding.

Edit: in case you want to see where I got the info from:

https://www.statista.com/statistics/1103789/top-government-global-coronavirus-response-funders/

https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019/donors-and-partners/funding

Don't start relaxing just yet!

I dont see any way there's gonna be a season,I think it's a goner

Where did you guys get that information from? I did some research and my findings shows that China isn't even #1 contributor to the WHO's funding.

Edit: in case you want to see where I got the info from:

https://www.statista.com/statistics/1103789/top-government-global-coronavirus-response-funders/

https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019/donors-and-partners/funding



My biggest issue with WHO is who leads the organization, and how he got there. Enter China. Here are some facts about the Director General of the World Health Organization:

1. Dr. Tedros is the first African Director-General to be appointed to the WHO, and the first in its 72-year history to not be a medical doctor. He has never practiced as a medical doctor. His doctorate degree is in philosophy in community health and he holds a master of science in the immunology of infectious diseases.


2. As foreign minister from 2012 and 2016, Tedros became the face of a government that human rights groups accused of systematic torture, disappearances and repression of the media and civil society. In Ethiopia’s controversial 2015 general elections, Tedros’ ruling EPRDF declared that it won all 547 seats of legislature amid reports of continued repression.

Source: Quartz Africa

3. At the time of Dr. Tedros’s appointment to the WHO, Frida Ghitis of the Washington Post noted that China “worked tirelessly behind the scenes to help Tedros defeat the United Kingdom candidate for the WHO job, David Nabarro. Tedros’s victory was also a victory for Beijing, whose leader Xi Jinping has made public his goal of flexing China’s muscle in the world.”

4. He was also accused of covering up cholera outbreaks in Ethiopia when he served as health minister. Whether it's true or not, I'm not totally sure, but not something that should even be in question ... and to have it happen in three separate years is pretty damning.

"During the 2017 election itself, several groups within Ethiopia opposed Dr Tedros’s appointment due to his links with the TPLF and allegations that they stifled journalists and repressed minorities.

Dr Tedros was also accused of covering up three separate cholera outbreaks in 2006, 2008 and 2011 by mis-reporting it as ‘watery diarrhea’, allegations he dismissed as a ‘smear campaign’ by his British rival.

Source: Daily Mail"


Here's one article on the relationship with China and WHO ...


https://www.dw.com/en/what-influence-does-china-have-over-the-who/a-53161220

At the start of this century, the agency received almost half of its money as dues from member states, but that has now dropped to around 20% of its funds. This meant that the WHO has become more reliant on voluntary contributions to carry out its mandate.

Experts say this dependence leaves the WHO — which is lauded for its role in the elimination of smallpox, the near-eradication of polio and the fight against diseases like HIV, malaria and tuberculosis — highly susceptible to the influence of individual countries or organizations.

____

Despite its low share in the WHO's overall funding, experts say China's rising financial contributions increase its heft, particularly at a time when the US is seen to be giving up on international organizations and threatening to cut global health funding.

"China's potential of becoming a major WHO contributor must necessarily be an alluring prospect for the UN agency," said MERICS expert des Garets Geddes.

Observers also point out that cooperation between the WHO and China has been on the rise, be it along China's "Health Silk Road" initiative or in support of the WHO's goal of universal health coverage by 2030.

"These are projects that matter to Tedros and the WHO," said des Garets Geddes. He also stressed that China's growing economic and diplomatic clout allows Beijing to influence political decisions and build coalitions across the world. "This is especially true in the 'Global South' — an important region for the WHO. The World Health Organization needs to have China on its side."

A highly sensitive issue

Critics also point to Taiwan's continued exclusion from the WHO as evidence of Beijing's influence. Since China acceded to the UN in 1971, it has periodically blocked Taiwan from membership in international organizations like the WHO on the grounds that the democratically governed island is part of China.


Other than all this, I'm cool with WHO.

Just a minor point, I wouldn't put your trust in the Daily Mail. IN fact I can't name a British newspaper I would put my trust in.

My biggest issue with WHO is who leads the organization, and how he got there. Enter China. Here are some facts about the Director General of the World Health Organization.

Sorry for taking a little while to get back to you on this, I wanted to find one specific article I read a while ago regarding Tedros but I cannot find it. The concerns you have about Tedros are legit and I can understand why you feel that way. The issues with human rights and accident cover ups are definitely significant concerns. I'm big on human rights so it's a little tough for me to not consider it but I have to acknowledge the fact that the world accepted Tedros as the WHO director and this is the wrong time to be critical of Tedros's past so I'm going to shelf this until after we have a better control of the virus. The relationship between Tedros and Xi is something we should keep an eye on but as we have seen here in USA in the last few years, it is easy for media to manipulate perspectives to show what they want the audience to see so I'm reserving my judgment on this part. At last, I'm not too concerned about Tedros' credentials, while it would have been great if Tedros is expert in medical field, it is not deal breaker. There are plenty of jobs that have been taken over by people that do not necessarily have a degree designed exactly for the jobs they took on and yet they do well in their positions. Even USA accepted Trump as a president despite the fact he had no politician experiences. If you want to be critical of Tedros as the WHO director simply because of his credentials, then I should expect you to be critical of Trump because of his lack of politican credentials. Isn't that fair assessment?

The article that I have been trying to find for you, it helped me to understand Tedros a little bit more and it puts me in a neutral perspective, I guess - the article explained how Tedros likes to please people. Tedros doesn't like to get on anyone's bad side so he would try to not step over anybody's toes. With that on mind, WHO is in a delicate position at this time as it does not have the power to control what countries can and can't do. If the president of a country didn't like what Tedros said, did or whatever and then refuse to work with WHO, there isn't much Tedros can do about it. USA is a perfect example. The virus originates from China, which means it is critical for WHO and world scientists to have access to China to find the original virus, in order to develop an effective cure. If Tedros decides to condemn China for not being transparent with the world, do you think China would continue to be willing to work with Tedros? Will China continue to allow WHO to have access to China? This article (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-who-tedros-special/special-report-caught-in-trump-china-feud-who-leader-under-siege-idUSKBN22R1IL) might give you a different perspective of how difficult the position Tedros is in. To me, it seems like it doesn't matter what Tedros do, there always will be a group of people/countries who would be upset with Tedros. At this point, Tedros's primary goal should be to dissolve COVID permanently, not to appease people. Tedros can worry about pleasing people and countries after the pandemic.

To show you a different perspective - we all know USA did a bad job of handling the virus as we were very slow to respond to the pandemic, and yet Tedros praised (https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/25/who-officials-praise-us-leaders-on-pandemic-response-trump-is-doing-all-he-can.html) USA for how we handled the pandemic. Tedros was smart to focus on how people and businesses in USA came together to work together because it was the only good thing that happened during that time. As an American myself, I'm not proud of how USA handled this pandemic in the beginning - we could have done so much better and prevent it from getting worse. I wondered why Tedros praised USA, but after reading about Tedros and understanding where WHO stands, I realized WHO have a little power and is dependent on the world to work together to help WHO beat the pandemic. There's a saying, "don't bite the hand that feeds you" - I think this rings true for WHO. Unfortunately, the world have put Tedros in a position where he needs to do everything to not bite all hands and yet there still will be someone who claims that his hand have been bit by Tedros.

At last, the issue regarding with WHO funds. Can you enlighten me exactly what WHO should have done instead of accepting China's extra funds? If WHO is running out of money for their work, what can they do to resolve the funding issues? I can see how the fact that China is providing extra fund is a concern, but at the same time, I don't see any other choices WHO could have choose. Should WHO simply downsize or close down instead of accepting China's money?

And / Or, the people do go back home, but don't infect anyone and there is no dramatic rise in new cases. People may be getting to the point that they don't care anymore. The media is hardly covering coronavirus now anymore. I saw it mentioned over the weekend that at one point, the media went 30 hours without reporting anything about coronavirus.

And just FWIW, i don't know what in the world is up with our own UVA models. They have one now that says by August, Virginia gets over 10,000 new cases a day and 1K deaths a day, Just in VA. Like WTF?

Also, did anybody forget when the news said that there was official top secret, highly classified documents that they just conveniently were able to get a copy of, that said by the last week of May the USA would see 300K new cases daily and between 5 and 6K deaths daily?

I turned on CNN last night and it's all they were talking about. Needless to say I turned it off within 5 minutes.