Immunization Agenda 2030 from the WHO.

This post would be 3 pages long if I explained what are Agenda 21 and Agenda 2030, so I won't. But if you don't know what they are or think they are wacky conspiracy theories, they are not and this is easily verifiable on the UN website. What this post is about is IA2030, which is the "Immunization Agenda 2030" from the WHO and differs from the Agenda 2030 that the UN is pushing. The WHO IA2030 is exactly what it says it is, an agenda to increase vaccination worldwide.

www.who.int...

Implementation of IA2030 will initially focus on a comprehensive response to the COVID-19 pandemic. An urgent priority is the rapid and equitable scale-up of COVID-19 vaccines in all countries as well as collective action to catch up on missed vaccinations and rebuild essential services. Rebuilding of immunization programmes will make a major contribution to the strengthening of primary health care systems. Effective childhood and adult immunization programmes, including COVID-19, will lie at the heart of resilient and sustainable primary health care systems that will be central to future global health security.

Here is a quote from the PDF produced by the WHO, entitled "Implementing the Immunization Agenda 2030: A Framework for Action through Coordinated Planning, Monitoring & Evaluation, Ownership & Accountability, and Communications & Advocacy"...

Member States will prioritize elements of IA2030 according to their national and regional contexts. For example, many are likely to prioritize concrete, national plans focused on COVID-19 vaccine implementation and recovery of essential health services initially. Some countries with high coverage and well-resourced programmes may focus primarily on rebutting efforts to undermine confidence in vaccines on social media platforms. Other countries may also prioritize access to affordable, quality-assured vaccine supplies or strategies to target children being missed by integrated health services. Introductions of recommended vaccines not yet included in immunization programmes may be a primary priority for other countries. Each country working to address its respective priorities within IA2030 will contribute to achieving shared global impact

This is funded partially by GAVI and GEPI...

Domestic financing will remain the most important contribution overall in immunization. Development partners and CSOs will specify their intended commitments and additional contributions, aligned to their technical roles and the IA2030 strategic priorities. This will ensure greater transparency and facilitate monitoring of their contributions, and promote accountability for the achievement of IA2030 goals. This process is currently being developed, and is intended to complement and align with existing pledging mechanisms such as Gavi, GPEI and others

This agenda does not just apply to coronavirus vaccines but all vaccines. And really I am not implying that it is a bad thing. On it's face, this is a positive because it supposedly will help countries access vaccines for actual deadly diseases. I am just putting some information out because usually when I wonder why something is happening in society, I can look to Agenda 21 or Agenda 2030 and see that they are the reason for certain policies being implemented so I figure that if this information is more widespread more people can watch as things develop and see if there are correlations between events happening surrounding vaccines and this IA2030.

a reply to: Chalcedony

Well they all seem like highly trustworthy folks, don't they though ?

Perhaps we should let them inject our precious fragile newborns, to get stabbed with about 20 jabs of toxic poison, in their first few months of life ?

Doesn't that just sound marvelous ?

No child left behind !!!

a reply to: Nothin

Ha. They basically already do that. I find the funding source of GAVI to be interesting. I know, where else would they get funding from than GAVI since GAVI was started for this exact purpose, but I do not buy the Gateses claims that if we increase vaccination we will solve the overpopulation problem. They claim that if less children die from vaccine preventable diseases, women will feel less compelled to have multiple children. But how does that make sense when if I was a woman in a 3rd world country who had a child die from a disease and then had another child to "replace" them, it has no effect on population whatsoever. What is the real reason for the fixation on vaccination when there are many more cheaper, easier to solve issues like clean water or crops that can grow in hostile climates?

a reply to: Chalcedony

I think they were a bit to early to talk about 2030. We shall see what happens a year from now i think this winter will be a dark winter.

a reply to: Chalcedony

What is the real reason for the fixation on vaccination when there are many more cheaper, easier to solve issues like clean water or crops that can grow in hostile climates?

Good question. Something seems odd with the fixation on vaccination...

originally posted by: Nothin
a reply to: Chalcedony

Well they all seem like highly trustworthy folks, don't they though ?

Perhaps we should let them inject our precious fragile newborns, to get stabbed with about 20 jabs of toxic poison, in their first few months of life ?

Doesn't that just sound marvelous ?

No child left behind !!!

Well lets put it this way:

In the year 1800 in the UK, this is an age before vaccines. The mortality rate in children under 5 years old was 1 in 3.

Today it's 1 in 250.

Do the math.

a reply to: Chalcedony

About the amount of kids being born in hardship ridden regions. There are several different reasons. Two of the main reasons are missing birth control measures like condoms, kids are also seen as providers for the future when the parents are old and can't work anymore.

Deceases, like jamespond explained, have higher chances to rise, medical help is far away. A lot of these children do not make it to adult age. It's very sad. But it's important to know that not only two hundred years ago, in Europe and America, it was almost the same situation. My Great-Grandmother had twelve siblings and of course the children worked on the farm too, as soon as they could. Many did not make it to adult age, but some died during WW1 and WW2 though.

Even today, now and then, I still see old women that can't walk upright because their back is deformed from field work. Kids are not grown up and if they have to do repetitive work like pick stones out of a field for hours and days, but seldom straighten up this happens. There was always work to do.

Hard times back then.

a reply to: jamespond

I think you don't know that we are talking about a completely different kind of injections here.
I am not an anti vaxxer, I believe that some of the old school vaccines have helped childhood survival a lot.

However. I believe also that some vaccines are absolutely unnecessary. We don't need to inject teenage girls to maybe prevent possible ovarian cancers.
That said, I am absolutely and 100% against the novel mRNA injections for a variety of reasons, but it is these that they have announced to be using in the future for many diseases.

I am also against the distruction of our excellent immune system, which these novel injections do by swamping the body for an as of now not clear timeframe, causing auto immune disease. Especially with multiple injections.

Also these injections are not actual vaccines. They are treatments at best as they do not give immunity but only help minimise symptoms. Hence diseases will not be eradicated but human kind will lose it's ability to conquer new viruses via natural immunity.

In the long run this will cause more deaths than save lives.
If there isn't a nefarious reason behind this it would be a case of the road to hell being paved with good intentions.

But I don't believe it's benign at all. Not if you understand the micro biology and functions of diseases, actual vaccines, the immune system and most importantly mRNA injections.

So, WHO are acting directly and deliberately to prevent people dying - ensuring populations continue to increase - whilst "They" (according to numerous threads on ATS and elsewhere) want a massive cull of human population.

So whose side are WHO on?

a reply to: jamespond

I know right! Antibiotics really were a game changer.

a reply to: [post=26095342]ThatDamnDuckAgain[/

About the amount of kids being born in hardship ridden regions. There are several different reasons. Two of the main reasons are missing birth control measures like condoms, kids are also seen as providers for the future when the parents are old and can't work anymore.

Do vaccines prevent children from being born into poverty? If kids are seen as providing for the future then they will still have more children. If the amount of money spent on vaccines was redirected to say providing adequate clean water and hygiene and nutrition then that would prevent many of those early deaths in the first place.

The argument bill gates makes, (who has bragged about the 20/1 returns on his investment in pharmaceuticals) that vaccines will cause women in 3rd world countries to have less children is a nonsense.

These guys claim they want to limit the worlds population by saving lives? Yeah right.

a reply to: surfer_soul
My post wasn't about the vaccines, it was about the reasons why in poor demographics, there are more kids. It's not something I came up with on my imagination, it's a proven fact.

Do vaccines prevent children from being born into poverty?

Of course not. But some vaccines actually help preventing serious cases in the living children that may lead to crippling, blindness or even death.

If the amount of money spent on vaccines was redirected to say providing adequate clean water and hygiene and nutrition then that would prevent many of those early deaths in the first place.

I agree a lot with this.

The argument bill gates makes, (who has bragged about the 20/1 returns on his investment in pharmaceuticals) that vaccines will cause women in 3rd world countries to have less children is a nonsense.

IDK if he makes that argument openly but if you look at some lawsuits from India and Africa, it's a hint on what he was really saying.

originally posted by: jamespond
Well lets put it this way:

In the year 1800 in the UK, this is an age before vaccines. The mortality rate in children under 5 years old was 1 in 3.

Today it's 1 in 250.

Do the math.

Done it many times. Also looked at the real numbers proving the declines in death rates for virtuall all vaccine rollouts was already well on the way down when the vaxx was introduced (I believe there is exactly one exception to this, but can't remember which one).

The declines in death rates was simply due to massive improvements in sanitation and sewage.

You do know people used to just dump the contents of their indoor 'privvy' out on the street, right?

originally posted by: Crackalackin
a reply to: jamespond

I know right! Antibiotics really were a game changer.

What's your point here?

Yeah antibiotics have played a part just like vaccines have.

Are you saying we're ok to trust antibiotics but not vaccines?

I don't see the logic in that.

a reply to: ThatDamnDuckAgain

IDK if he makes that argument openly but if you look at some lawsuits from India and Africa, it's a hint on what he was really saying.

Yes he made the argument that vaccines will encourage women to have less children.
He also bragged about 20/1 returns from his investment.

If you are referring to the vaccines he pushed in India that left all those children with nasty side effects I have heard of such. Or are you referring to the previous record breaking lawsuits against the vaccine makers?

The OP was asking in their second post why the push vaccines when there are alternatives available. I am curious about this too.

a reply to: surfer_soul

Do you remember how he justified that train of thought?

I am referring to the stories about African women and Indian women fertility but I do not have any sources now, please take it as hearsay. That's what I think he was secretly referencing, but I would be interested in the official narrative from him, why it would encourage women to have less children exactly.

The OP was asking in their second post why the push vaccines when there are alternatives available. I am curious about this too.

I think money and control is a big factor here.


Late addition: I recommend looking into Gates and his MO. How he ticks. He despises people for how he was treated in his past, he's a nerd with ego issues and does not refrain from dropping real stuff just to feel in top. Just like that interview with his wife about vaccines, where he smugly had to imply that there will be another crisis and people will be asking for it.

I don't think he lost control there, that was pure evil intend hinting on how supreme he feels over others.

a reply to: ThatDamnDuckAgain

Do you remember how he justified that train of thought?

Yes he said because vaccines would help prevent deaths in children in 3rd world countries, women in those countries wouldn’t feel the need to have as many children. Implying that women are in a way hedging their bets and having more children than they want or need because they assume they will lose one or more.

This kind of thinking alone says a lot about the man, he assumes people look at their children like commodities or assets, the same way he probably does.

I think money and control is a big factor here.

Definitely, but TPTB already have more than enough money, perhaps they desire more control but this seems bigger to me, I think they want to bring in a whole new system the 4th industrial revolution that Swaube has talked about and agenda 21/30 smart city’s, nobody traveling more than 5 miles from where they live, social credits tied to a digital UBI to monitor and coerce behaviour, rationed resources and nobody owing anything. The vaccines are just conditioning for vaccine passports which are conditioning for embedded digital ID’s (look up ID2020) so people can be scanned like products and status monitored 24/7. Just like how covid was conditioning to get everyone wearing masks, social distancing and getting a vaccine...

Just like that interview with his wife about vaccines, where he smugly had to imply that there will be another crisis and people will be asking for it. I don't think he lost control there, that was pure evil intend hinting on how supreme he feels over others.

Funny how near the beginning of the so called crisis he was brought on to many a news and talk show to give his opinion like he was a doctor or expert or something? Meanwhile he prophesies there will be a second wave and more deadly waves and that vaccines are the only solution, grinning all the while like a maniac.

And Santa Claus Swaube talks about how it’s the perfect time for a “great reset” and oh look how well the environment is doing now there is nobody about, wouldn’t it be great if there was nobody about anymore? Just the essential workers all the rest of you are surplus. It’s the new normal...

a reply to: surfer_soul

Implying that women are in a way hedging their bets and having more children than they want or need because they assume they will lose one or more.

This kind of thinking alone says a lot about the man, he assumes people look at their children like commodities or assets, the same way he probably does.

First, regardless what I am going to write now, in no way do I question the love of any mother or father in poverty plaqued places. I am a mother myself, maybe that's important to tell you to understand my viewpoint. The brutal reality.. and here comes the connection to what Gates was implying, but couldn't say is:

Statistically and historically, more kids are born in poor regions. Today, contraception is often not available. Poor regions are poor for a reason, often climate and landscape related. With that come health issues too, because of lack of nutrition. Miscarriages are far more common to the people. Death is far more common.

This was much similar in the early centuries, before the industrialization, in places like European continent, too. Many families had their own farm here. The last generation with lot's of kids, in my region, was my great-grandmother, born in the year the titanic sunk. She had twelve siblings and not everyone made it. They had to work on the fields, or do other household stuff, just like the age allowed it. This was common and normal. The next generations had less and less children until we came up with a factor of under two. Negative growth, I think it happened in the last 30 years.

I also only have one child but because it's someone like me would not have made it through giving birth. I would have just died in agony on the table, because of a hidden medical condition. Boom, gone. I had no idea. This is what I mean, such things happened far more often back then and people made more children. Contraception and all the above adds to this soup of life.

Like I wrote, I don't question the love but daily life wasn't candy cotton like we are used in more developed countries with running water, electricity, grocery store and access to medical help.

Kind of long winded answer so I keep the rest short. 4th industrial age, well I just read that now and see how it fits! Have you seen the British/German paper about augmented humanity?

a reply to: Chalcedony


....And What EXACTLY is in these Alledged " Vaccines " ?


What Independent Scientists have Found after Analyzing them is PURE Eventual Death in a Syringe !


" You Won't Believe What They Found In The CoV19 Vaccines - (It Will BLOW Your Mind) "

banned.video...

a reply to: Chalcedony



We're not 'supposed-to' discuss such things.
Why ? Because a thread describing a published WHO™ agenda is put-in the skunky-junkies.
Did you post it here ?

Vaccines have been protected like a sacred-cow, for decades.

Any time you hear a politician, or a large organization, state that they want to do something for the good of the people : be aware that this type of language has been used by tyrants since forever.

None of them is in the business of telling the 'truth', whatever that may be.

So we're left to guess, about the real-reasons behind the massive worldwide push.
But a heck of a lot of it all fits the Technocrats™ checklist, like an invisible signature over much of what we see happening.
Like a missing blueprint overlay, that once you find it, and lay it over the blueprint : the entire rest of what's going-on in this clown-world finally starts to make a little sense, as horrifying as it is.