Beware of False Prophets, like Andrew G Huff

So who here has read this swashbuckling tale, one in which our hero - Andrew G Huff - faces up to gain-of-function evil? I would add ‘unsung’, but I feel as though that would smear it a bit thick, as he’s song his own praises rather well enough especially in the book’s 20th chapter; ‘I am over the target’.

I’m going out on a limb here, suggesting that you will never, ever guess how it ends.

No, really - have a guess.

Here it is. Outlining how ‘his approach’ is entirely in line with the ‘sustainable development goals’.

Bet you didn’t see that one coming, eh? Clearly, SDGs are very, very important in a book supposedly about ‘the biggest lie in history’.

The final chapter in fact is very much an ode to the SDGs, no kidding.

For starters, the drum he repeatedly bangs, is that of banning gain-of-function, yet, in the final chapter he outlines the exception: ‘except in the limited cases…‘ - thereby rendering everything void. The core premise itself is shot. Why? Because everyone will exploit that ‘loophole’.

But the horrors are only just starting.

This is basically the WHO’s ‘Social Determinants of Health’ lie parroted. It’s a larger topic which drags in the likes of Michael Marmot, so I will reserve it for a later post. In short, what it means is that ‘not health is also health’. This concept is important, because the surveillance component of One Health seeks to monitor literally everything about you in real-time, and by claiming that not health is also health, they justify monitoring every other informational component, too.

I’ve covered One Health in the past, the first post of which is here, but another is on the way.

I also previously covered the surveillance component here.

And finally, in this article, I covered how the incoming surveillance network already is being justified via fake literature (Heidi Larson is usually in the proximity), and filled in with private actors, monetising the affair.

-

But back to the book. He carries on by utilising the age old trick ‘but think of the children’, and compounds the UN blind spot creation technique of throwing blatant sexism into the matter. It’s about the women. For now, anyway.

He carries on outlining the lack of ‘guaranteed’ availability of ‘nutricious food’, but short of some supply chain dictatorship, I fail to see how he could ever make a such promise. Consequently, he doesn’t outline a solution. That would make it too obvious.

The next point of ‘shelter’ likewise carries on about refugees, migrants, and all the other groups which UN literature casually exploits. His solution? ‘Provide adequate shelter… including the provisioning of clean energy’. Yes, really. ‘Clean energy’ is also health - if you subscribe to the ‘Social Determinants of Health’ marxist garbage.

Next topic? Energy. ‘… by transitioning from burning biofuels to modern electric grids…‘? The grid is the carrier, it doesn’t generate. And everything has to be ‘clean’ aka ‘green‘. Very important to your health, that. Honestly, this section alone broadcasts how far removed from reality the man is, because the only suggestion comes up with - apart from ‘extending grid access’ (which, again, is not generative) - is decentralised solar power. I cannot imagine an argument further adrift from reality.

The next item is sanitation. True to form, he rattles on about the benefit of sanitation (yes, we know; sanitation was a primary driver in the decline of illness, rather than vaccination). The solution here is for the ultra-poor to ‘allocate resources to process solid waste in sanitary landfills’. I would laugh, but he goes on - and this is where the extremely faint ‘X’ marks the spot: ‘… sanitation reforms benefit women’s health…‘ - again? Seriously, now - stop it. It sticks out. Enough of this incessant attempt to divide people in us vs them. ‘Wastewater is often used in crop irrigation… strict guidelines on wastewater… pathogens…‘ - yeah, this is about One Health, ultimately. It’s about cutting down on livestock, ultimately, because there is no way for you to know the concentration of pathogens in the excreted material. The only way to reduce it, is to perform across the board culling. It’s One Health.

Then we have education, which in the context of health is simply too stupid for me to waste time commenting on, health care systems (incorporates a trained workforce - no doubt per One Health Workforce Academy standards, and also includes requests for stockpiles - another common One Health topic).

This continues with funding medical research - vaccines, naturally - surveillance. That’s where it hides. It’s always buried in the area where people are least likely to pay attention. 70% through a paper or book, or 70% through a chapter in a book.

One Health - in very short - is about using surveillance to produce vaccines. He hits both marks in this section, but we also see most of the minor points of the One Health agenda mentioned prior to this section.

This is not by coincidence. The guy is a crook. A complete an utter fraud, without the shadow of a doubt.

I started off by mentioning the SDGs in the conclusion. But there’s another paragraph which deserves mention, because it’s the typical list of rhetoric which has absolutely nothing to do with the topic at hand.

Female genital mutilation and health? I mean, for fuck sake, I thought this book was supposed to be about Gain of Function?

-

Now, rather than mock chapter 20, a lunatic James Bond fantasy, in which he repeatedly describes himself in 3rd person - I only have a few further comments to make in the regard of his literary masterpiece. There simply is no need to dive into detail, because the objective is hammered home. He is through and through on board with the plan, the agenda, the One Health Surveillance and Vaccine state. Without the shadow of a doubt.

-

One of the point I have wrestled with, is in relation to page 190. He states that he sent copies of his workfiles to Alex Berenson and Bret Weinstein.

I have followed both for years, and they’re both clearly intelligent individuals, who have found traction with their anti-establishment views related to Covid-19.

And - before carrying on further - I certainly do not accuse them of anything. I’ve questioned Berenson’s blind side to Ivermectin, but we all have different perspectives. But there is something here which I really do not understand.

Because I found this link on Huff’s Twitter page - in spite of being blocked, which I also don’t quite understand given that I’ve never really interacted with him. I downloaded the material in question… and it’s chock full of presentations outlining the likes of One Health. No, really, it is.

More on that below. I want to finish off the book, then deal with follow on questions.

-

The best, most illuminating, part of the book by far is Chapter 16. I, personally, did not know of Obama’s personal involvement of lab creation in Ukraine; ‘monitoring stations’. And on page 175, he agrees with accelerated trials, though they should be ‘limited in scale’. So, basically, do what we already do, just somehow less of it. Another non-solution.

He also outlines the liability immunity, and its inclusion in US legislation. There’s more to comment on here, but it will have to be later.

And he then goes on to detail PREDICT, which ‘strengthened global surveillance and laboratory diagnostic capabilities’, that this ties in with the ‘One Health approach’ - and that he found this to ‘be reasonable on the surface’. I haven’t found him to return to this point, so I can only assume he agrees with it - global surveillance, that is.

On page 181, he reveals that Michael T Osterholm was his PhD vice chair, and that is actually very illuminating, and could hypothetically explain his recruitment.

Because Osterholm has been around the One Health initiative since very early days - back when it wasn’t called ‘One Health’. Like in this document from 2002, for instance, which also featured Fauci, Margaret Hamburg, and the author of the important 1992 report ‘Emerging Infections: Microbial Threats to Health in the United States‘ which in many ways is the earliest trace that I have of One Health; Joshua Lederberg.

And, to round up chapter 16, he’s suddenly worried about timecard fraud, in the presence of some of the most notorious foundations on the planet. Comedy!

He also mentions USAID’s global disease surveillance work, his own work on biosurveillance technologies, and finishes off with rubbishing any ‘conspiracy theory’ on what the labs in Ukraine are used for.

-

The final two oddities I’ve found worthy of a mention is him talking about Q-level clearance (which you’d surely want to keep to yourself, as it’d make you a target), and his work on EIDR - ‘an indexed and searchable database'‘.

-

But back up a bit. The Tweet in which he posted a link to a zip file containing files handed over to Berenson and Weinstein (and others) - what does that zip contain?

Well, first off, here’s a Dan’s CV. Yes, there are a number of CVs in there. He worked on prototyping Mantle, EIDR, GRITS. Biosurveillance is mentioned.

But that’s really just the warm-up act. Here’s from one of his technical presentation.

The ‘management plan’ section specifically mentions ‘global EID surveillance’.

And in this regard, guess how many times the word 'privacy' can be located in that presentation?

Zero. Zip. Zilch. None. 0.

They do not give a f- about privacy.

But then there are other bits - like the one below - where suddenly, the honesty overwhelms you.

This is from 2015 - the same year in which Saint Obama announced One Health (though indirectly, and only in relation to antibiotic resistance).

So one question - the Mantle description doesn’t even mention microbial resistance, and Obama only announced it in relation to antibiotic resistance - so who gave the order to fully implement at this stage?

And it becomes worse. From yet another presentation, we see a familiar phrase - 'Wet markets'? Such prescience! This doc is from either 2015 or 2016, so impressive prediction here. 'Wet markets'? Really?

The presentation is fairly detailed, and it shows you… well, more or less exactly what you’d expect. Keyword search, information extraction. The output of surveillance, in short. What will be turned on you.

It finishes off with a ‘future work’ section, where one of the bullet points is ‘integration with other systems’. Somewhat I feel as though this is straddling far beyond stated purpose - Which other systems?

This wouldn’t perchance happen to be what the CDC at present work on in, say, Albania, would it?

The monetisation angle we also see in the article relating to the Climade and the 3-D Commission, which you can find above.

And further - in a December 2014 presentation by Karesh 'The Bat-Human Interface' partnered with Stratcom, NASA, and USRA, the quantum computing guys.

So we have BOTH ‘bats’ and ‘wet markets’ in relatively few documents here, and somehow, this didn’t appear suspicious? Really?

And all of this was in the context of One Health, surveillance, and lots of documents detail what they do with this data, and even that didn’t trigger alarm bells with Berenson and Weinstein? Really???

-

And I think this should highlight what I don’t quite understand. I think this cache of documents should have at least raised an eyebrow with the journalists who were handed this data. One Health, surveillance, wet markets, bats, … but I see no indication that anyone did question any of it. Why?

And in the regards of surveillance, let’s finish with this explicitly named presentation on ‘One Health in Action’. Hooray for global surveillance!

-

Finally, and for sake of completion, let me just drag in a few papers which Andrew G Huff authored.

Here’s a paper on biosurveillance, on which he worked with the ‘Manhattan Principled’ William Karesh.

-

And here’s another paper of his on Mantle, which also explicitly states biosurveillance.

-

And to complete, here are a few of his very own Tweets.

Unsure of the project of which he speaks, as all those I can find appear to be on biosurveillance.