|
Intended to form part of international law, preparations for the creation of a World Health Organization (WHO) 'pandemic' treaty began in 2001.
Far from strengthening the prevention of, preparedness for, and response to future 'pandemic's as the latest draft of the text claims, its implementation could severely undermine democracy by limiting the ability of national parliaments to make crucial healthcare decisions in the best interests of their citizens.
Aided by proposed amendments to the International Health Regulations of 2005, the treaty threatens to transform the WHO into a global health dictatorship.
The sweeping influence exerted by the WHO during the COVID-19 'pandemic' was the result of revised International Health Regulations passed at a meeting of the World Health Assembly (WHA) in 2005.
The decision-making body of the WHO, the WHA's meetings are held annually in Geneva, Switzerland, and attended by delegations from the WHO's 194 Member States.
Prior to 2005, the WHO had principally acted as a coordinator, assistant, or collaborator to the public health services and drug regulatory authorities of its Member States.
But with the passing of the revised International Health Regulations, the WHO took on vast new powers that were unprecedented in the field of global health.
These essentially enable it to,
Under the regulations, the WHO's recommended actions can include,
...among others.
Now, however, in the wake of the COVID-19 'pandemic', the road is being prepared for the WHO's already considerable powers to be expanded still further.
Particularly worryingly, the latest draft of the proposed amendments to the regulations shows that,
As such, claims that the planned 'pandemic' treaty will not undermine national sovereignty are at best disingenuous, as its text has to be viewed in light of,
The WHO thinks you have "too much information"
The growing concern over the WHO 'pandemic' treaty isn't simply that it could undermine democracy by preventing national parliaments from being able to make crucial healthcare decisions in the best interests of their citizens.
Through introducing the term "infodemic," the treaty seems to,
Without citing any evidence, the text claims that having,
Suggesting who this wording is primarily intended to benefit - namely, the WHO itself - the text states that having too much information apparently,
To counter this,
The 'pandemic' treaty also dramatically expands the WHO's areas of interest.
Through what it terms a "One Health approach," the global body now intends to be able to take decisions in health matters related to animals, ecosystems, and the environment.
The treaty specifically refers to "taking action on climate change," for example...!
Several observers have suggested that,
Given the global body's close links to Bill Gates and the Pharma Industry, and the hundreds of millions of dollars in annual funding it receives from them, there is a growing worldwide recognition that this looming power grab represents a fundamental threat to democracy.
At the very least, the increasing transfer of powers to the WHO raises important questions regarding national sovereignty and personal liberty.
Ultimately, if its handling of the COVID-19 'pandemic' has taught us anything, it is that,
It is surely in all of our interests to demand that our national lawmakers do not sign away the sovereignty that the WHO is seeking.
|
