About three and a half years ago I wrote a newsletter about the World Health Organization (W.H.O.) and discussed the growing influence of this organization, which is part of the United Nations, has on health policies around the world. Specifically, it seems to have changed much of its focus from improving health in third world countries by improving living conditions with clean water, access to medical care etc. to pandemic preparedness and the implementation of a vaccine response in that event. What raised concern for me, and others, was that seventy-five percent of the donations to the W.H.O. come from private donors, pharmaceutical companies, and foundations like the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, not member governments. Oftentimes those donors earmark their donations for specific purposes, which begs the question about what motives those private donors might want in the way of policy changes about how the W.H.O. operates. In short, according to Dr. Meryl Nass “the W.H.O. dances to the tune of its donors, not its members.”
This month, on May 27th, 2024, a vote will take place in Geneva Switzerland on two items that gives us a glimpse to the direction the W.H.O. has designs on for their future purpose and role regarding worldwide health policy. Details are still being negotiated, but one item is the World Health Pandemic Preparedness Agreement, and the second item is to vote on amendments to the existing International Health Regulations (IHR), both of which would give the W.H.O. authority over individual governments under the premise of global health safety.
The treaty and major amendments being proposed create a new supranational body that gives the W.H.O. legally binding global authority over PHEICs (public health emergencies of international concern) not necessarily only pandemics, but any “emergency” including a perceived climate crisis. A ruling by the W.H.O. under this circumstance would give member states 48 hours to comply and if that does not happen, then the W.H.O and the U.N can impose sanctions. Here is a summary of what the Pandemic Preparedness Treaty and the amendments to the existing IHR entail:
What do the IHR Amendments and Pandemic Treaty do?
1. Future PHEICs will be declared by the WHO Director-General who can apply measures like those used for COVID including lockdowns and vaccine mandates--usurping state authorities.
2. WHO can order what Drugs are to be used and those to be restricted--usurping state and federal authorities.
3. PREP Act must be globalized: laws and structures put into place to allow the use of unlicensed vaccines and drugs and to remove any liability from these products. – a 14th amendment violation of due process.
4. WHO will tell nations what misinformation and disinformation they must censor. —a 1st amendment violation.
5. Medical records and other personal data are to be shared with the WHO--4th amendment Violation.
6. "One Health" expands the range of authority for the WHO D-G, wrapping plants, animals and ecosystems into the health basket to be managed by the WHO.
7. The treaty gives the WHO a blank check to write the rules in future and determine the price Nations will need to pay, in future.
8. Potential pandemic pathogens will be collected, shared, and managed by the WHO. -- a Biological Weapons Convention violation.
Thank you to Door to Freedom for the above synopsis.
Notice that there is no language about cracking down on any potential future lab leak of a virus!
There are 194 member countries that are in the W.H.O. including the U.S. The only countries not a part of it are Taiwan and Liechtenstein. If the members vote in a two thirds majority for the passage of these amendments and for the treaty, it will give the W.H.O. far-reaching authority without the normal checks and balances that we are accustomed to having within our constitution in America. There would be no veto power against them, no security council like there is within the United Nations, no court that has jurisdiction over the decisions made and lastly no liability from the decisions made because all diplomats and employees of the W.H.O. have diplomatic immunity. Presently, the U.S. under the direction of the Biden administration is poised to vote in favor of the treaty and amendments. Although spokespeople within the administration claim that voting for this will not usurp the rights of our country to resist any recommendations, many well respected lawyers are genuinely concerned and so are other countries. Last month there were tens of thousands of people protesting in Japan against this action by the W.H.O., and the Lancet published an article called The Pandemic Treaty: shameful and unjust. This month all of the 49 Republican Senators signed a letter to President Biden asking him to withdraw support for this W.H.O. action, and twenty two state attorney generals signed a letter asking for the same thing. Some are saying since this is a treaty, that two-thirds of the U.S. Senate would need to ratify it, but the government is refuting this, saying that it is an update to an existing treaty.
The big questions are, do we really want a small number of bureaucrats and medical professionals within the W.H.O. to have universal decision-making ability about whether a vaccine or a medication should be mandated or what medication should not be made available? How will “One Health” work? How does wrapping plants, animals and ecosystems look under W.H.O. control? If we have learned one thing from the last pandemic and from medical history for the past 150 years, is that expert opinions with a one size fits all solution combined with censorship of dissenting opinion is never a promising idea.
Call to Action:
Last week I listened to a webinar that included, Dr. Meryl Nass founder of Door To Freedom, Valerie Borek who has a degree in biochemistry, is an attorney and associate director and policy analyst for Stand For Health Freedom , and Vicki Flynn an assemblywoman from the 13th district in NJ. This meeting was hosted by Felicia Melilli, who is co-founder of NJPHIPAC, New Jersey Public Health Initiative Political Action Committee. If what I have written concerns you then please consider acting proactively yourself, and by telling others about doing the same in the following ways.
Please sign this petition: https://alignact.com/go/stop-the-who-power-grab
There are two bills in Congress to support the idea that this treaty should be ratified by the Senate. Senate bill S.444 and House bill H.R.1425
If you want to write to your elected officials, you can call 202-224-3121 or use this website to find out how to reach them. https://www.usa.gov/elected-officials
Louisiana just voted unanimously to not follow the W.H.O.’s recommendations, even if the treaty and amendments are passed. NJ is one of eight states that has an active bill to do the same, to stop the W.H.O.’s control in our state no matter what the federal government does. To support this effort in NJ, Bill AR29 can be read here along with finding your representative. Calling or writing to your NJ assembly representative to support it would be helpful.
If you think that the W.H.O. has usurped it’s authority and you no longer think the U.S. should be a member state of the W.H.O. then support HR 79, which is asking the President to withdraw from the W.H.O.
If you want to see the slideshow presentation of Attorney Valerie Borek from the webinar, open this attachment.
