The WHO's Last Stand
The WHO's Last Stand
The Pathway to a One World Government
'Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence. '
-Hanlon’s Razor
Hanlon’s Razor suggests that at any given time in history, there is no malicious ruling class of unelected leaders conspiring behind the scenes and that all of the strife in human history has resulted from the pure chaos of incompetence in high places.
If we were to apply this adage to COVID-19 and its response, then we may have witnessed the most lucrative act of incompetence in human history.
The consolidation of wealth and power that resulted from the pandemic was staggering and has since fueled widespread speculation that COVID-19 was no accident at all. (#)(#)
The pandemic adversely affected more lives than both World Wars, the Vietnam War, and the Wars in the Middle East combined.
Yet to this day, there has been virtually no accountability.
Over a protracted period of time, outrage dissipates. The public begins to forget about COVID and all of the unaddressed grievances, while the nation’s attention is focused instead on a war in Eastern Europe, a culture war at home, the persecution of former presidents, and a looming financial collapse …
None of the errors of the last Pandemic have been sufficiently addressed. Now, when the next global health emergency comes around, the machinations of the Pandemic Industrial Complex will be able to proceed unimpeded under the banner of “global health”.
No lessons were learned, and no justice was served.
What has always lurked behind COVID, and the “public health” agenda in general, is a long-planned global coup d’etat. A coup that the people will welcome willingly after sufficient fear and demoralization has been achieved.
Since the pandemic, globalist institutions such as the United Nations, the World Economic Forum, and especially the World Health Organization, have been laying the groundwork for the subtle, subversive usurping of the collective governments of the world.
The globalist’s endgame is finally coming into view, and the next phase will be critical to their plan.
Earlier this year, I published a SubStack for Badlands entitled Behold, a Trojan Horse, which briefly touched on a couple of troubling “instruments” that the global elites are itching to foist upon civilization: the WHO CA + (popularly referred to as the Pandemic Treaty), and the proposed amendments to the International Health Regulations (IHR).
Since then, I’ve delved deeper into both proposals and have been fortunate enough to have interviewed activist, author and researcher James Roguski, who has been the leading voice on SubStack raising awareness of the WHOs lightly veiled machinations. (You can see our interview with James HERE.)
There are at least two avenues or instruments the WHO appears poised to utilize in order to complete the next phase of the global coup operation:
One avenue is currently being referred to as the “WHO CA+”, or what was formerly and more commonly known as the “Pandemic Treaty” (#)
The second avenue, and perhaps the more subversive option, is a series of amendments to the International Health Regulations (IHR). (#)
Analysts have cautioned that the ratification of either, let alone both, of these instruments, would devastate or even completely strip away sovereignty from nation-states and place public health decision-making power in the hands of the WHO and its director-general.
Granting the World Health Organization the authority to supersede national governments is paramount to the coup’s success, and the propaganda machine is already hard at work conditioning the public to accept the poison apple …
In order to push back, it is imperative that we understand the globalists' playbook, and that means becoming familiar with these proposed “instruments”.
WHO CA+ (Pandemic Treaty)
In December 2021, it was decided at a special session of the World Health Assembly to establish an Intergovernmental Negotiating Body (“INB”), representing all regions of the world, to draft and negotiate “a WHO convention, agreement, or other international instrument on pandemic prevention, preparedness, and response.”
Soon after, the term “Pandemic Treaty” began floating in and out of public awareness, but was never clearly defined by the press or the institutions advocating for it.
The usual suspects in the mainstream media seemed more concerned with convincing the public that their suspicions were invalid than effectively explaining what the so-called treaty actually proposed.
Outlets like SkyNews Australia at least tried to warn of the potential dangers:
So, what is the Pandemic Treaty?
For starters, the Pandemic Treaty isn’t really a treaty at all, but rather what’s called a “Convention agreement”, and as such isn't subject to the typical requirements for ratification, namely having to pass a vote in the U.S. Senate.
Additionally, the proper name for this “convention agreement” is “The WHO CA+”.
On May 22nd, 2023, the “Drafting Group of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Body to Draft and Negotiate a WHO Convention, Agreement, or Other International Instrument on Pandemic Prevention, Preparedness, and Response” released an unedited draft titled “The Bureau’s Text of the WHO CA+”. (#)
The Bureau’s Text revealed the true goals of the WHO and its funders, goals that are so unabashedly dystopian in scope that most people would assume they were satyrical.
The proposed treaty establishes a “Conference of the Parties,” or C.O.P., which would essentially become a new bureaucracy beyond Congressional or Parliamentary oversight and control. (# Article 20)
This group would include:
“Representatives of the United Nations and its specialized agencies” as well as “representatives of any body or organization, whether national or international, governmental or nongovernmental, private sector or public sector, which is qualified in matters covered by the WHO CA+”
These individuals would be empowered to add protocols to the agreement without the consent of the public. (# Article 34)
Despite the convoluted jargon used in the Bureau’s text, this transfer of power from We the People to the unaccountable, unelected, and mostly invisible members of the so-called “Conference of the Parties” has been described as a veiled but direct attack on the sovereignty of nations.
The hardline anti-globalist sector of the alt-media has been the only wing of media willing to scrutinize the Pandemic Treaty. However, in the wake of scrutiny from both the public and alternative media, the Associated Press ran a “fact-check” claiming that the treaty would in fact “not threaten national sovereignty” (#)
But many remain skeptical of the AP’s assurances.
After all, AP pushed the myth that masks were somehow effective against viruses, that Hydroxychloroquine and Ivermectin were “sham cures”, that vaccines were safe and effective, and that the Wuhan lab leak theory was Russian disinformation. (#)
Looking back, there isn’t much that the Associated Press got right regarding the Pandemic, so why should the public trust their word now, when the stakes are so high?
The reality of the situation, and what AP should have been reporting on, is that the pandemic treaty, or WHO CA+, will grant the WHO power over far more than 'pandemic' responses. Under the new convention, the WHO’s dictates will supersede and overrule any and all local, state, and federal laws.
Some of the proposals in the pandemic treaty include:
Setting up an international supply network overseen by the WHO.
Funding the WHO's health emergency structures and processes by requiring at least 5% of national health budgets to be dedicated to health emergencies.
Setting up a governing body under the auspice of the WHO to oversee the entire health emergency process.
Expanding the scope of the WHO's power by implementing the "One Health" agenda, which recognizes that a very broad range of aspects of life and the environment can impact health and therefore fall under the "potential" to cause harm.
Consider the implications of this.
Just about anything can be sold as “potentially harmful” when you consider that the affiliated media has the ability to shape the public discourse, essentially determining how people should think and feel about any given topic. As long as the media pumps out sufficient fear and propaganda, the scope of the WHO’s power will be limited only by their imagination.
Additionally, the emphasis on the "One Health" concept combines human health, animal health, and environmental concerns into one amalgamated globalist agenda. [(#)(#)(#)]
Interestingly enough, the term "One Health," which was formally adopted by the WHO and the G20 health ministers in 2017, was first coined by the executive vice president of the EcoHealth Alliance, the same firm that appears to have had a hand in the creation of SARS-CoV-2. (#)
Isn’t it interesting that the same names and institutions continuously pop up? It’s almost as if there’s some kind of conspiracy …
Under the One Health agenda, the WHO would be given the power to make decisions concerning diet, agriculture and livestock farming, environmental pollution, the movement of populations, and much more.
The highly biased International Fact-Checking Network and the damage control experts at the Associated Press would have you believe that the WHO has purely altruistic intentions and only has the best interests of humanity and the planet in mind, but this is demonstrably false.
The truth is that private interests wield immense power over the WHO, and a majority of its funding is "specified," meaning it's earmarked for particular programs. The WHO cannot allocate those funds wherever they're needed most. To put it simply, these funders exert massive influence over what the WHO does and how it does it.
Funders like Bill Gates, for example—who is the largest funder of the WHO when you add together the donations from the Gates Foundation and his other organizations, such as GAVI the Vaccine Alliance …
We’ve seen examples of how funders guiding the WHO’s decision-making have actually adversely affected the public health.
A prime example is the push for lockdowns.
Dr. David Bell, a Senior Scholar at Brownstone Institute, public health physician, and biotech consultant in global health(#), has pointed out that the COVID lockdown strategy clearly did not come from the WHO itself, but rather from some outside source.
(Solid quote comes from this clip, around 6:55 - 7:55.)
“The idea of lockdowns didn’t come from the WHO, it came from these external influences.”
If the Pandemic Treaty is signed, and the WHO is elevated to a de facto world governing body, then men like Bill Gates will wield unprecedented influence over global affairs.
… but as bad as the treaty sounds, there’s something far more subversive and sinister lurking in the background that hasn’t really been talked about by anyone.
Proposed IHR Amendments
In May of 2022, while the media focused on the Russo-Ukrainian War and the overturning of Roe v. Wade, the WHO’s 2022 World Health Assembly saw the adoption of amendments to the International Health Regulations.
The International Health Regulations (IHR) are legally binding rules that only apply to the WHO as an instrument aiming for international collaboration "to prevent, protect against, control, and provide a public health response to the international spread of disease in ways that are commensurate with and restricted to public health risks and that avoid unnecessary interference with international traffic and trade".
Some of these regulations are actually useful and should be in place, while others, particularly these new amendments, seem more concerned with public surveillance rather than public health …
These proposed amendments would make the WHO’s proclamations legally binding rather than just advisory recommendations. The amendments seek to institute global digital health certificates, dramatically increase the billions of dollars available to the WHO, and override decisions made by national governments.
A total of 307 IHR amendments have been proposed thus far. Some of the more troubling amendments suggest :
Changing the WHO “from an advisory organization … to a governing body whose proclamations would be legally binding.” (Articles 1 and 42)
Removing language from the IHR preserving “respect for dignity, human rights and fundamental freedoms of people.” (Article 3)
Giving the WHO “authority to require medical examinations, proof of prophylaxis, proof of vaccine and to implement contact tracing, quarantine, and treatment.” (Article 18)
Instituting “a system of global health certificates in digital or paper format.” (multiple articles and annexes)
Empowering the WHO’s Emergency Committee “to override decisions made by sovereign nations regarding health measures.” (Article 43)
These amendments were submitted on September 30th of last year, and the public has not seen an updated negotiated draft since, meaning everything is currently cloaked in secrecy.
The most problematic part about all of this is that in both the case of the WHO CA+ as well as the IHR Amendments, the power that the WHO and its funders seek can only be granted in the event of another global health emergency, and the usual suspects are already planting seeds in the mass consciousness.
Observe the rampant fear-mongering of the usual suspects:
( 0:41 - 1:08 ) https://rumble.com/v2962xp-breaking-the-who-warns-of-next-pandemic-calls-in-big-pharma-redacted-with-c.html
Gates:
It is concerning, to say the least, that all of the individuals who stand to gain the most from another pandemic are so excited—almost giddy—over the prospect of another global health emergency.
It would be far more comforting if the United States, and other nations, had leaders who were willing to fight back against the rapid encroachment of globalism from all directions.
Unfortunately, the current U.S. President appears all too eager to facilitate the “Public Health” agenda.
On July 21st, the Biden Administration launched the “Office of Pandemic Preparedness Response Policy,” signaling to the more discerning portions of the population that Tedros’, Fauci, and Gates’ veiled threats of future pandemics were not empty gestures. (#)(#)
There is a deadline of December 1st, 2023 for the 194 member nations to REJECT the amendments to the IHR. Which begs the question; what can we do?
Fighting Back
In June of 2023, the public was given the opportunity to speak directly to the delegates appointed to represent them in these negotiations through an Office of Global Affairs listening session.
James Roguski was present at this listening session and was able to voice some of the concerns and criticisms held by the greater public.
The Listening Session makes it seem as though the public has at least some say in this process, but most of what is being planned and discussed is occurring in secret, and whatever they decide to do, they are going to do it regardless of public sentiment.
To fight back effectively, there are two things you can do:
First, you can speak up. Spreading awareness among our fellow citizens might be the single most important step we can take to push back.
By publicly declaring your dissatisfaction with the WHO, you send out a ripple among those in your personal life and your greater community.
Countless individuals are doing just that …
From September 9th - 16th of 2022, the WHO, presumably in an attempt to fix their damaged PR, requested the public submit 90-second videos detailing what they think the WHO could do better in the event of another Pandemic.(#)
The response was incredible:
There may be nothing we can do to stop the WHO and its funders from at least trying to implement these proposed instruments, but there is one additional thing we can always do, and that is simply to not comply.
Florida didn’t comply with the COVID guidelines and has since been heralded as the gold standard for how other States should have responded. If Florida had complied, this gold standard wouldn't exist.
The government of Uttar Pradesh, a state in India with over 200 million residents, distributed Ivermectin and squashed the Delta Wave. This would never have happened if they complied with the WHO’s guidelines. (#)
Sweden never locked down, and there were no significant consequences; in fact, people living in Stockholm carried on as if nothing ever changed.
No one person is going to singlehandedly thwart the machinations of the global elite behind the WHO and the greater Pandemic Industrial Complex, but when a single person becomes aware, spreads that awareness, stands up, and refuses to comply, they are sending a signal, and leading by example. A single person's effort can ripple out and show others that they do not have to comply either, and from there, a chain reaction will occur.
Even if the various treaties and amendments are ratified and adopted, if the edicts of the WHO fall on def ears then what control do they really have?
The globalists think that they’ve managed to get away with COVID and its response scot-free, and they are confident in their ability to elicit specific reactions in the public. However, even though the collective attention is being effectively bounced back and forth from one headline to the next, if we were to be placed in another global health scare so soon, the still-open wounds from the last pandemic will quickly serve to remind the public what they went through.
The powers that be had significant trouble keeping everyone in line during the last Pandemic, it would be difficult if not impossible to force the masses into compliance a second time. And that is precisely the reason they are attempting to take such drastic measures with the WHO CA + and the IHR Amendments.
The final act in the Global Coup d’etat is rapidly approaching. Are you going to lower your head and comply, or are you going to raise your voice and fight back?
Dive Deeper:
WHO CA+ Analysis by James Roguski:
“PRIORITIZING ACTIONS THAT MAY RESTRICT PERSONAL LIBERTIES”
Awesome clip:
G20:
Source: Badlands Media
Comments
Post a Comment