The WHO’s Global Power Grab Begins with IHR Amendments

3
8203

The World Health Organization is attempting a ‘power grab’ — quietly setting up a single globalized response to all future ‘health emergencies’ in the form of a Pandemic Treaty.

The Treaty would be controlled and run by the United Nations World Health Organization via an international treaty.

The World Health can’t move on with the treaty without more money and more political clout.

At the same time, The World Health Organization plans potentially dangerous amendments to international health regulations at the World Health Assembly #75 (WHA75) May 22-28. It will give the treaty the enforcement power it needs.

The amendments, recommended by the Biden Administration, are dangerous intrusions on the sovereignty of the nations of the world. They give the Pandemic Treaty teeth.

If these amendments are approved, The Who will obtain the authority to declare an international health emergency, overriding national governments.

The amendments appear to give global authority over nations to the Director General. They give The Who an enforcement mechanism:

  • The WHO requests increased surveillance heading towards a one-health approach, which is a direct imposition of sovereignty.
  • A 48-hour time period to respond to The WHO if they declare a public health emergency, and if you don’t respond, it is assumed that you agree to their involvement. In other words, The Who may make unilateral decisions about health in your country.
  • Regional directors can also declare health emergencies of regional concern, as well as intermediate emergencies.
  • There will be the deployment of expert teams, and health care workers who will be brought into your country.
  • Almost any country can claim to be an affected party.
  • They agreed to have an emergency committee and their deliberations on whether you have a public health emergency or not are going to be shared with member states. In other words, shared with representatives, but not the public.
  • There is a compliance committee which will have investigative power within each country. It will impact on sovereignty.
  • The Director General makes these decisions. It used to say in consultation with member states but that part has been struck off. So, this one person is going to be able to make these decisions.

The International Pandemic Treaty will be far more expansive in its scope than these amendments, but these amendments are more urgent because they will be voted on this month.

THE PANDEMIC TREATY AND INTERNATIONAL HEALTH REGULATIONS

Go here for more information or watch below for more insight:

BACKGROUND ON THE PANDEMIC TREATY

In an April video, The Pulse’s Joe Martino interviews Shabnam Palesa Mohamed, a member of the steering committee of the World Council for Health who gives a startling account to a toxic pandemic treaty that would come under the guise of protecting world health. It would not require ratification in home countries but could rob 195 countries of their sovereignty.

The World Health Organization at their World Health Assembly on May 22-28 of this year will propose a Pandemic Treaty. The stated purpose is to prevent another pandemic. In execution, from the little we know about it, the treaty gives The WHO an “inordinate amount of power to make decisions in sovereign countries as to how people live and how they deal with pandemics from lockdowns to mandates over treatments.”

The Pulse’s Joe Martino interviewed Shabnam Palesa Mohamed, a member of the steering committee of the World Council for Health, who points out that the treaty gives the WHO:

“… an inordinate amount of power to make decisions in sovereign countries as to how people live and how they deal with pandemics, from lockdowns to mandates over treatment.”

In an open letter on the WHO’s pandemic treaty, the World Council for Health writes, in part:

“The proposed WHO agreement is unnecessary, and is a threat to sovereignty and inalienable rights. It increases the WHO’s suffocating power to declare unjustified pandemics, impose dehumanizing lockdowns, and enforce expensive, unsafe, and ineffective treatments against the will of the people.

The WHO appears to want to push the treaty through quickly without public participation and input.

“It is undemocratic, it is unconstitutional and therefore it makes the treaty invalid and unlawful,” Mohamed says. She also made note of the many WHO health policy failures due to their “conflicts of interest.”

The rule change includes dangerous amendments – 13 of them. Investigative reporter Leo Hohmann reports that these amendments will NOT require approval by 2/3 of the United States Senate. It’s not called a treaty since it’s amending a treaty we already approved.

If they are approved (as submitted by the United States) by a simple majority of the 194 member countries of the World Health Assembly countries), these amendments would enter into force as international law just six months later (November 2022). The details of this are not crystal clear.

Original Interview with The National Pulse:

THE LETTER FROM THE WORLD HEALTH COUNCIL

Wch Open Letter on Who Pandemic Treaty 2 by MaurA

CORRECTION: THE ARTICLE WAS CONFUSING. WE MADE IT SEEM AS IF THE PANDEMIC TREATY AND THE NEW AMENDMENTS ARE ONE AND THE SAME. WE’VE CORRECTED THE LANGUAGE AND ADDED A VIDEO BY DR. SILVIA BEHRENDT.

PowerInbox
5 1 vote
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

3 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Anonymous
Anonymous
4 months ago

There’s a difference between the planned pandemic treaty and the IHR amendments

Please do some research on it. The topic needs exact information

Huapakechi
4 months ago

Treason!

Zigmont
Zigmont
4 months ago

well now we have this…………….The Hill reports: The White House is preparing for as many as 100 million Americans to get infected with COVID-19 during a wave this fall and winter, a senior administration official said Friday, but warns there will not be enough vaccines or treatments to protect everyone unless Congress provides new funding.