UPDATE 21. May 2022: BEHIND THE PANDEMIC TREATY - Ex-WHO Scientist David Bell: Will New Pandemic Treaty Cause Permanent Lockdowns?

UPDATE 20. May 2022: TUCKER WOKE UP: THERE IS NO GRAVER VIOLATION OF MEDICAL ETHICS THAN THIS + World Health Organization pandemic treaty: A fresh push for vaccine passports, global surveillance, and more

UPDATE 19. May 2022: Sign the Petition: Refuse and Reject the WHO Powergrab That Would Lead to Global Medical Martial Law + PANDEMIC TREATY A GLOBAL TECHNOCRATIC COUP + THE WHO PANDEMIC TREATY POWER GRAB - BEHIND THE DEEP STATE

UPDATE 18. May 2022: UK Petition - Do not sign any WHO Pandemic Treaty unless it is approved via public referendum + BURYING DEMOCRACY UNDER THE GUISE OF HEALTH: MEP ANDERSON REVEALS THE TRUE MOTIVES BEHIND THE WHO PANDEMIC TREATY

UPDATE 17. May 2022: Global WHO Treaty Is Real And Will Control You (ALL COUNTRIES: RED ALERT !!!)



UPDATE 13. May 2022: A Treasonous Set of WHO Amendments to Undermine the U.S. Constitution Before Midterm Elections + URGENT: Support HR419, No Taxpayer Funding for the WHO

UPDATE 12. May 2022: The Global Pandemic Treaty & the W.H.O. and What you need to Know

UPDATE 10. May 2022: Stop the WHO Global Pandemic Treaty + WHO Pandemic Treaty: What It Is, Why It Matters and How to Stop It

UPDATE 08. May 2022: The W.H.O’s ‘Pandemic Treaty’ will end Freedom as we know it and hand the ‘keys to power’ to its largest private funder, Mr Bill Gates


UPDATE 04. May 2022: Biden Handing Over U.S. Sovereignty to WHO  TAKE ACTION





ICYMI: BRUTAL: 5 awful facts about WHO’s Tedros Adhanom + World Economic Forum and UN Sign Strategic Partnership Framework + YOU WERE TOLD SINCE JUNE 2011, BUT YOU DIDN'T LISTEN

WHO is World Government. Power grab scheduled from May 2022. With “relaxations” you are being framed.

Every governance of every sovereign state and all First Nations and Indigenous communities, especially on unceded lands, should immediately send a letter of  rejection to the World Health Organization (WHO).

By fPcN · 28. February 2022

We have the right to consent, not the duty;

And we have the right to NOT CONSENT.

An individual exercising the right to consent cannot force another to do the same.

This is why the ridiculous figure of having to be injected with a gene therapy to protect other injected individuals from a disease caused by a non-existent “virus” has arisen.

Wearing a mask to protect another who is also wearing one.

Locking up a healthy population and forcing a gene therapy to protect old, weak and sick people.

EVERYTHING is turned around, your right has become a duty. Our parents have also been skillfully misled linguistically. Disinformation and wars.


First published on BITCHUTE May 20th, 2018.

We Do Not Consent – Powerful Message to Humanity (2018 Speech)

Download Video: https://files.catbox.moe/im7h4b.mp4?_=1

The World Government

No one has asked for this either. We are led to believe that we have made such a mess of things that there is no other option. To give us a helping hand, we are being healthily and mentally weakened and chipped under false pretenses. Reaming, earning and directing.

Anyone who does not revolt against this is an accomplice!

Ex-WHO employee Dr. Astrid Stuckelberger warns us based on information she received from insiders. WHO wants to take over power because WHO decided it that way. Sneaky people they are. The regimes that participate in it commit high treason and must be culled. The message:

The fact that they are suddenly distancing themselves from restrictions is just a game. The last week of January 2022 WHO  held an emergency meeting and deliberations in Geneva on expanding its powers to take over all member states in the event of a pandemic and “any other form of threat or disaster”. WHO wants member states to sign a new treaty on Covid-19, which expands the 2005 treaty. Once signed by the Ministers of Health, the WHO Constitution (according to its Article 9) takes precedence over a country’s constitution (189 countries have signed the 2005 treaty) during natural disasters or pandemics.

“Once signed by the Ministers of Health, the WHO Constitution (according to its Article 9) takes precedence over a country’s constitution…during natural disasters or pandemics.”

An intergovernmental negotiating body will now be constituted and hold its first meeting by 1 March 2022 (to agree on ways of working and timelines) and its second by 1 August 2022 (to discuss progress on a working draft). It will then deliver a progress report to the 76th World Health Assembly in 2023, with the aim to adopt the instrument by 2024.

Since the definition of pandemic was changed a few years ago (cases based on the PCR test), they can enforce obedience in any country and impose WHO guidelines on the public, which will be mandatory, not just recommended. And that sounds like power over the country and the world. Dr. Astrid Stuckelberger, who has worked for the WHO for 20 years, warns that every country should send a public letter of protest to the WHO. “Governments” should draft a letter stating that the people do not accept that the signature of the Minister of Health can decide the fate of millions of people without a referendum.

It is very important to send this letter from every country to the WHO in Geneva. WHO wants all countries to implement the measures by May 2022.

Dr. Stuckelberger shared the information that so far, only the Russians have sent such a rejection letter!

However, the US Constitution, Article VI requires that no treaty can violate the Constitution.
The Bill of Rights (BoR) is part of that Constitution. That means no treaty can violate the BoR.
The BoR broadly encompasses our GOD-GIVEN rights, as seen in BoR’s #9 & 10.

US Constitution, Article VI also requires ALL public officials (which includes ALL their down-lines, including but not limited to ALL corporations, which are creatures of the state) to obey the mandates of the Constitution. So that means NOBODY in power and business can violate the people’s rights under ANY circumstances. That’s a fact, not my personal opinion.

Until we learn the facts and ENFORCE them against political insurgents posing as legit public officials, nobody is safe from slavery, mass murder and mass destruction.

'Pandemic Instrument' (WHO decree) based on 100% Fatal Lies.

As you may have gathered by now, we are living in an upside down world and have lost contact with Mother Earth. In the world of mass media, truths are conspiracy theories and lies are made law.

Analysis of a decree.

How a collection of fatal lies is turned into "law". How the laws of a new bureaucratic world order are called "instruments".

Fatal Lies

The mother of all lies is that of "Overpopulation." Dismissed professor Jordan Peterson argues that there is even a structural population shrinkage. [LINK] The explosive growth of the population in Africa cannot compensate for the shrinkage of the Asian and Western populations. As an example, he points out, by the end of this century Nigeria's population will have passed that of China. [LINK] Nigeria's population will more than triple and China's will halve. The number of people on Earth will not reach 9 billion and will stabilize and decline slightly in the centuries to come. There is no overpopulation and the question is whether there are in fact 7.9 billion people at this time. After all, as you know, governments and institutions make more "miscalculations" in their favor.

In the Netherlands the number of Dutch people has been 13 million for 40 years. Our country now officially has about 17.5 million inhabitants, of whom 4.5 million came from other soil and have reproduced. The original population in Germany and Austria is also shrinking. The consequence is, however, that of the 13 million original Dutch population, the proportion of elderly people is increasing. So in a while there will also be a shrinkage here, as in the entire western world. The growth is artificially maintained by immigration.

With this terrible lie of overpopulation come many more fatal lies.

The second fatal lie is that the climate would change and therefore global warming would be on the way. But the reality is, cooling has been going on for decades and is still going on. Anyone who knows anything about solar minima can predict this.

The third fatal lie is that carbon dioxide emissions are the problem. It is not, the lack of oxygen is the problem. Lack of oxygen is what disrupts the natural carbon cycle and that causes the accumulation of carbon dioxide. We have lost 5% of atmospheric oxygen in the last 100 years. Destroying forests and oceans is to blame. 

Oxygen deprivation also causes serious health problems due to incomplete oxidation of food and oxidative stress. With the installation of the 5G frequencies, this is also exacerbated. All in all: the lack of oxygen does seem to be human work. Waging wars in order to be able to commit predatory acts. Not taking responsibility for Nature. This will cost us dearly, but we can easily rectify it. Not with windmills and solar panels, not with eating insects and driving electric. But with the release of 6000 patented and suppressed methods to cooperate with Nature, instead of trying to destroy her. We are being misadvised, don't listen to the possessed in the puppet regimes, but listen to ourselves and each other.

These Fatal Lies are propagated to keep humanity in a certain mental fog. This allows a small elite with their bought cronies to control total humanity.

The Pandemic Tool

This "tool" is another step in securing humanity in that same mental hold.

While we are all distracted with war and nuclear violence threats, plans are almost ready to have every country on earth sign an agreement under WHO dictate (read: New World Order) to control future pandemics with the goal of implementing it by 2024.

Those who thought that this action is still a long way off will be deceived, as this contract must be signed by March 1, 2022. "A treaty, agreement or other international instrument that is legally binding under international law." In other words, the contract does not actually apply to us, we are not involved, but they don't tell us that. STATES are corporations, as are the UN and subsidiary WHO. What corporations do with the rules for their employees is none of our business.

The leaders (read: CEO's ) of the countries are going to sign an internationally binding legal agreement with the World Health Organization, by which OUR RIGHTS will finally be given away to multinationals, including STATES. You read that right. The Corporations want to close the doors of our cells behind us. Kaboom!

If this goes through, the possessed psychopaths in WHO can dictate all kinds of draconian measures under a global legal agreement, using a global emergency as a cover to do whatever they want.

They have already tested it out to see what the people will do when Dan Andrews, the communist leader of the Australian state of Victoria, imposed a test set of similar "laws" that gave the prime minister, i.e., him, the right to shut down the entire state on a whim with emergency measures. No other approvals needed - utter tyranny. Well, despite the opposition of over 120 000 brave Victorians, the bill was passed in December 2021, with the royal assent of the governor.

Victorian government's pandemic bill becomes law | https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-12-02/covid-victoria-pandemic-bill-passes-through-parliament/100668140

Here's the thing - read the WHO bill below and, more importantly, RECEIVE AND SHARE it. It is important to know that this contract (between companies) this paves the way for a phase II "viral outbreak" that will be just as fake as phase 1, the "next one that will get our attention" to paraphrase the late Bill Gates. If this goes through, the companies can wave international law at the police (false flag subsidiary) and the military (false flag subsidiary) and have them take action against us. If the personnel of those subsidiaries resist, troops of the corporate United Nations will be forced to act. See what is going on in Canada Corporation.

Any government that accepts this has committed treason against its people, has renounced any right to govern and must be removed immediately to ensure the safety and freedom of its people. In the Netherlands, the "government" has already said goodbye to the people. Thus, the STATE can no longer impose anything as a business on the Dutch people, only on the officials.

Attached is the insidious plan which is very reminiscent of a papal bull from the Middle Ages.....


Please share this article widely.






How about we come together and rid ourselves from the chains of evil? Why are we not all coming together to form our own militia and make a new Constitution and arrest all the traitors? We have the evidence against them. Why are we allowing this to continue? Too many talkers , no walkers. The evidence is clear. They have killed millions now. If we do not rise up to protect each other now then we have none to blame but ourselves.

SEE: https://www.thesovereignproject.live/





First published on BITCHUTE May 23rd, 2022.

channel image

Let’s Talk About It

Dr. Robert Malone: "They [WEF graduates] have been intentionally inserted [into government] in order to serve the interests of these 100 large corporations that fund this trade organization. That's what we're dealing with. Now, there's a word for that.... Mussolini is credited with the statement that fascism really should have been called corporatism. Fascism is the fusion of the interests of the state and the corporation."

Tune in to the Better Way Conference: https://betterwayconference.org/fox



First published on BITCHUTE May 22nd, 2022.

channel image


SOURCE: www.chd.tv



First published on BITCHUTE May 22nd, 2022.



The Kurgan Report

It's pretty easy when Davos (WEF) gets requests from Kenya to come exterminate their own people. Yes, give them all the hellcare they're asking for! You can't make this stuff up!

Source WEF:

These "Safari-Doctors" are nothing but the nationalized frontline for the unconsented pharmaceutical trials, which AMREF "doctors" have been conducting with money from BigParma (incl. the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundationm CDC et al.) for decades, abusing the mostly illiterate and uninformed people in the hinterland of Lamu, while enjoying the jet-set holidays on the world-famous Archipelago while it still was safe. For similar scams Bill Gates stands now accused for murder and cases against him have been accepted e.g. by the High Court of India and even the International Criminal Court (ICC). Critics to these unethical trials using Africans as guinea-pigs have found their death in Kenya, like the Canadian Dr. Frank Plummer or Dr. Stephen Karanja.





Ex-WHO Scientist David Bell: Will New Pandemic Treaty Cause Permanent Lockdowns?

By JAN JEKIELEK - 21. May 2021

With the World Health Organization (WHO) set to discuss a global pandemic treaty and far-reaching amendments to the 2005 International Health Regulations, we sit down with Dr. David Bell, an expert in global health and infectious disease.

“Even though it doesn’t directly change sovereignty, in effect, it does. It takes away the ability of the people of that country to make their own decisions,” says Dr. Bell.

VIDEO: Behind the Pandemic Treaty (registration required)

And more importantly, these proposals will create a bureaucracy “whose existence is dependent on pandemics,” says Dr. Bell. “They’ll have a very vested interest in finding outbreaks, declaring them potential pandemics, and then responding. It’s the way that they will survive.”

And it appears that they will make lockdowns “a permanent feature of pandemic responses,” Dr. Bell says.

Dr. Bell is a public health physician. He has previously worked at the World Health Organization, as programme head for malaria and febrile diseases at the Foundation for Innovative New Diagnostics (FIND) in Geneva, and as director of Global Health Technologies at the Intellectual Ventures Global Good Fund. He is now on the board of Pandemics, Data, and Analytics (PANDA), a group studying the world’s response to COVID-19.


American Thought Leaders





First published on BITCHUTE May 20th, 2022.  - slightly out of syncronization.

Tucker: There is no graver violation of medical ethics than this


World Health Organization pandemic treaty: A fresh push for vaccine passports, global surveillance, and more

The unelected international health agency is on the verge of being granted sweeping new powers.

By Tom Parker - 20. May 2022

Members of the World Health Organization (WHO) are days away from voting on an international pandemic treaty and amendments to the International Health Regulations (2005) which would give the unelected WHO greater control of national emergency healthcare decisions and new powers to push vaccine passports, global surveillance, and “global coordinated actions” that address “misinformation” whenever it declares a “health emergency.”

From May 22 to May 28, representatives of the WHO’s 194 member states (which represent 98% of all the countries in the world) will attend a World Health Assembly meeting in Geneva and vote on this treaty and the proposed amendments to the International Health Regulations (IHR). If passed, both the treaty and amendments to the IHR will be legally binding under international law.

The international pandemic treaty

The World Health Assembly (WHA), the decision-making body of the WHO, established an intergovernmental negotiating body (INB) to draft and negotiate a “global accord on pandemic prevention, preparedness and response” in December 2021. The WHA aims to have this treaty adopted under Article 19 of the WHO Constitution which gives the WHA the power to impose legally binding conventions or agreements on WHO member states if two-thirds of the WHA vote in favor of them.

While the WHO framed this as an international pandemic treaty, the latest draft of the treaty has since evolved to cover all “health emergencies.” Unlike the term “pandemic,” which is limited in scope and refers to the worldwide spread of infectious disease, the WHO’s definition of a “public health emergency of international concern” (PHEIC) is much broader and applies to all types of disease, regardless of whether they’re infectious:

“A PHEIC is defined in the IHR (2005) as, ‘an extraordinary event which is determined to constitute a public health risk to other States through the international spread of disease and to potentially require a coordinated international response.'”

The draft treaty places the “WHO at the centre” and solidifies the WHO as “the directing and coordinating authority on international health” and gives it sweeping, legally binding powers to force member states to adopt many of the censorship and surveillance tools that were imposed during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Some of the key areas of the draft treaty include:

International vaccine passports and contact tracing: Member states will be required to “support the development of standards for producing a digital version of the International Certificate of Vaccination and Prophylaxis” (the WHO’s official vaccine passport). The WHO will also “develop norms and standards” for “digital technology applications relevant to international travel” such as contact tracing apps and digital health forms.

Global surveillance: The WHO will conduct “coordinated global surveillance of public health threats” and member states will be required to build out their surveillance systems and work with “the WHO’s global systems for surveillance.” Non-state actors (which could include Big Tech companies) will also be required to work with governments, the WHO, and other international partners to leverage their “considerable data” to “create the strongest possible early warning and response systems.”

Addressing “misinformation,” “disinformation,” and “too much information:” The draft treaty pushes “national and global coordinated actions to address the misinformation, disinformation, and stigmatization, that undermine public health.” Member states will also be required to strengthen their approaches to “infodemic management” (a term coined by the WHO that refers to “too much information including false or misleading information in digital and physical environments during a disease outbreak.”) Additionally, non-state actors will be required to actors to work with governments to fight disinformation.

Funding: WHO members are set to collectively pay the WHO over $950 million in dues for 2022-2023 and already paid over $270 million in voluntary contributions for 2020-2021. And this draft treaty proposes that G7 countries (Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the UK, and the US) also pay $11 billion for the “Access to COVID-19 Tools Accelerator (ACT-A).” Additionally, it intends to create an”International Pandemic Financing Facility” that will extract long-term (10-15 year) contributions of $5-10 billion per year.

We obtained a copy of the draft treaty for you here.

If this draft treaty is approved at the May 22 to May 28 WHA meeting, the INB will hold a second meeting on August 1 to discuss progress on the draft. A progress report will then be delivered at the 76th WHA meeting in May 2023. The final treaty will then be presented for adoption at the 77th WHA meeting in May 2024.

Proposed amendments to the International Health Regulations (2005)

On January 18, the Biden administration quietly sent the WHO its extensive proposed amendments to the IHR. The details of these proposed amendments were only made public on April 12, almost three months after they were sent.

Under the current IHR, 196 countries are legally required under international law to build the capability to detect and report potential public health emergencies worldwide and respond promptly to a public health emergency of international concern (PHEIC) whenever it’s declared by the WHO.

These proposed amendments from the Biden administration give the WHO and its Director-General, Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, sweeping new powers to declare public health emergencies, even over the objection of member states, and implement global surveillance measures that require the mass collection of genetic sequence data.

Some of the key amendments that are being pushed by the Biden administration include:

Increased WHO powers to declare “potential” emergencies:Currently, the WHO can only declare a PHEIC when there’s an actual “public health risk to other States through the international spread of disease.” These proposed amendments allow it to declare a PHEIC when there’s a “potential or actual” PHEIC. This means there doesn’t have to be evidence of the international spread of disease, just the potential for it.

Increased WHO powers to declare health emergencies:Currently, the WHO has to follow the PHEIC criteria when declaring a public health emergency and health emergencies can only be declared by the Director-General. But under these proposed amendments, the WHO Director-General can issue an “intermediate public health alert” to any country in response to events that don’t meet the criteria of a PHEIC and a WHO “regional director” can declare a “public health emergency of regional concern” (PHERC).

Global surveillance and data sharing: The Biden administration’s proposed amendments empower the WHO to develop new “early warning criteria” for monitoring “national, regional, or global risk posed by an event of unknown causes or sources.” Additionally, these proposed amendments expand the scope of data sharing under the IHR and require members to hand over genetic sequence data to the WHO whenever they have an event that “may constitute a public health emergency of international concern.”

We obtained a copy of the proposed amendments to the IHR for you here.

If these amendments are approved at the May 22 to May 28 WHA meeting, nations have six months to reject them. After six months, they’ll enter into force and any rejection or reservation “shall have no effect.”

The WHO’s history of supporting surveillance and acting as an arbiter of truth

Not only could this treaty and the proposed amendments to the IHR empower the unelected WHO to push surveillance, vaccine passports, and global programs that target what it deems to be misinformation but this international health agency already gave the world a taste of how it exercises these powers during the COVID-19 pandemic. As COVID-19 spread, the WHO rigorously supported surveillance tech and was increasingly used as an arbiter of truth on Big Tech platforms, even though it got many things wrong.

YouTubeFacebookWikipedia, and others have partnered with the WHO to tackle misinformation or display labels with information from the WHO. YouTube even goes as far as removing videos that go against the WHO and has censored over 800,000 videos under this policy.

Despite having significant influence over how these platforms determine which posts to brand as misinformation, the WHO has got many things about COVID wrong and amplified misleading statements. For example, in an infamous January 14, 2020 tweet, the WHO stated that “preliminary investigations conducted by the Chinese authorities have found no clear evidence of human-to-human transmission” of the coronavirus.

The WHO has also praised China’s response to COVID which relies heavily on digital censorship and surveillance. Only recently did the WHO break this trend and criticize China’s zero-COVID policy. And when it did, these digital censorship systems were unsurprisingly used to censor the WHO’s statements on Chinese social platforms.

Another thing that the WHO heavily supported throughout the COVID-19 pandemic was vaccine passports. It pushed for them in December 2020 and it’s still pushing for the adoption of global vaccine passportsthis year.

The WHO’s undemocratic global governance system

The way the WHO gains its powers gives citizens almost no recourse. Instead of the response to national emergencies in democratic nations being the sole purview of elected officials who can vote on proposed measures that apply to their citizens and be held accountable at the ballot box by those citizens, WHO members vote on legally binding international treaties and agreements on their behalf via the WHA. If two-thirds of the WHA vote to adopt a treaty or agreement, it becomes legally binding under international law.

This global governance system has the support of both parties in most democratic countries. For example, during the 2022 Australian federal election campaign, both of the leading candidates expressed full support for the WHO’s expanded powers.

And the WHO Director-General has used the COVID-19 pandemic to push countries to further embrace the WHO’s global governance system by blasting countries that made their own decisions and claiming that their “‘me-first’ approaches…stymie the global solidarity needed to deal with a global threat.”

Countries that support the WHO’s expanded powers

Many countries have expressed support for the international pandemic treaty or the proposed amendments to the IHR.

The US supports both its proposed IHR amendments and the international pandemic treaty.

The treaty also has the support of the UKCanadaAustraliaNew Zealand, and the European Council (EC) (which represents 27 European Union (EU) member states). According to the EC, 110 countries supported the decision to launch negotiations on the treaty. If these 110 countries vote in favor of the treaty, it would give the WHA close to the two-thirds of the majority it needs to pass the treaty.

Opposition to the WHO’s expanded powers

While there’s significant member state support for these expanded WHO powers, local politicians, citizens, and rights groups are opposing this power grab.

In the US, Congresswoman Mary Miller (R-IL)Congressman Byron Donalds (R-FL), and Congressman Chris Smith (R-NJ), have opposed the Biden administration’s proposed amendments to the IHR.

Senator Rick Scott (R-Fla.), and Senator Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) have also opposed the Biden administration’s support of the international pandemic treaty.

In Australia, Senator Malcolm Roberts (One Nation), Senator Alex Antic (Liberal Party), and Senator Gerard Rennick have opposed the international pandemic treaty.

Several UK Members of Parliament (MPs), including the Conservative MPs Craig Mackinlay and Steve Baker, have also called for the government to provide clarity on the treaty.


UK Health Secretary Sajid Javid responded to Baker’s calls by stating that the UK government supports the treaty but “would not sign up to any instrument that compromises the UK’s sovereignty,” including “any instrument which compromises the UK’s ability to take domestic decisions on national restrictions or other measures.”

UK Government and Parliament petition urging the government to not sign any WHO pandemic treaty unless it’s approved via public referendum has received over 130,000 signatures which means Parliament will now consider it for a debate. The petition has also trended on the homepage of the UK Government and Parliament petition’s website.

Member of the European Parliament (MEP) Christine Anderson has opposed the treaty, branding it an “abolition of democracy by the global elites.”

Conservative Party of Canada (CPC) MP Leslyn Lewis has also pushed back against the treaty and launched a “Stop The Treaty” petition which calls for Canada to decline the treaty.

And rights group World Council for Health has launched a #StopTheWho Campaign which opposes both the treaty and proposed IHR amendments.

But for now, the fate of this WHO power grab rests on the outcome of the May 22 to May 28 WHA meeting.



First published on BITCHUTE May 19th, 2022.


Jim Fetzer

The great Alex Newman of the New American (.com) gives an incredibly good analysis of the new WHO Pandemic Treaty and why it's nothing but a NWO power grab - a destruction of national sovereignty using the Trojan Horse of pubic health. HIGHLY RECOMMENDED!

If you are not yet participating, watch this Video: https://www.bitchute.com/video/KBJnDolVgmTs/ Then go to our website to download the brochures and hand them out to everyone in your neighborhood and community. https://wakethehellup.org. The brochure PDFs are free.



First published on BITCHUTE May 19th, 2022. TLAV

Pandemic Treaty A Global Technocratic Coup


The Last American Vagabond

Pandemic Treaty: A Global Technocratic Coup

This is an excerpt of The Daily Wrap Up 05/05/22

Full Episodes And Links Can Be Seen Here:


Sign the Petition: Refuse and Reject the WHO Powergrab That Would Lead to Global Medical Martial Law

19. May 2022


Mr. Francisco Duque III
Secretary, Department of Health 
Chief delegate, World Health Assembly

Mr. Evan P. Garcia 
Ambassador, Permanent Representative, Geneva 
Deputy chief delegate, World Health Assembly

Dr. Mario C. Villaverde 
Undersecretary, Health Policy and Systems Development Team, Department of Health 
Delegate, World Health Assembly

CC: The Sovereign People of (... enter your country)  

CC: The WHO and the United Nations

The WHO is making a power grab over our health sovereignty by amending the International Health Regulations

Our country’s sovereignty is at risk. Unknown to many citizens of the world, the World Health Organization (WHO) is attempting to pass a Global Pandemic Treaty that would give it total control over the world’s health agenda. The beginning stages of this power grab are already underway, with the planned amendment of the International Health Regulations (IHR) during the May 22-28, 2022 World Health Assembly.

The IHR, which was adopted by 194 member states of the WHO in 2005 recognizes the sovereignty of nations and the need for localized action in cases of epidemics and other disease outbreaks. But that is about to change.

Key Issues to Understand

Under the proposed amendments unilateral authority will be given to the WHO Regional Directors to declare a Public Health Emergency of Regional Concern (PHERC), and the Director-General the authority to issue an “Immediate Public Health Alert” (IPHA).

At its core, the proposed amendments are directed toward the establishment of a centralized architecture for worldwide surveillance, reporting, and management. It imposes a top-down view of governance where the public will have no opportunity to provide input or criticisms concerning the amendments.

This, of course, is a direct violation of the basic tenets of democracy and can be compared to the separate new pandemic treaty. [Read this article to find out more about the WHO Global Pandemic Treaty, World Council for Health Sounds Alarms on WHO’s pandemic treaty initiative].

Moreover, such centralization is contrary to the fundamental pillars of community-based, locally-organized healthcare and antithetical to the principles of individual rights and autonomy upon which the WHO’s constitution is based.

Summary of Selected Proposed Amendments to the IHR[1]

The WHO intends to amend 13 IHR articles: 5, 6, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 15, 18, 48, 49, 53, 59

  1. Increased surveillance: Under Article 5, the WHO will develop early warning criteria that will allow it to establish a risk assessment for a member state, which means that it can use the type of modeling, simulation, and predictions that exaggerated the risk of Covid-19 over two years ago. Once the WHO creates its assessment, it will communicate it to inter-governmental organizations and other member states.
  2. 48-hour deadline: Under Articles 6, 10, 11, and 13, a member state is given 48 hours to respond to a WHO risk assessment and accept or reject on-site assistance. However, in practice, this timeline can be reduced to hours, forcing it to comply or face international disapproval led by the WHO and potentially unfriendly member states.
  3. Secret sources: Under Article 9, the WHO can rely on undisclosed sources for information leading it to declare a public health emergency. Those sources could include Big Pharma, WHO funders such as the Gates Foundation and the Gates-founded-and-funded GAVI Alliance, as well as others seeking to monopolize power.
  4. Weakened Sovereignty: Under Article 12, when the WHO receives undisclosed information concerning a purported public health threat in a member state, the Director-General may (not must) consult with the WHO Emergency Committee and the member state. However, s/he can unilaterally declare a potential or actual public health emergency of international concern. The Director General’s authority replaces national sovereign authority. This can later be used to enforce sanctions on nations.
  5. Rejecting the amendments: Under Article 59, after the amendments are adopted by the World Health Assembly, a member state has six months to reject them. This means November, this year. If the member state fails to act, it will be deemed to have accepted the amendments in full. Any rejection or reservation received by the Director-General after the expiry of that period shall have no force and effect.

Why We Must Take Action Together

Corruption at the WHO is well-known, and it runs deep [In the video 2015 documentary TrustWHO, former WHO Director-General Margaret Chan Fung Fu-Chun reveals how private money has compromised WHO’s Mission. Also, read WHO insider blows whistle on Gates and GAVI global health dictatorship]. The Journal of Integrative Medicine & Therapy calls the influence of private money on the WHO the “biggest threat to the world’s public health of our time.”

And while WHO’s own documents highlight the importance of “setting up, fine-tuning, improving, and institutionalizing new or existing participatory health governance mechanisms” to ensure equity and democracy in health coverage, information regarding the decision-making on how the IHR amendments will be processed remain inaccessible. In fact, without the research of the World Council for Health, we would not have information on who will be making decisions for our country.

By now, we already know that censorship, particularly in the case of health, is not only unethical but also dangerous. Any organization claiming that they are the only source of truth must not be trusted.

The WHO has moved away from an institution dedicated to health and has been reduced to a global drug peddler. This is an organization that is heavily conflicted and controlled by various industries. Its interests are no longer aligned with ours.

Our Call   - Sign the Petition -

We call on our government to critically re-evaluate the impact of handing over the country’s capacity to make sovereign decisions concerning the health of its citizens to unelected technocrats who are not accountable to the Filipino people.

We demand that our representatives to the World Health Assembly, Chief Delegate Mr. Francisco F. Duque III, Deputy Chief Delegate Mr. Evan P. Garcia, and Delegate Dr. Mario C. Villaverde reject the proposed amendments to the IHR. The DOH must consult with the Filipino people first on such matters that can deeply negate our Constitution and impact the democracy of our country.

We call on our fellow Filipinos to speak up against the WHO power grab and to demand the creation of alternative paradigms and models of health and healing which are based on authentic science and ethical guidance that upholds human dignity and respects human rights.

↩1 This section has been borrowed directly from https://worldcouncilforhealth.org/campaigns/stop-the-who/2022/05/stopthewho-oppose-international-health-regulation-amendments/73799/



First published on BITCHUTE May 18th, 2022. Re-Published on BITCHUTE May 22nd, 2022 for more people to see.

W.H.O planning on declaring a globally manufactured famine and health emergency in order to take over global sovereignty of 194 countries. Then they will issue everyone a programmable digital bio ID to ration the distribution of food turning our world into their stealth One World Government Dictatorship. Most people are not going to buy into another virus pandemic but will for a real famine.

Knowledge is Power

"If you give executive powers to a non-elected body, then you no longer have democracy; you no longer have accountability of elected officials, and who will the citizens hold accountable for taking away their rights?"

"You're taking away the rule by the people, for the people. That's what you take away with this. And people need to understand. If this treaty goes through, you can bury democracy altogether."

"You need to see the big picture, the goal of all of this. It's abolition of democracy, taking away your freedom, and it's no longer to having abide by the rule of law. That's what they're trying to do."

Christine's Telegram: t.me/ChristineAnderson

New https://lc.org/lcemail/elc2205-pet-whopg
New https://oneclickpolitics.global.ssl.fastly.net/messages/edit?promo_id=16808
New https://oneclickpolitics.global.ssl.fastly.net/messages/edit?promo_id=16788


UK Petition

Do not sign any WHO Pandemic Treaty unless it is approved via public referendum

We want the Government to commit to not signing any international treaty on pandemic prevention and preparedness established by the World Health Organization (WHO), unless this is approved through a public referendum.

More details

Sign this petition


Global WHO Treaty Is Real And Will Control You

May 17, 2022

The Jimmy Dore Show

Flying under the radar and unbeknownst to most, the World Health Organization is quietly pursuing an international treaty that would hand national sovereignty over healthcare decisions to the unaccountable global body, allowing the WHO to unilaterally declare pandemics and impose responses on individual nations. Not surprisingly, major WHO funder Bill Gates is fully supportive of the idea. Jimmy and American comedian Kurt Metzger discuss the possible consequences of this treaty and how the Microsoft founder would benefit from its signing.



By  - 16. May 2022

Palbulletin.com - SGT Report: WORLD HELL ORGANIZATION. The deep state seems extremely desperate and SGT and guests discuss the latest scandal

SGT Report: WORLD HELL ORGANIZATION. The deep state seems extremely desperate. Recently we posted a video featuring former U.S. representative for Minnesota’s 6th congressional district Michele Bachmann making some shocking statements. She says that the United States is about to vote on giving the World Health Organization extreme power over our country if a potential of a pandemic hits our nation. SGT Report, Zach Vorhies and additionally Sarah Westall discuss the World Health Organization’s attempted coup of the Republic of the United States of America.


Zach Vorhies and Sarah Westall join me to discuss the World Hell Organization's attempted coup of the Republic of the United States, the ongoing FREE SPEECH lawsuit against Google and You Tube and much more. Thanks for tuning in.




First published on BITCHUTE May 15th, 2022.



- through WHO, UNICEF, UNHCR, WorldBank, IMF and even UNESCO

- targeting especially Aboriginal and Indigenous peoples, First Nations, true Nation states and even white minorities.  


A Treasonous Set of WHO Amendments to Undermine the U.S. Constitution Before Midterm Elections

13. May 2022

Increased surveillance under Article Five would allow the WHO to do a risk assessment for a member state with a suspected health crisis. This means they can use a modeling simulation like the one that overestimated COVID-19 deaths to declare a public health emergency for that member state.

Once the WHO creates this risk assessment autocratically, they will communicate with other intergovernmental organizations and other member states to make a "go or no go" decision to issue a health mandate, which is under the complete control of Director-General Tedros. Under this statute, he has complete authority to permit the WHO Constitution to take precedence over national constitutions.

Dr. Robert Malone: "This is a play to circumvent not only the U.S. Constitution but to circumvent the ability of states to control medical care within their domains."


URGENT: Support HR419, No Taxpayer Funding for the WHO

Click to say NO to the WHO global health grab

Our Stand

  • In 2005, America agreed to the WHO International Health Regulations (IHR) only to the extent it would not affect state sovereignty.
  • The new proposed amendments to the existing International Health Regulations, along with a pending pandemic treaty being drafted right now, would vastly expand the authority and resources of the WHO.
  • The amendments and the treaty would threaten state sovereignty by triggering an expansion of legal power of the CDC to detain and examine Americans based solely on the statements of unelected WHO leaders.
  • The WHO and its members are immune to liability per international agreement, so the American Constitution will not protect Americans when it comes to the actions of the World Health Organization —no transparency, no accountability.
  • Basically, the WHO is on track to become a global health governance body, which would undermine the health and security of Americans and the U.S. itself.
  • International agreements are made by the president, but Congress must provide oversight and step in when the President goes too far.
  • It is not too late to stop the U.S. from signing on to a global health government: America must stop funneling U.S. tax dollars to the World Health Organization now! Click to ask your U.S. House Representative to Support HR419, which would defund the WHO and call your local U.S. Senator asking them to do their job to offer oversight so that the current administration does not destroy our U.S. constitution when it comes to public health. Our Congress needs to keep Biden in check with international relations!
  • Don’t forget to call your congressional legislators as well, we must amplify the message, so that they take action quickly. Are you reading this at night or on the weekend? You can still call and leave a message.
  • Want more information on these amendments? Please read below.

Your home address information is required from the legislative offices to ensure you are reaching out to your designated representatives. Your email and your phone number are used to establish connection with your designated representatives. Messages from non-constituents don't have the same impact on a legislator as messages from verified constituents, who can vote for that officeholder. We do not share your name and contact information with any third parties unless legally required to do so.


Did you know that a declaration of public health emergency by someone at the World Health Organization could be used by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to justify detaining and examining Americans suspected of being ill, even without the declaration of an emergency under U.S. law?

The CDC updated regulations for quarantine on the last day of the Obama administration (2017) to add a definition of public health emergency. The term was not defined in the law passed by Congress, even though the law authorized the Secretary of Health and Human Services to declare an emergency. It’s not unreasonable that a regulation defined a term yet to be determined under law. But what is deeply troubling is that the definition expanded to include declarations by unelected officials in an international organization.

In response to alarmed commenters in the Federal Register, the CDC defended itself: “We note first that the definition of public health emergency is not limited to those emergencies declared by the HHS Secretary.” Who else would declare a public health emergency in the United States other than the Secretary of HHS as designated by Congress? None other than the World Health Organization. This regulation (which has the force of law) creates the ability for a declaration by the WHO, that has not been made here in the U.S., to be the legal basis for action by the CDC and HHS.

This action of the WHO being a trigger to legal actions in the U.S. is dangerous to American citizens as well as the U.S. Constitution. And this is only the tip of the iceberg when it comes to what the U.S. is currently opening the door to with proposed and pending changes in international law.

America should stop funneling U.S. tax dollars to the World Health Organization!

The World Health Organization is dangerous to Americans and the rest of the globe and the U.S. should withdraw its financial support. The No Taxpayer Funding for the World Health Organization Act, HR419, in the House of Representatives right now would defund the World Health Organization. We need to call our lawmakers and get it passed!

International agreements are in a very fluid area of law. Custom, tradition, expectations and what is allowed to continue are key to whether agreements or actions on the global scale will be acceptable, or considered legal. In other words, things are legal until we say they’re not.

This is why it is so important that we speak up right now and let the administration know that we will not continue to stand by while anti-American agreements are being made with the WHO.

There has been criticism from around the globe about the mishandling of the COVID-19 pandemic by the WHO. There are claims that Taiwan tried to warn the WHO, but that warning, along with lack of cooperation from China about knowledge of the emergence of the virus, led to a global pandemic. There are a handful of U.S. lawmakers who know this and have proposed bills to defund the WHO, but the bills have not moved since they were introduced. Now, new information has come to light that the WHO is on the verge of being given moreauthority over Americans and more funding.

It has recently been uncovered that there are two ways WHO expansion is being orchestrated: through amendments to already existing legally binding International Health Regulations that could possibly go into effect by the end of 2022, and simultaneously by a new pandemic treaty that is already set to be voted on in May 2024, even though it is not yet drafted, which we told you about here. The amendments propose to expand authority and induce compliance. The treaty will have the teeth: non-compliance will likely trigger sanctions and/or withholding of financial resources. The two documents together will outsource our sovereign nation’s powers to respond to a global health threat, to an organization controlled by financial interests outside of our borders. (Investigative researcher James Roguski sounded an early alarm on this — check out his Substack!)

The aims of the treaty are vague and not yet drafted. The more immediate concern is the amendments proposed by the U.S. to the existing International Health Regulations.

The WHO has shown us time and time again it is not fit to manage global health. The coronavirus pandemic was not the first time the WHO bungled handling the spread of disease, or blew the actual threat greatly out of proportion. By their own admission, they mishandled the spread of Ebola. 

Some say the WHO needs more – more funds, more authority, and the ability to hold countries accountable when they are not compliant with WHO dictates. Does this make sense? The WHO is not a governing body, nor should it be. It should continue to be an agency that supports governments where they are.

We cannot allow this international organization to have its hand in global health any further. Billions of U.S. tax dollars have been funneled to the WHO in 2021 alone and that number will only grow if we allow it.

The WHO includes voting members who put their own people in jeopardy through dictatorial violence, and U.S. tax dollars are supporting that by voting on global health issues alongside people who would harm their own citizens.

If the U.S. agrees to strengthen the WHO through finances and more authority, the constitutional rights of Americans will be threatened and ultimately destroyed.

The response of the U.S. and the rest of the world to a declared COVID-19 pandemic showed us that we need to act fast to stop a global government that has been in the making for many years.

More details on the CDC quarantine regulations

The Public Health Service Act, passed by the U.S. Congress and signed into law by President Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1944, authorizes the CDC to detain and examine people they believe may spread a disease that would constitute a public health emergency. The term “public health emergency” was never defined in the law.

In 2017, the CDC updated their regulations regarding quarantine and isolation. The changes were finalized in the public register on the last day of Barack Obama’s presidency, January 19, 2017. Part of those changes included aligning the U.S. definition of public health emergency with that of the WHO.

“HHS/CDC considers it essential to define public health emergency because the existence of such an emergency is a necessary prerequisite to the apprehension and examination of individuals in the precommunicable stage of quarantinable communicable disease." (emphasis added)

The CDC is saying to detain and examine individuals they suspect may have a disease, they must have a legal trigger, and that trigger is their definition. Their definition allows them to bypass the U.S. legal system.

Interestingly, these definitions were added only to the section on regulating interstate and not foreign quarantine. Wouldn’t it be logical to include the WHO definition as a trigger for quarantine of foreign travelers, rather than those in the U.S. moving between states?

It’s also interesting to note that even though the CDC responds to public comment that it is essential to define public health emergency so they have a basis for action, those words are not used at all in the regulation where they are defined.

The CDC says “a disease threat anywhere is a disease threat everywhere. The CDC estimates that only about a third of countries in the world are able to detect, assess, and respond to a public health emergency.

What is the US relationship with the WHO?

The WHO is a specialized agency of the United Nations. The WHO has a constitution which authorizes the Health Assembly — the voting members – to adopt either “conventions or agreements, which shall come into force for each Member when accepted by it in accordance with its constitutional processes.” It can also adopt regulations aimed at preventing the international spread of disease. The adopted regulations are known as the International Health Regulations. Members of the WHO must give notice of their adoption, they may reject the regulations or amendments, or they may take reservations (make objections to part of, or an interpretation of, the regulations but still adopt the regulations as a whole).

The only other thing the WHO constitution authorizes the Health Assembly to do with respect to countries and territories around the globe is to make recommendations to members on matters of health. There’s no authorization in the constitution to impose sanctions or use force. (Some people believe this will be covered by the upcoming pandemic treaty.)

The WHO is immune from “every form of legal process” under a document agreed to by the United States through the United Nations called the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the Specialized Agencies. The document continues, “The property and assets of the specialized agencies, wherever located and by whomsoever held, shall be immune from search, requisition, confiscation, expropriation and any other form of interference, whether by executive, administrative, judicial or legislative action.” This means there is zero transparency or accountability.

Furthermore, the American Constitution will not protect Americans when it comes to the actions of the World Health Organization.

Moreover, the WHO is exempt from taxes, customs duties, and prohibitions, and may freely transfer their funds around the globe.

The earliest iterations of the IHR only addressed specific diseases. In 1951, the WHO adopted the International Sanitary Regulations, which consolidated many international agreements into one. The name of the document was changed to the International Health Regulations in 1969 and revised in 1983 to remove smallpox from the list of diseases covered because the WHO declared it eradicated.

In general, the IHR is designed to protect trade and travel while also attempting to stop international spread of disease. The regulations impose reporting requirements on Member States and require members to maintain certain “capacity” to handle public health emergencies. Capacity means the infrastructure to get health measures to the population and the funds to handle an emergency.

The IHR facilitates sharing of health data around the globe. According to the President of the European Union, “The International Health Regulations (IHR) are a very effective tool for reinforcing the connection between the surveillance systems and in establishing rapid reaction mechanisms.”

The 2005 amendments to the IHR introduced the concept of the “Public Health Emergency of International Concern,” which was not yet a legal concept in international law. Declarations of emergency, which trigger temporary changes in legal rights of citizens and powers of the executive, were traditionally American concepts. As one legal scholar noted, the IHR expansion “empowers WHO to determine, independently, whether an event constitutes a public health emergency of international concern…This proposal increases WHO’s power vis-à-vis its members because it authorizes WHO to make judgements about events transpiring in the territories of its members.The proposed amendments by the U.S. will expand this even further.

 Importantly, the U.S. accepted the amendments to the IHR with the following reservation:

“The Government of the United States of America reserves the right to assume obligations under these Regulations in a manner consistent with its fundamental principles of federalism. With respect to obligations concerning the development, strengthening, and maintenance of the core capacity requirements set forth in Annex 1, these Regulations shall be implemented by the Federal Government or the state governments, as appropriate and in accordance with our Constitution, to the extent that the implementation of these obligations comes under the legal jurisdiction of the Federal Government. To the extent that such obligations come under the legal jurisdiction of the state governments, the Federal Government shall bring such obligations with a favorable recommendation to the notice of the appropriate state authorities.” 

Summary of Proposed Amendments to IHR

Here’s a quick list of the major points of the proposed U.S. amendments:

  1. The WHO could act without verification from a Member State where there is a report of a public health concern.
  2. The amendments would add new possible declarations of a Public Health Emergency of Regional Concern. The PHERC could be declared by an (unelected) regional director of the WHO.
  3. In addition, the amendments allow the Director General to issue a new, “intermediate public health alert,” if the Emergency Committee that considers whether there is a PHEIC does not agree there’s an emergency.
  4. New Compliance Committee to review national structures for things like surveillance, infrastructure, cooperation, and implementation of medical response.
  5. The amount of time to opt-out of the adopted regulations would change from 18 to 6 months; the time from adoption to implementation would change from 2 years to 6 months..

You can help stop the WHO global governance. Take action today!

With the WHO, agreements are legal only if we allow them to be! Grassroots activism works! This is why they are trying to silence our voices with censorship and cancellation. Use your voice now to tell the President we will not stand by while he destroys America with global agreements that threaten US sovereignty and the health of the American people. Click to send the letters to your lawmakers letting them know what’s going on, urging them to act to take away American tax dollars from the WHO, and to check the power of the president on his actions with the WHO. If we allow our  money and sovereignty to be taken away now, we will not be able to say no later.







First published on BITCHUTE May 15th, 2022.


The Global Pandemic Treaty & the W.H.O. and What you need to Know

By  - 

The Global Pandemic Treaty & the W.H.O. and What you need to Know. James Corbett talks about the global pandemic treaty led by the W.H.O.

The Global Pandemic Treaty & the W.H.O. and What you need to Know. James Corbett of The Corbett Report talks about how the World Health Organization is currently working on creating a global pandemic treaty on pandemic preparedness. Are there seriously individuals in the world who don’t believe that the Deep State isn’t trying to move the planet into a New World Order?

The World Health Organization has already begun drafting a global pandemic treaty on pandemic preparedness. What form will it take? What teeth will it have? How will it further the globalists in cementing the biosecurity grid into place? James breaks it down in today's episode of The Corbett Report podcast. SHOW NOTES AND MP3: https://www.corbettreport.com/globaltreaty/


The W.H.O’s ‘Pandemic Treaty’ will end Freedom as we know it and hand the ‘keys to power’ to its largest private funder, Mr Bill Gates

By Tessa Lena - 08. May 2022

The following is about the proposed new World Health Organization pandemic treaty that can potentially eradicate the national sovereignty as we know it. It is also about the banality of evil and the impact of our individual daily choices on future generations and the history of the world.


What’s the Deal With the World Health Organization Pandemic Treaty?

In December 2021, the World Health Organization announced their plan to develop a new pandemic treaty “strengthening” international cooperation during future pandemics. What does it mean in practical terms? The language of the announcement was vague, so we need to interpret it in context. Here’s from the horse’s mouth: (December 2021):

“In a consensus decision aimed at protecting the world from future infectious diseases crises, the World Health Assembly today agreed to kickstart a global process to draft and negotiate a convention, agreement or other international instrument under the Constitution of the World Health Organization to strengthen pandemic prevention, preparedness and response.

Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, WHO Director-General, said the decision by the World Health Assembly was historic in nature, vital in its mission, and represented a once-in-a-generation opportunity to strengthen the global health architecture to protect and promote the well-being of all people.”

More from the horse’s mouth (April 2022):

“In a consensus decision aimed at protecting the world from future infectious diseases crises, in December 2021 the World Health Assembly agreed to kickstart a global process by establishing an intergovernmental negotiating body (INB) to draft and negotiate a convention, agreement or other international instrument under the Constitution of the World Health Organization to strengthen pandemic prevention, preparedness and response …

As part of this historic decision, the World Health Assembly requested the Director-General to hold public hearings, in line with standard WHO practice, to support the work of the INB. Per the INB’s timeline, the first round of those hearings has been set for 12-13 April 2022, with a second round set for 16-17 June. This information on the modalities for the first round of hearings is also expected to apply to the second round as well.”

Lies, Lies, Lies

Let’s start with the issue of distorted language. In an honest world with no dark agendas, no Fourth Industrial Revolution, and no upside-down language, their treaty could sound like a beautiful idea. Like, what can possibly be wrong with benevolently guided, meaningful international cooperation during a time of crisis? A beautiful fairy tale, no?

Sadly, not a fairy tale at all but more like a horror movie because we are living in a world of shameless lying and upside-down language — and the words no longer mean what they are supposed to mean.

To deceive us, the bureaucrats are trying to create a feeling in our minds that they getting together to protect us, like a benevolent council of wise indigenous grandmothers — while in reality, it’s more like they are aiming to trap us, being a gang of greedy and ruthless wolves in sheep’s clothes that they are.

“Health” doesn’t mean actual health but rather the promotion of any product or interference that is desirable to the shareholders and the CEOs of pharmaceutical and technology companies.

Just like Fauci recently equated himself with science, the corporate mouthpieces equate whatever they want to sell or impose on us with “health,” and then say they are protecting our “health” while in fact, they are merely protecting their pockets.

We are living in a world where our leaders (translation: our fellow human being who have no intrinsic upper hand on us but who have gotten ahead on the basis of being extremely power-hungry) are taking full advantage of the fact that in order to do destructive things with the least resistance, then can call them “useful things that are good for the people,” and get away with it for some time. That’s the trick!

And besides, if the past two years are any indication, “international cooperation” means in practice that all WEF-affiliated leaders go ahead and throw their people under the bus in unison, to the sound of uniform messaging in the media.

“International cooperation” means that all countries do the same destructive thing, resulting in unnecessary human death and suffering, a disruption of social structures and the world economy, all to clear the way for their favorite “new normal.” That’s some international cooperation!

Public Hearings

Given the self-proclaimed historical nature of this treaty, the World Health Organization dedicated the whole two days to the first round of the public hearings (and they didn’t advertise it much). The first round took place in April 2022. The second round will be held in June of this year.

Dr. Tess Lawrie wrote a very moving article about the WHO pandemic treaty and the video comment submission by the World Council for Health.

Here are Dr. Lawrie’s comments on the proposed treaty, after she had a chance to participate in a call with the WHO (as well as UNAIDS, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, the UN Environment Programme, and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations) as a part of the submission process.

• Calls for ‘human security centric’ not just ‘health security centric’. Apparently, they don’t just want to control your body but every aspect of your life.

• Fast approval of emergency diagnostics – and unified regulatory registration for diagnostics. In other words, more control.

• Equitable access to vaccines and ‘a mechanism to hold violators accountable’. So if a nation concludes a vaccine is not safe – as has happened in this last pandemic – the WHO would have the power to override that and jab their population anyway.

• Vaccines should be developed within 100 days. This is absurd. Safe drugs take ten years to be adequately tested and declared safe. There are more than 3.5 million people on the WHO database who have been harmed by Covid vaccines and this may be the tip of the iceberg.

I agree that these bullet points sound like it’s about control, so no surprise that it comes with more censorship!

More Censorship

While the public comments were open, the #StopTheTreaty campaign by the World Council for Health, where Dr. Tess Lawrie is on the Steering Committee, was the talk of the town in the “freedom community.” But if you searched for it on Google, you wouldn’t know anything about it! Here’s what I wrote just a few hours after the comment period ended:

“If you search for the phrase “WHO pandemic treaty” on DuckDuckGo, #StopTheTreaty comes up among the top results. On Google though no such thing exists. If you actually search for the phrase “stop the treaty,” on DuckDuckGo #StoopTheTreaty is the number one result. Google, on the other hand, tells you everything you ever wanted to know about the 1919 Treaty of Versailles!)”

For the World Health Organization, It’s Not the First Rodeo

It is curious that it’s not the first time that the WHO is trying serve the pharmaceutical industry and various industry shareholders using “pandemic preparedness” as a legal tool.

For example, in 2009, they announced an influenza pandemic (H1N1) that activated vaccine purchasing agreements and forced participating countries to large batches of doses that they didn’t need. The rushed release of a subpar medical product led to a “narcolepsy fiasco,” among other things.

According to the report by the Council of Europe’s Parliamentary Assembly:

“The Parliamentary Assembly is alarmed about the way in which the H1N1 influenza pandemic has been handled, not only by the World Health Organization (WHO), but also by the competent health authorities at the level of the European Union and at national level.

It is particularly troubled by some of the consequences of decisions taken and advice given leading to distortion of priorities of public health services across Europe, waste of large sums of public money, and also unjustified scares and fears about health risks faced by the European public at large.

The Assembly notes that grave shortcomings have been identified regarding the transparency of decision-making processes relating to the pandemic which have generated concerns about the possible influence of the pharmaceutical industry on some of the major decisions relating to the pandemic.

The Assembly fears that this lack of transparency and accountability will result in a plummet in confidence in the advice given by major public health institutions. This may prove disastrous in the case of the next disease of pandemic scope – which may turn out to be much more severe than the H1N1 pandemic …

The rapporteur considers that some of the outcomes of the pandemic, as illustrated in this report, have been dramatic: distortion of priorities of public health services all over Europe, waste of huge sums of public money, provocation of unjustified fear amongst Europeans, creation of health risks through vaccines and medications which might not have been sufficiently tested before being authorised in fast-track procedures, are all examples of these outcomes.”

Even Forbes wrote in 2010 that “from the beginning the World Health Organization’s actions have ranged from the dubious to the flagrantly incompetent.” A poignant quote:

“The WHO’s dubious decisions demonstrate that its officials are too rigid or too incompetent (or both) to make needed adjustments in the pandemic warning system — deficiencies we have come to expect from an organization that is scientifically challenged, self-important and unaccountable.

The WHO may be able to perform and report worldwide surveillance — i.e., count numbers of cases and fatalities — but its policy role should be drastically limited.

U.N. bureaucrats pose as authorities on all manner of products, public policy and human activities, from desertification and biodiversity to the regulation of chemicals, uses of the ocean and the testing of genetically engineered plants.

However, the U.N.’s regulatory policies, requirements and standards often defy scientific consensus and common sense. Its officials are no friends of commerce, public health or environmental protection. The result is a more precarious, more dangerous and less resilient world. When it comes to pestilence, the U.N. may be the greatest plague of all.”

What’s a Pandemic, Anyway?

It’s noteworthy that just before the WHO declared a pandemic, they changed the definition of the word. From the British Medical Journal:

“WHO for years had defined pandemics as outbreaks causing “enormous numbers of deaths and illness” but in early May 2009 it removed this phrase — describing a measure of severity — from the definition.

Key scientists advising the World Health Organization on planning for an influenza pandemic had done paid work for pharmaceutical firms that stood to gain from the guidance they were preparing. These conflicts of interest have never been publicly disclosed by WHO, and WHO has dismissed inquiries into its handling of the A/H1N1 pandemic as ‘conspiracy theories.’

A joint investigation by the BMJ and the Bureau of Investigative Journalism has uncovered evidence that raises troubling questions about how WHO managed conflicts of interest among the scientists who advised its pandemic planning, and about the transparency of the science underlying its advice to governments.

Was it appropriate for WHO to take advice from experts who had declarable financial and research ties with pharmaceutical companies producing antivirals and influenza vaccines?”

Boasting About the Tricks

In 2019, Marc Van Ranst, Belgian Flu Commissioner, gave a talk at the ESWI/Chatham House Influenza Pandemic Preparedness Stakeholders Conference. At around 13 minutes in, he boasted about how he “misused the fact that that the top, top football … soccer clubs in Belgium inappropriately and against all agreements vaccinated … they made their soccer players priority people.” The audience responded with laughter.

“Trust WHO”

In order to understand the corruption inside the WHO, one may want to watch a pre-pandemic documentary called “Trust WHO,” produced by Lilian Franck. Among other things, it looks into various conflicts of interest as well as the examples of how the organization has been influenced by the tobacco industry and the nuclear industry.

The United Nations Has Been Hijacked

Last year, I interviewed Mary Otto-Chang, a former United Nations employee, who talked about the hijacking of the UN and the 2019 agreement between the UN and the World Economic Forum that the Fourth Industrial Revolution as a cooperation goal.

So what we are looking at is using the authority of the UN as supposedly a just and wonderful international organization that protects the people for the commercial and philosophical goals of the richest people of the world. What an intricate lie!

Banality of Evil

Most horrible things that people do to each other don’t come out of nowhere. There is usually a “warm-up” period during which evil actions are trivialized, and people’s senses are “re-trained.”

Sometimes, using upside-down language, people’s senses are re-trained to the extent of swapping out the meanings completely, where war becomes peace, and murder becomes compassion. It takes time to dehumanize entire demographics — based on a particular ethnicity, or religion, or health status, or any other arbitrary affiliation.

For example, in early Nazi Germany, there was a campaign to kill mentally disabled children, (and also do inhumane experiments on them), and the parents were often told that their children were being taken away for better care. The parents didn’t know that their children were being murdered — but the nurses who killed the disabled knew exactly what they were doing, but perhaps some of them believed that they were performing acts of mercy!

There is a powerful, must-see documentary about it, called, “The Killing Nurses of the Third Reich.” I wrote about it last year:

“The only thing that was needed for the nurses to make the transition to the horror zone was to decide that the poor suffering imbeciles had no agency. As soon as in their minds, the nurses stripped the disabled children and the mentally ill adults of their human agency and turned them into creatures akin to suffering pets, killing them became virtuous. The nurses held the disabled babies lovingly, and then killed them.”

Our Choices Matter

Something that I have been thinking about a lot over the course of my life is how our choices have long-term consequences: for ourselves, for the people around us, and even for the history of the world!

For example, to come back to the topic of pandemic preparedness, much of what happened in the U.S. in 2020 was made possible thanks to Bush’s 2005 decision to redo the pandemic preparedness plan. Who paid any attention to it back in 2005? Who could imagine that it would have such a profound impact on our lives? Nobody, probably, except for the people who planned it. And yet here we are …

Or another example. When people accept censorship against the groups that they don’t relate to, they often don’t think that the censors are coming for them next — and yet more often than not, that is exactly what happens.

Or sometimes, a choice that we make at a very young age comes back to us years later, and whatever we tried to escape stares us straight in the face, and we have to deal with it anyway.

Which is to say, courage and trying to do the right thing are not only praise-worthy, they are also very practical, especially during challenging times.

There is most certainly no formula, and no universal prescription for a time like this but it’s important to see the scammers in high chairs for who they are (including when they talk about pandemic preparedness treaties “for our own good”), and to see through them without being afraid. When we stand together, with love in our hearts, we are strong.

To find more of Tessa Lena’s work, be sure to check out her bio, Tessa Fights Robots.  


Stop the WHO Global Pandemic Treaty

10. May 2022

The following article was written by Dr. Joseph Mercola and was republished on The Defender last May 10, 2022.

In this article, Mercola dives deeper into the connection between the WHO Pandemic Treaty and The Great Reset. He says, “Make no mistake, the WHO [World Health Organization] pandemic treaty is a direct attack on the sovereignty of its member states, as well as a direct attack on your bodily autonomy”.

The article gives us an overview of how the WHO handled previous pandemics and what we can expect if they are allowed to monopolize health information. He then connects Bill Gates’ new brainchild, a pandemic response team he calls the GERM [see Bill Gates Proposes the Creation of a Global Pandemic Protection Team].

Mercola goes on to explain how under WHO rules, vaccine passports are a given, and how this could pave the way for programmable central bank digital currencies [Also read Bank of England propose to use digital money to put “restrictions on people’s freedom” and Is Ukraine’s Digital ID System a Blue Print for WEF’s Great Reset?].

Editor’s Note: Mercola offers us several options we can take to stop this treaty. Here are the options he offered:

  • Block the amendments to the International Health Regulations (IHR) at the May 22-28, 2022 World Health Assembly by flooding your country’s delegates with opposition. [We will be launching a signature campaign about this, please stay tuned].
  • Make plans to send your thoughts to the WHO on June 16 and 17, 2022. We will send more information about this once it becomes available.


WHO Pandemic Treaty: What It Is, Why It Matters and How to Stop It

By Joseph Mercola - 10. May 2022

The World Health Organization is drafting a global pandemic treaty on pandemic preparedness that would grant the agency absolute and unprecedented power over global biosecurity. The last days to comment on the draft are June 16 and June 17.

WHO pandemic treaty feature

Story at a glance:

  • The World Health Organization has started drafting a global pandemic treaty on pandemic preparedness that would grant it absolute power over global biosecurity, such as the power to implement digital identities/vaccine passports, mandatory vaccinations, travel restrictions, standardized medical care and more.
  • The WHO is not qualified to make global health decisions. As just one example, the WHO didn’t publicly admit SARS-CoV-2 was airborne until the end of December 2021, yet scientists knew the virus was airborne within weeks of the pandemic being declared. The WHO also ignored early advice about airborne transmission.
  • More importantly, a one-size-fits-all approach to pandemic response simply does not work, because pandemic threats are not identical in all parts of the world. Even people in the same region do not have identical risk and may not need or benefit from identical treatment.
  • The WHO will accept two more days of public comment on the treaty, June 16 and 17, so prepare your statements now. The World Health Assembly will also vote on amendments to the International Health Regulations May 22-28, which may also strip away more individual rights and liberties.

The globalists that brought us the wildly exaggerated COVID pandemic in an effort to cement a biosecurity grid into place are now hard at work on the next phase of this New World Order.

The World Health Organization has started drafting a global pandemic treaty on pandemic preparedness that would grant it absolute power over global biosecurity, such as the power to implement digital identities/vaccine passports, mandatory vaccinations, travel restrictions, standardized medical care and more.

In “The Corbett Report”, above, independent journalist James Corbett reviews what this treaty is, how it will change the global landscape and strip you of some of your most basic rights and freedoms.

Make no mistake, the WHO pandemic treaty is a direct attack on the sovereignty of its member states, as well as a direct attack on your bodily autonomy.

A back door to global governance

As noted by anti-extremism activist Maajid Nawaz in an April 28 Twitter post, the “WHO pandemic treaty serves as a backdoor to global empire.”

COVID-19, while potentially deadly to certain vulnerable groups, simply isn’t a valid justification for handing over more power to the WHO, especially in light of its many inexplicable “mistakes” in this and previous pandemics.

As just one example, the WHO didn’t publicly admit SARS-CoV-2 was airborne until the end of December 2021, yet scientists knew the virus was airborne within weeks of the pandemic being declared. The WHO also ignored early advice about airborne transmission.

So, it seems clear that the effort to now hand over more power to the WHO is about something other than them being the most qualified to make health decisions that benefit and protect everyone.

1 Million Copies Sold — ‘The Real Anthony Fauci’ — The book that launched a movement. BUY TODAY!

It seems far more likely that the WHO is being installed as a de facto governing body for the global Deep State. Through the WHO, under the guise of biosecurity, the globalist cabal who seek to own everything and control everyone will then be able to implement their wishes across the whole world in one fell swoop.

With this treaty in place, all member nations will be subject to the WHO’s dictates.

If the WHO says every person on the planet needs to have a vaccine passport and digital identity to ensure vaccination compliance, then that’s what every country will be forced to implement, even if the people have rejected such plans using local democratic processes.

As noted by Corbett, these negotiations are already well underway, and the treaty is expected to be fully implemented in 2024 — that is, unless the people of the world wake up to what’s happening and beat back this monstrosity.

WHO likely seeking to monopolize health care worldwide

Under the guise of a global pandemic, the WHO, the World Economic Forum and all its installed leaders in government and private business were able to roll out a plan that had already been decades in the making. The pandemic was a perfect cover.

In the name of keeping everyone “safe” from infection, the globalists justified unprecedented attacks on democracy, civil liberties and personal freedoms, including the right to choose your own medical treatment.

Now, the WHO is gearing up to make its pandemic leadership permanent, extend it into the healthcare systems of every nation and eventually implement a universal or “socialist-like” healthcare system as part of The Great Reset.

While this is not currently being discussed, there’s every reason to suspect that this is part of the plan. WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus has previously stated that his “central priority” as director-general of the WHO is to push the world toward universal health coverage.

And, considering the WHO changed its definition of “pandemic” to “a worldwide epidemic of a disease,” without the original specificity of severe illness that causes high morbidity, just about anything could be made to fit the pandemic criterion.

The whole premise behind this pandemic treaty is that “shared threat requires shared response.” But a given threat is almost never equally shared across regions.

Take COVID-19 for example. Not only is the risk of COVID not the same for people in New York City and the outback of Australia, it’s not even the same for all the people in those areas, as COVID is highly dependent on age and underlying health conditions.

The WHO insists that the remedy is the same for everyone everywhere, yet the risks vary widely from nation to nation, region to region, person to person.

They intend to eliminate individualized medicine and provide blanket rulings for how a given threat is to be addressed. Without a doubt, this can only result in needless suffering, not to mention the loss of individual freedom.

How the WHO has wielded previous pandemic instruments

To give us an idea of how the WHO might end up misusing this new proposed international “instrument” on pandemic prevention, preparedness and response, we can look at the International Health Regulations (IHR), which the U.S. signed on to in 2005.

The IHR is what empowered the WHO to declare a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC). This is a special legal category that allows the WHO to initiate certain contracts and procedures, including drug and vaccine contracts.

As noted by Corbett, the IHR allows the unelected director-general of the WHO to simply declare a PHEIC and, suddenly, all member states have to dance to his tune. It basically grants the WHO dictatorial powers over health policy.

PHEICs have included the phony H1N1 swine flu pandemic in 2009, the inconsequential Zika outbreak in 2016, the overhyped Ebola outbreak in 2019, and, of course, the massively exaggerated COVID pandemic in 2020.

All of these PHEICs were poorly handled and the WHO was criticized as inept and corrupt in their wake.

So, to summarize, through the IHR, the WHO has already been significantly empowered to dictate global health policy with regard to pandemics, and they used that power to bamboozle the nations of the world into spending billions of dollars on countermeasures, especially drugs and vaccines, that didn’t work very well.

In that sense, the WHO is really just another wealth-transfer instrument. The WHO’s Big Pharma collaborators make billions on the taxpayers’ dime, while the people of the world are left to suffer the consequences of fast-tracked vaccines.

Its handling of the COVID pandemic in particular has been unprecedentedly bad, as they were behind the withholding of early treatment with safe medicines worldwide.

As noted by ivermectin advocate Dr. Tess Lawrie, the WHO has also claimed the mRNA shots as safe as conventional vaccines, which is nowhere near the truth. Most all available data prove they are the most dangerous drugs ever created. Why would anyone expect the WHO to become less corrupt if given even more power and control?

IHR amendments may also restrict rights and freedoms

Now, the IHR overrode and superseded the U.S. Constitution from the start, but in January, the U.S. also submitted regulatory amendments that will give the WHO even more power to restrict your rights and freedoms.

May 22-28, the World Health Assembly will gather and vote on these amendments to the IHR and, if passed, they will be enacted into international law.

These submitted amendments are in addition to the WHO pandemic treaty currently under discussion. As reported by Health Policy Watch February 23:

“Washington wants to fast track a series of nitty-gritty, but far-reaching changes in the existing International Health Regulations that govern WHO and member state emergency alert and response — for consideration at this year’s World Health Assembly, 22-28 May.

“The U.S. proposal for major IHR rule changes, obtained by Health Policy Watch, has been a topic of discussion in a series of closed-door meetings of WHO member states, which are considering ways to reform the existing IHR, as well as advancing a whole new WHO convention or other international instrument on pandemic prevention and response …

“The U.S. is expected to lead a parallel track of tightly-paced ‘informal’ member state negotiations to reach consensus on an IHR reform resolution for approval at this year’s 75th WHA [World Health Assembly] …”

The “new WHO convention or other international instrument” mentioned here refers to the WHO treaty currently under discussion.

An intergovernmental negotiating body (INB) was established as a subdivision of the World Health Assembly in Dec. 2021, for the purpose of drafting and negotiating this new pandemic treaty. And, as mentioned, this INB has begun that work.

However, as noted by Corbett, this is only the second time in the WHO’s history that an INB has been established. The first one was the INB of the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, 22 years ago. So, this is not a well-established process, and it’s hard to predict how it will play out.

Bill Gates builds GERM team for the WHO

Another clue about what the WHO intends to do with more power comes from its primary funder, Bill Gates. Gates recently announced he’s building a pandemic response team for the WHO, which he would like to be called the “Global Epidemic Response & Mobilization” or GERM Team.

This team will be made up of thousands of disease experts under WHO’s purview, and will monitor nations and “decide when they need to suspend civil liberties, force populations to wear masks and close borders,” The Counter Signal reports.

Of course, Gates is also the largest funder of the WHO (when you combine the donations from both his foundation and GAVI, the Vaccine Alliance). This and other relationships speak volumes about the corruption still ruling the WHO.

At the end of the day, Gates is basically paying the WHO to dictate to the world what they must do to make Gates a ton of money. As noted by The Counter Signal:

“Gates’ announcement of the GERM team coincides with the World Health Organization’s drafting of a global pandemic treaty … In the future, the pandemic treaty will not only ensure that member states abide by International Health Regulations but will also put the WHO in the driver’s seat, so to speak. Member states, including the US and Canada, will take their orders directly from the organization. As Conservative MP Leslyn Lewis explains:

“‘The treaty includes 190 countries and would be legally binding. The treaty defines and classifies what is considered a pandemic, and this could consist of broad classifications, including an increase in cancers, heart conditions, strokes, etc. If a pandemic is declared, the WHO takes over the global health management of the pandemic.

“Of even more concern, if this treaty is enshrined, the WHO would be in full control over what gets called a pandemic. They could dictate how our doctors can respond, which drugs can and can’t be used, or which vaccines are approved. We would end up with a one-size-fits-all approach for the entire world … A one-size-fits-all response to a health crisis doesn’t even work across Canada, let alone the entire globe’ …

“It isn’t unreasonable to assume that the GERM team, as a new branch of the WHO, would oversee making sure member states comply with the pandemic treaty after the draft is finalized and member states sign on.

“The next question, then, is how the WHO and Bill Gates would be able to monitor every individual in every country to determine whether enough people are sick to justify locking a region down.

“To this end, the WHO has contracted German-based Deutsche Telekom subsidiary T-Systems to develop a global vaccine passport system, with plans to link every person on the planet to a QR code digital ID … Thus, there will be one pandemic treaty, one GERM team, one global vaccine passport and one World Health Organization to monitor every person on the planet.”

Under WHO control, vaccine passports are a given

Indeed, while countries around the world have scrubbed their COVID measures and backed away from vaccine passports, the WHO is still moving ahead with a global vaccine passport program.

So, if the WHO is given the authority to dictate biosecurity rules for the world, you can bet they’ll insist on vaccine passports with built-in digital identity and readiness for a centralized programmable central bank digital currency.

As reported by the Western Standard:

“The WHO fully intends to provide support to its 194 member states to facilitate the implementation of the digital verification technology for countries’ national and regional verification of vaccine status.

“‘COVID-19 affects everyone. Countries will therefore only emerge from the pandemic together. Vaccination certificates that are tamper-proof and digitally verifiable build trust. WHO is therefore supporting member states in building national and regional trust networks and verification technology.

“The WHO’s gateway service also serves as a bridge between regional systems. It can also be used as part of future vaccination campaigns and home-based records,’ said Garrett Mehl, unit head of the WHO’s Department of Digital Health and Innovation, on Deutsche Telekom’s website.”

Can we stop the international pandemic treaty?

The question now is, can we stop this “international pandemic instrument” that the WHO is seeking? With short notice, the WHO announced it would accept public comment on the treatyfor a total of five days.

The World Council for Health was among the few that acted quickly enough to submit a comment in opposition to the treaty. Lawrie delivered the World Council for Health’s submission.

In an April 26 update on Substack, Lawrie wrote:

“Despite the lack of notice, many grassroots organizations did what they could to spread the word and the World Council for Health’s #stopthetreaty campaign reached an astonishing 415 million people. Many of you made written submissions expressing your concerns. So many of you in fact, that I hear the WHO’s website crashed on the last day.”

It's Time to Follow the Science. Join our Campaign!

One person who missed the deadline was professor Robert Clancy, a leading clinical immunologist in Canada. He sent the comment he would have wanted to submit to Lawrie, who included it in her post:

“The proposal to take control of pandemics at a central WHO level is untenable and threatens a global society. I am in receipt of the World Council for Health response, and the superbly summarized view by Dr. Tess Lawrie. These concerns reflect the ‘across the board’ view of most Australian doctors …

“The failure to understand the restrictions of systemic vaccination for mucosal infection and the dangers of accumulated suppression that follows mindless booster programs, and failure to interrogate the massive databases regarding adverse events of genetic vaccines are but two of the serious mistakes perpetuated by the WHO …

“It is foolhardy to even suggest that a ‘one size fits all’ response to a pandemic crisis across geographic zones characterized by hugely different parameters, could possibly be covered by a central bureaucratic process — the need for local decision making is of prime importance.

“The rule of science and the rule of the doctor-patient relationship must determine any response to a pandemic, and current experience where the rule of the narrative has so distorted disease outcomes — supported by the WHO — must make very clear the foolishness of rewarding incompetence and corruption with even greater powers.

“I write this as the most experienced Clinical Immunologist in Australia, and a leading research scientist in Mucosal Immunology with a focus on ‘host-parasite relationship.’ Professor Robert Clancy AM FRS(N) MB BS BSc(Med) PhD DSc FRACP FRCP(A) FRCP(C)”

Make your voice heard in June

While many, like Clancy, didn’t get a chance to participate, the WHO has announced it will allow for two more days of public comment, June 16 and 17. As noted by Lawrie:

“Please also be aware of the proposed amendments to the International Health Regulations, to be voted on this May at the World Health Assembly.

“Like the pandemic treaty, this is another move to seize greater powers and override the sovereign laws of individual nations. Some say this is more significant than the pandemic treaty: if voted in, it means the loss of our sovereignty from this November. James Roguski has written extensively about this on his Substack.

“There seems to be a concerted effort by the WHO and its controllers to attack our sovereignty from all angles. It is important we make it clear that we do not recognize the WHO as an authority over us and that we will not tolerate this abuse of power.

“We are sovereign and will not be bound by the undertakings of corrupt officials who pretend to act on our behalf when signing away the inherent rights of the World’s People. They do not act for us and we will not be bound.”

I encourage you to make plans to have your voice heard June 16 and 17. Unfortunately, the WHO has not yet released any submission details. Your best bet right now is to sign up for the World Council for Health newsletter. The last time, they issued links and instructions on how to submit your comment, and are sure to do the same for the June submission window.

To block the IHR amendments at the May 2022 World Health Assembly, we need to flood our respective delegations with opposition. A list of U.S. delegates can be found in Roguski’s Substack article, “Speaking Truth to Power.”

For contact information for other nations’ delegates, I would suggest contacting the regional office and asking for a list (see “Regions” in the blue section at the bottom of the World Health Assembly webpage). It’s also possible that the World Council for Health will publish guidance on it, so be sure to sign up for their newsletter.

Originally published by Mercola.

The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of Children's Health Defense.


Dr. Joseph Mercola's avatar

Dr. Joseph Mercola is the founder of Mercola.com.




First published on BITCHUTE May 6th, 2022. BACKUP ON RUMBLE

THE PLAN shows the official agenda of the World Health Organization to have ten years of ongoing pandemics, from 2020 to 2030. This is revealed by a WHO virologist, Marion Koopmans. You will also see shocking evidence that the first pandemic was planned and abundantly announced right before it happened. Make sure to watch, and share this everywhere.

More information, and to see all the documents in THE PLAN, go to: https://www.stopworldcontrol.com/proof

channel image




Biden Handing Over U.S. Sovereignty to WHO

By Peter Breggin MD and Ginger Ross Breggin - 04. May 2022

Please take seriously the severity of this existential threat to everything free people hold dear. Do everything in your power to pass this report on to others and to find ways to communicate with and to influence people to stop empowering WHO to take over our national sovereignty and freedom. 

WHO nerve center 

On May 22-28, 2022, ultimate control over America’s healthcare system, and hence its national sovereignty, will be delivered for a vote to the World Health Organization’s governing legislative body, the World Health Assembly (WHA).

This threat is contained in new amendments to WHO’s International Health Regulations, proposed by the Biden administration, that are scheduled as “Provisional agenda item 16.2” at the upcoming conference on May 22-28, 2022.1

These amendments will empower WHO’s Director-General to declare health emergencies or crises in any nation and to do so unilaterally and against the opposition of the target nation. The Director-General will be able to declare these health crises based merely on his personal opinion or consideration that there is a potential or possible threat to other nations.  

If passed, the Biden Administration’s proposed amendments will, by their very existence and their intention, drastically compromise the independence and the sovereignty of the United States. The same threat looms over all the U.N.’s 193 member nations, all of whom belong to WHO and represent 99.44% of the world population.2

These regulations are a “binding instrument of international law entered into force on 15 June 2007.”3 U.N. members states can be required by law to obey or acquiesce to them.

How It Became Official 

On January 18, 2022, with no public awareness, officials from the Biden Administration sent the World Health Organization these extensive amendments to strengthen WHO’s ability to unilaterally intervene into the affairs of nations merely suspected of having a “health emergency” of possible concern to other nations.4 The U.S. amendments cross out a critical existing restriction in the regulations: “WHO shall consult with and attempt to obtain verification from the State Party in whose territory the event is allegedly occurring…”5 By eliminating that, and other clauses (see below), all the shackles will be removed from the Director-General of WHO, enabling him to declare health emergencies at will. 

The amendments would give WHO the right to take important steps to collaborate with other nations and other organizations worldwide to deal with any nation’s alleged health crisis, even against its stated wishes. The power to declare health emergencies is a potential tool to shame, intimidate, and dominate nations. It can be used to justify ostracism and economic or financial actions against the targeted nation by other nations aligned with WHO or who wish to harm and control the accused nation.

Although sponsored by an American administration, WHO’s most significant use of this arbitrary authority to declare national emergencies will be used against the United States if our government ever again dares to take anti-globalist stands as it did under the Trump administration. 

How Much Time Do We Have to Stop the Amendments? 

The contents of the proposed amendments were not made public until April 12, 2022,6 leaving little time to protest before the scheduled vote. As noted, the amendments are scheduled and almost certainly will be enacted May 22-28, 2022. 

The existing WHO regulations then provide for an 18-month grace period during which a nation may withdraw its “yes” vote for amendments, but the current proposed amendments would reduce that opportunity to six months. If the U.S.-sponsored amendments are passed, a majority of the nations could, in the next six months, change their individual votes and reverse the approval. But this is a much more difficult proposition than stopping the whole process now. 

We must act now to prevent the passage of the amendments, including putting sufficient pressure on the United States to withdraw them from consideration. If that fails, and the amendments are approved at the May meeting of the WHO governing body, we must then make the effort to influence a majority of the nations to change their votes to “no.” 

Without Organized Resistance, the Amendments Will Definitely Pass

On January 26, 2022, the same U. S. Permanent Mission to the United Nations in Geneva sent a one-page memo to WHO confirming that the amendments had been sent. It also contained a brief report by the same Loyce Pace, Assistant Secretary for Global Affairs HHS.7 Most importantly, the memo listed all the nations backing the U.S. amendments. The size and power of the group guarantee that the amendments will be passed if unopposed by significant outside pressure. 

Here are the 20 nations, plus the European Union, listed by the U.S. as supporting the amendments:

Albania, Australia, Canada, Colombia, Costa Rica, Dominican Republic, Guatemala, India, Jamaica, Japan, Monaco, Montenegro, Norway, Peru, Republic of Korea, Switzerland, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United States of America, Uruguay, Member States of the European Union (EU).

The European Union, a globalist organization, has been among the biggest backers of increasing WHO’s global power. The EU includes the following 27 Western nations: 

Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Republic of Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, and Sweden.

That’s a total of 47 nations supporting the U.S.-authored amendments. All of them have endorsed empowering WHO to declare a possible or potential health emergency or crisis within any nation despite its objections and refusal to cooperate. To repeat, these amendments will pass unless American citizens, as well as citizens worldwide, mount a very strong opposition.

World Health Organization 

Defining “Health” and WHO’s Domain of Authority

According to the Foreward to WHO’s regulations, there is no specific limit to what constitutes a health emergency, and it is certainly not limited to pandemics. WHO’s domain includes:8

a scope not limited to any specific disease or manner of transmission, but covering “illness or medical condition, irrespective of origin or source, that presents or could present significant harm to humans… 

WHO’s powerful reach is also defined by the number of other organizations it is authorized to cooperate with once it has declared an emergency or health crisis: “other competent intergovernmental organizations or international bodies with which WHO is expected to cooperate and coordinate its activities, as appropriate, include the following: United Nations, International Labor Organization, Food and Agriculture Organization, International Atomic Energy Agency, International Civil Aviation Organization, International Maritime Organization, International Committee of the Red Cross, International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, International Air Transport Association, International Shipping Federation, and Office International des Epizooties.”9

The Preamble to the WHO Constitution (separate from the International Health Regulations) summarizes WHO’s concept of what is included under its mandate of improving, guiding, and organizing world health:10

WHO remains firmly committed to the principles set out in the preamble to the Constitution

  • Health is a state of complete physical, mental and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity.
  • The enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of health is one of the fundamental rights of every human being without distinction of race, religion, political belief, economic or social condition.
  • The health of all peoples is fundamental to the attainment of peace and security and is dependent on the fullest cooperation of individuals and States.
  • The achievement of any State in the promotion and protection of health is of value to all.
  • Unequal development in different countries in the promotion of health and control of diseases, especially communicable diseases, is a common danger.
  • Healthy development of the child is of basic importance; the ability to live harmoniously in a changing total environment is essential to such development.
  • The extension to all peoples of the benefits of medical, psychological, and related knowledge is essential to the fullest attainment of health.
  • Informed opinion and active co-operation on the part of the public are of the utmost importance in the improvement of the health of the people.
  • Governments have a responsibility for the health of their peoples which can be fulfilled only by the provision of adequate health and social measures.

Given WHO’s assessment of the breadth of its health concerns, mandates, and goals — almost any kind of problematic situation that affects the people of a nation could be considered a health problem. Indeed, under WHO’s approach, it would be difficult to find any important national issue that was not a potential health problem. With the imminent passage of the American-sponsored amendments to the International Health Regulations, WHO will have free reign for using these expansive definitions of health to call a crisis over anything it wishes in any nation it desires. 

WHO’s Sweeping New Powers 

The sweeping new powers will be invested in the Director-General of WHO to act on his own. The Director-General is Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, commonly known as Tedros. Tedros, the first non-physician director-general of WHO, is an extremely controversial Marxist activist and politician from Ethiopia installed by the Chinese Communist Party. Despite the fact that his role as the cover-up apologist for the Chinese Communists at the onset of COVID-19, this “dear friend of Anthony Fauci” was re-elected without opposition in 2022 to a second five-year term.11 His original election in 2017, followed by his re-election without opposition in 2022, is an ominous display of Chinese Communist influence over WHO,12which makes further empowering the U.N. agency extremely dangerous.

Under the new regulations, WHO will not be required to consult with the identified nation beforehand to “verify” the event before taking action. This requirement is stricken by the U.S. amendments (Article 9.1). The amendments require a response in 24 hours from the identified nation, or WHO will identify it as “rejection” and act independently (Article 10.3). If the identified nation “does not accept the offer of collaboration within 48 hours, WHO shall … immediately share with the other State Parties the information available to it…” (Article 10.4). 

Indicating the breadth of WHO’s scope of power, the agency will be given the right to involve multiple other U.N. agencies, including those related to food and agriculture, animal health, environmental programs, “or other relevant entities” (Article 6.1). This, too will not require the permission of the identified nation. The targeted nation is also required to send to WHO any relevant genetic sequence data. And as we have seen, the Foreward to these regulations presents a much larger array of potential collaborating agencies.

Under the proposed regulations, WHO itself would develop and update “early warning criteria for assessing and progressively updating the national, regional, or global risk posed by an event of unknown causes or sources…” (New article 5). Notice that the health-endangering event may be so nonspecific as to have “unknown causes or sources.” Thus, Tedros and any future Director-Generals of WHO will be given unrestricted powers to define and then implement their interventions. 

The proposed regulations, in combination with existing ones, allow action to be taken by WHO, “If the Director-General considers, based on an assessment under these Regulations, that a potential or actual public health emergency of international concern is occurring…” (Article 12.2). That is, Tedros need only “consider” that a “potential or actual” risk is occurring. 

Global Supporters of WHO

WHO is not a global powerhouse by itself. Early in the pandemic, it acted as a front group for the international exploiters of humanity, whom we describe in our new book COVID-19 and the Global Predators. In particular, it made certain the Chinese Communists could hide the seriousness of the pandemic while spreading to the world on passenger airplanes from its major cities, including Wuhan itself. We have already noted and documented that the Chinese Communist Party and Xi Jinping have enormous influence over WHO.  

Even after Donald Trump slashed the U.S. contribution to WHO in February 2020, the U.S. remained the largest donor to WHO. On March 31, 2020, the U.S. contribution was $115.8 million, followed by China at approximately one-half that amount, followed by Japan, Germany, the United Kingdom, France, Italy, and Brazil.13

Then in early July 2020, Trump notified Congress and the U.N. that it was formally withdrawing from WHO. Bill Gates quickly announced he was increasing his contribution from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation to $250 million.14

After the Communist Chinese Party, Bill Gates probably has the most influence over WHO. In our book, COVID-19 and the Global Predators: We Are the Prey, we describe in Chapter 15 how Bill Gates, Klaus Schwab, and the giant medical foundation Wellcome Trust created CEPI — The Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations. This became the center of global predatory activities in preparation for the anticipated pandemic. It brought together key U.S. agencies, including the FDA, CDC, NIAID, NIH, the U.N., WHO, giant pharmaceutical companies, banks, and multiple other sources of wealth and power. 

In 2017, or earlier, CEPI made an agreement called a memorandum of understanding with WHO. CEPI then presented a PowerPoint presentation to WHO in July 2017, in effect dividing up the world between the Gates’ CEPI and WHO in the coming pandemic. Gates would handle the financing, supply, and distribution of the vaccines, and WHO would control and monitor the scientific and medical community. Among the stipulations of the PowerPoint, which the Gates-created foundation presented, was that the pharmaceutical companies would be reimbursed for all direct and indirect costs by the government for developing their high-speed manufacturing platforms.

WHO was highly effective during COVID-19 in implementing the aims of the global predators, led by the groups around Bill Gates and the Chinese Communist Party, in their organized assault and terror campaign against the Western democracies. This purposely resulted in the vast weakening of any potentially anti-globalist, freedom-oriented, patriotic nations, including the U.S., Great Britain, Australia, Canada, and others. That success may explain why the global predators chose WHO to now deliver a major and potentially lethal death blow to the sovereignty of the world’s nations.  

Europeans Call for Additional Further Increases in WHO’s Power  

There is a growing debate over further increasing the power of WHO to punish uncooperative or dissident nations.15 Some “have sounded the alarm about giving the WHO too much power at the expense of national sovereignty.” Some have voiced concern about China’s influence on WHO: “Not only has it increased its payment to the WHO in recent years, but it also enjoys a special relationship with its leader.” 

Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, director general of the World Health Organization, with President Xi Jinping. 

But others are calling for increasing WHO’s ability to sanction non-compliant nations. Echoing recent plans publicized by the Biden administration, some nations are calling for “national and global coordinated actions to address the misinformation, disinformation, and stigmatization that undermine public health.” German Health Minister Jens Spahn has proposed “that countries that fail to follow up on their commitments to the WHO should face sanctions.” Tedros has said, “maybe exploring the sanctions may be important.”

Treaties with WHO: Another Enormous Threat to Sovereignty — With a Longer Timeline

Before we learned about this current and more immediate threat to U.S. sovereignty, we were focusing on WHO’s plans to begin making treaties with individual nations to take over their general healthcare structures, making WHO the guiding and central authority for the world’s healthcare. In addition to many radio, TV, and public appearances giving the details about this threat, we have written a column on America Out Loud, dated February 18, 2022, “Tedros Introduces Globalist Plan to Take Over World’s Health Systems.”16

If implemented, the treaties become an even greater threat than the amendments to WHO’s International Health Regulations, but we have more time to deal with the treaties than with the amendments.

We need to face that these American-sponsored amendments are a great step toward America voluntarily forfeiting its sovereignty to the New World Order or Great Reset — and that without strong opposition, the ratification of the amendments is a foregone conclusion. Our success or failure in stopping the ratification of these amendments will establish the pattern for the future, including WHO’s ongoing effort to make legally-binding treaties that rob nations of their sovereignty.  

Why Would the U.S. Government Surrender Its Sovereignty

Why would the U.S. give away its sovereignty to other nations? In reality, that process has been going on at least since President Wilson’s failed attempt to get the Senate to approve U.S. membership in the League of Nations. It has escalated since World War II, often under the umbrella and authority of the United Nations, with which many global predators are enamored and use as the cover story for their predations. As documented in our book, COVID-19 and the Global Predators, Bill Gates and Klaus Schwab have both worked out cooperative agreements for their versions of the New World Order with the U.N. 

President Biden has recently told the Business Round Table — the presidents and CEOs of the wealthiest 200 corporations in America — that they must lead the growing New World Order:17

“And now is a time when things are shifting. We’re going to — there’s going to be a new world order out there, and we’ve got to lead it. And we’ve got to unite the rest of the free world in doing it.”

John Kerry, the President’s climate czar, had announced that when Americans elected Biden, they voted for the Great Reset, whether they knew it or not.18

Discussion and Conclusions

The planning for these devastating U.S.-sponsored amendments to WHO’s International Health Regulations has been so stealthy that it might have escaped attention except for the efforts of one individual, James Roguski. He was the first to recognize this threat, and on March 31, 2022, he published a report headlined, “WAKE UP and Smell the Burning of Our Constitution.”19 He also helped us by reviewing the material and this report with us. Fortunately, our courageous medical colleague Robert Yoho originally alerted us to Roguski’s work and its importance.20

We are facing an imminent threat to U.S. sovereignty by these legally-binding amendments to the WHO’s International Health Regulations that — without stiff opposition — will almost certainly be passed during the upcoming meeting of WHO’s governing body, the World Health Assembly, May 22-28, 2022. As noted earlier, there is a six-month grace period following approval of amendments during which countries may withdraw their approval, but a majority doing so seems highly unlikely. Right now, we must focus on preventing the WHA from approving the amendments.   

We must immediately mount an international campaign, especially focused within America, to force the U.S. to withdraw these amendments before they come to a vote. Otherwise, America and the nations of the world will take a giant stride toward forfeiting national sovereignty to WHO and the U.N. In reality; they will be forfeiting their sovereign powers to the global predators who rule the U.N. and WHO, including the Chinese Communist Party and supporters of the Great Reset, like Bill Gates, Klaus Schwab, and giant foundations and corporations — all of whom benefit from weakening or destroying the sovereignty of the Western nations. Western civilization, and mainly the United States, is all that stands in strong opposition to the globalist takeover of the world, called the New World Order or the Great Reset. 

Take Action

Please act now to take a stand against a WHO global power grab and to stop the obliteration of health privacy. Click the button to sign our petition opposing a Pandemic Treaty. Once we reach 100,000 signatures, the petition will be sent to lawmakers and the President of the United States.



/WHO/U.S.-proposed-amendments-to-WHO-International-Health-Regulations-with-cover-materials_1.pdf Top lefthand corner provides the date and proposal ID.


International Health Regulations (2005) (who. int) These are the original WHO International Health Regulations before the proposed amendments by the U.S.A. The Overview on this page (before going to the link to the Regulations) in the second sentence contains the statement about their legally binding nature. 

/WHO/U.S.-proposed-amendments-to-WHO-International-Health-Regulations-with-cover-materials_1.pdf  The document dated January 18, 2022, is found on pages 3-4, From the “Permanent Mission of the United States of America to the United Nations and Other International Organizations in Geneva.” It lists the Amendments as an enclosure, along with a “Letter from HHS Assistant Secretary Loyce Pace.”

/WHO/U.S.-proposed-amendments-to-WHO-International-Health-Regulations-with-cover-materials_1.pdf See p. 6 of the amendments, Article 9 (1.).

/WHO/U.S.-proposed-amendments-to-WHO-International-Health-Regulations-with-cover-materials_1.pdf The date is in the upper righthand corner. 

https://geneva.usmission.gov/2022/01/26/strengthening-who-preparedness-for-and-response-to-health-emergencies/ This is a One-page statement from U.S. to WHO about amendments. Lists supporting nations and DHHS support.

International Health Regulations (2005) (who.int). Download the Regulations and go to the Foreward.

International Health Regulations (2005) (who.int). International Health Regulations, Section on Revision Of The International Health Regulations, pp. 3-4.

10 https://www.who.int/about/governance/constitution 

11 https://www.foxnews.com/world/world-health-organization-chief-tedros-unopposed-second-term. Even The New York Times had serious reservations about Tedros’ initial nomination, citing allegations of his covering up epidemics in his home country of Ethiopia: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/13/health/candidate-who-director-general-ethiopia-cholera-outbreaks.html

12 https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/04/02/china-coronavirus-who-health-soft-power/

13 https://www.statista.com/chart/21372/assessed-contributions-to-the-world-health-organization/

14 https://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2020-05-29/gates-foundation-donations-to-who-nearly-match-those-from-us-government

15 Swab, Petr. Proposal to Sanction Countries Disobeying WHO Pandemic Response Rules is Concerning: Author. The Epoch Times, April 14, Updated April 19, 2022. Swab’s report is the source for all the quotes in this section. is https://www.theepochtimes.com/proposal-of-sanctions-on-countries-disobeying-who-pandemic-response-rules-concerning-author_4405091.html 

16 https://www.americaoutloud.com/tedros-introduces-globalist-plan-to-take-over-worlds-health-systems/

17 https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2022/03/21/remarks-by-president-biden-before-business-roundtables-ceo-quarterly-meeting/

18 https://redstate.com/heartlandinstitute/2020/11/30/john-kerry-great-reset-will-happen-n286949 We have also checked a video of Kerry’s remarks.

19 https://jamesroguski.substack.com/p/wake-up-and-smell-the-burning-of?s=r

20 https://www.buzzsprout.com/1718994/10489421-the-world-health-organization-who-is-trying-to-take-over-the-world


Peter Breggin MD and Ginger Ross Breggin

 have been married and working together for almost 40 years. Peter is known as "The Conscience of Psychiatry" for his many decades of successful reform work in mental health. He has published more than 20 medical and popular books, several coedited or coauthored by Ginger, including the huge bestseller Talking Back to Prozac. He has written more than 70 peer-reviewed publications and testified in court more than 100 times with many cases related to drug company and medical malfeasance. The couple has now turned their attention to the misuse of science and the suppression of freedoms surrounding COVID-19 and its origins by those they identify as "global predators."  

Peter and Ginger have written the bestselling new book, COVID-19 and the Global Predators: We are the Prey with introductions by top COVID-19 scientists and physicians, Peter A. McCullough MD, MPH; Elizabeth Lee Vliet MD; and Vladimir "Zev" Zelenko. The book is available everywhere.



First published on BITCHUTE March 23rd, 2022.

channel image


In this clip, Dr. Sucharit Bhakdi discusses the WHO’s plans for a “Pandemic Treaty” and what are the jabbed to do after they’ve taken the bio-weapon. The full panel discussion with Catherine Austin Fitts, Polly Tommey and Carolyn Betts can be found below. 



First published on BITCHUTE March 16th, 2022.

channel image


Any one who thinks this is over! Needs to realise this is only the beginning. Once all countries assign their sovereignty over to the World Hell Organisation it's over!


I will not be vaccinated
I will not be tested
I will not be masked


PROLOGUE: The political stooges - placed by the globalist forces from the UN and WEF into positions of governmental power also in Vanuatu - are trying in cohorts with the World Health Organization (WHO) to remove the constitutional rights of the people because of a new high in numbers of sick people filed under COVID-19. They are again trying to force all people to get vaccinated. But islanders are resilient people as we saw earlier when the people on Iceland drove the criminal banksters and politicians into the sea. Likewise we believe that also in Vanuatu the brave people, who can't be scared by the WHO, though it’s head Tedros Adhanom is a wanted person for war-crimes and crimes against humanity committed earlier in Ethiopia, will drive the WHO and their counterparts into the ocean - to never return.




(To Be Released Immediately)

16th March 2022


“Vanuatu must not entertain any treaty to expand the powers of the WHO in Vanuatu in times of Pandemic in the near future,” said Andrew Napuat, MP for Tanna Constituency.

Vanuatu MPs have become aware of efforts of the World Council for Health (WCH) a coalition of scientists, doctors, lawyers, and civil society advocacy organizations opposing the World Health Organization (WHO)’s moves to implement a power grab in the form of a global pandemic agreement.

“The WHO must pack up and get out of Vanuatu now” said John Salong, MP for Ambrym Constituency.

The Port Vila Minister’s Fraternal, a network of Independent Church Pastors in Port Vila, Vanuatu have called on their congregation members to pray against Principalities, Powers, Spiritual Wickedness in High Places and Rulers of Darkness from challenging the sovereignty of Vanuatu.

The people of Vanuatu have suffered terribly from policy advice of the WHO in relation to COVID19 since March 2020. The service sector which was 40% of the economy has practically collapsed. Around 50% of the population has been vaccinated with COVID19 vaccines. Many of the vaccinated have had adverse reactions to the vaccines and turned to the pastors to pray for their respective healings.

People of Vanuatu have come to realize that Vanuatu has been captive to the WHO from March 2020 until March 2022. On the advice of the WHO adverse reactions to the COVID19 vaccines have not been recorded nor published by the Ministry of Health.

“We have had a stomach full and do not need to continue being bound by the WHO rules”, said Job Andy, MP for Paama Constituency.

The MPs and Pastors recall the independence speech of the first PM, late Dr Walter H Lini who said in 1980 that

“We are entitled to hope that we shall be able to exercise freedom of choice in other words Independence in the ways which we provide public services and change our society as we develop. At the same time, we have to face the fact that there may be external pressures on us both from large companies and foreign governments to conform to their ideas rather than our own where the two may differ.”


John Salong, MP (Ambrym Constituency) and Andrew Napuat, MP (Tanna Constituency)

Andrew Napuat, MP
John Salong, MP 


Parliament House, Republic of Vanuatu

PMB 9052

Port Vila



16th March 2022





First published on BITCHUTE March 4th, 2022.

SHOW NOTES AND MP3: https://www.corbettreport.com/nwnw20220303/

This week on the New World Next Week: fake news stories emerge from Ukraine; British steel shows the way toward absolute zero; and it's COVID Mission Accomplished! as the global pandemic treaty draws near.



BRUTAL: 5 awful facts about WHO’s Tedros Adhanom

Premiered Apr 4, 2020

Rebel News

“WHO” the hell is Dr. Tedros Adhanom, the Director General of the World Health Organization, anyway?


World Economic Forum and UN Sign Strategic Partnership Framework

Published 13 Jun 2019

  • The UN-Forum Partnership was signed in a meeting held at United Nations headquarters between UN Secretary-General António Guterres and World Economic Founder and Executive Chairman Klaus Schwab to accelerate the implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development
  • The partnership identifies six areas of focus – financing the 2030 Agenda, climate change, health, digital cooperation, gender equality and empowerment of women, education and skills – to strengthen and broaden their combined impact by building on existing and new collaborations
  • The full partnership framework can be found here

New York, USA, 13 June 2019 – The World Economic Forum and the United Nations signed today a Strategic Partnership Framework outlining areas of cooperation to deepen institutional engagement and jointly accelerate the implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. The framework was drafted based on a mapping of existing collaboration between the two institutions and will enable a more strategic and coordinated approach towards delivering impact.

The UN-Forum Partnership was signed in a meeting held at United Nations headquarters between UN Secretary-General António Guterres and World Economic Founder and Executive Chairman Klaus Schwab.

Meeting the Sustainable Development Goals is essential for the future of humanity. The World Economic Forum is committed to supporting this effort, and working with the United Nations to build a more prosperous and equitable future,” said Klaus Schwab, World Economic Founder and Executive Chairman.

“The new Strategic Partnership Framework between the United Nations and the World Economic Forum has great potential to advance our efforts on key global challenges and opportunities, from climate change, health and education to gender equality, digital cooperation and financing for sustainable development. Rooted in UN norms and values, the Framework underscores the invaluable role of the private sector in this work – and points the way toward action to generate shared prosperity on a healthy planet while leaving no one behind,” said António

Guterres, UN Secretary-General.

Signing of the Memorandum of Understanding between the United Nations and the World Economic Forum on the Strategic Partnership Framework for the 2030 Agenda

The Strategic Partnership Framework will focus on the following areas:

  • Financing the 2030 Agenda  Mobilize systems and accelerate finance flows toward the 2030 Agenda and the UN Sustainable Development Goals, taking forward solutions to increase long-term SDG investments.
  • Climate change  Achieve clear, measurable and public commitments from the private sector to reach carbon neutrality by 2050, help create public-private platforms in critical high-emitting sectors, and scale up the services required to adapt to the impacts of climate change.
  • Health – Support countries achieve good health and well-being for all, within the context of the 2030 Agenda, focusing on key emerging global health threats that require stronger multistakeholder partnership and action.
  • Digital cooperation – Meet the needs of the Fourth Industrial Revolution while seeking to advance global analysis, dialogue and standards for digital governance and digital inclusiveness.
  • Gender equality and the empowerment of women – Foster multistakeholder partnerships and coalitions for full participation and equal opportunities of women at all levels of decision-making and for productive participation of women in the labour force, and promote equal pay for work of equal value across sectors and occupations as well as within them.
  • Education and skills – Promote public-private partnerships to address global reskilling and lifelong learning for the future requirements for work, and empower youth with competencies for life and decent work.

The leadership across the United Nations will engage in and utilize the different platforms provided by the World Economic Forum to advance impact in the above areas. Both institutions will annually review the partnership to further streamline collaboration, take stock of results and identify additional areas to jointly invest efforts in.

Alem Tedeneke, Media Manager, Tel.: +1 646 204 9191, Email: 

Notes to Editors
Read the Forum Agenda at http://wef.ch/agenda
Become a fan of the Forum on Facebook at http://wef.ch/facebook
Watch Forum videos at http://wef.ch/video
Follow the Forum on Twitter via @wef and @davos
Follow the Forum on Instagram at http://wef.ch/instagram
Follow the Forum on LinkedIn at http://wef.ch/linkedin
Learn about the Forum’s impact on http://wef.ch/impact
Subscribe to Forum news releases at http://wef.ch/news