News

The World Health Organization is still pushing the proposed “pandemic treaty” as well as the highly controversial amendments to the International Health Regulations (IHR).

Countless analysts have cautioned that the ratification of either, let alone both, would devastate or even completely strip away sovereignty from nation-states and place public health decision-making power in the hands of the WHO and its director-general.

According to author and researcher James Roguski, these two proposals would morph the WHO from an advisory organization to a defacto world government whose edicts would become legally binding.

They also would greatly expand the scope and reach of the IHR, institute a system of global health certificates and “passports” and allow the WHO to mandate medical examinations, quarantine, and treatment.

 

What is the WHO CA+?

In December 2021, it was decided at a special session of the World Health Assembly to establish an Intergovernmental Negotiating Body (“INB”), representing all regions of the world, to draft and negotiate “a WHO convention, agreement, or other international instrument on pandemic prevention, preparedness, and response.”

Soon after, the term “Pandemic Treaty” began floating in and out of public awareness but was never clearly defined by the press or the institutions advocating for it.

The usual suspects in the mainstream media seemed more concerned with convincing the public that their suspicions were invalid than effectively explaining what the so-called treaty actually proposed.

Outlets like SkyNews Australia at least tried to warn of the potential dangers

So, what exactly is the Pandemic Treaty?

For starters, the Pandemic Treaty isn’t really a treaty at all, but rather what’s called a “Convention agreement”, and as such isn’t subject to the typical requirements for ratification, namely having to pass a vote in the U.S. Senate.

Additionally, the proper name for this “convention agreement” is “The WHO CA+”.

On May 22nd, 2023, the “Drafting Group of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Body to Draft and Negotiate a WHO Convention, Agreement, or Other International Instrument on Pandemic Prevention, Preparedness, and Response” released an unedited draft titled “The Bureau’s Text of the WHO CA+”. (#)

The Bureau’s Text revealed the true goals of the WHO and its funders, goals that are so unabashedly dystopian in scope that most people would assume they were satyrical.

The proposed treaty establishes a “Conference of the Parties” or C.O.P., which would essentially become a new bureaucracy beyond Congressional or Parliamentary oversight and control. (# Article 20)

This group would include:

 “Representatives of the United Nations and its specialized agencies” as well as “representatives of any body or organization, whether national or international, governmental or nongovernmental, private sector or public sector, which is qualified in matters covered by the WHO CA+”

These individuals would be empowered to add protocols to the agreement without the consent of the public. (# Article 34)

Despite the convoluted jargon used in the Bureau’s text, this transfer of power from We the People to the unaccountable, unelected, and mostly invisible members of the so-called “Conference of the Parties” has been described as a veiled but direct attack on the sovereignty of nations.

In a nutshell, the pandemic treaty, or WHO CA+, will grant the WHO power over far more than ‘pandemic’ responses. Under the new convention, the WHO’s dictates will supersede and overrule any and all local, state, and federal laws (whether or not they will be able to enforce those dictates has yet to be seen.)

Some of the proposals in the pandemic treaty include:

• Setting up an international supply network overseen by the WHO
• Funding the WHO’s health emergency structures and processes by requiring at least 5% of national health budgets to be dedicated to health emergencies.
• Setting up a governing body under the auspice of the WHO to oversee the entire health emergency process.
• Expanding the scope of the WHO’s power by implementing the “One Health” agenda, which recognizes that a very broad range of aspects of life and the environment can impact health and therefore fall under the “potential” to cause harm.

Consider the implications of this.

Just about anything can be sold as “potentially harmful” when you consider that the affiliated media has the ability to shape the public discourse, essentially determining how people should think and feel about any given topic. As long as the media pumps out sufficient fear and propaganda, the scope of the WHO’s power will be limited only by their imagination.

Additionally, the emphasis on the “One Health” concept, combines human health, animal health, and environmental concerns, meaning that under the One Health agenda, the WHO would be given the power to make decisions concerning diet, agriculture and livestock farming, environmental pollution, the movement of populations, and much more.

 

WHO Now Urging Member States to Finalize

Tedros Ghebreyesus, Director-General of the WHO, opened the Global Symposium of Global Health Security and Diplomacy in the 21st Century on Monday by saying that the coming year is “a generational opportunity that we must not miss.”

“As you know, Member States are now in the process of negotiating a new legally binding agreement on pandemic preparedness and response, and amendments to the International Health Regulations,” he said, adding that “the two will form the vital legal framework for a safer world.”

Ghebreyesus has said in the past that a Pandemic Treaty would not force countries to follow its rules, but he has also threatened to punish countries that don’t. He also listed three action plans for all member states to follow starting Monday, the first being that “we must close the governance gap.”

He’s also hinted that “misinformation”, IE unsanctioned scrutiny and dissent, is going to be an obstacle for the WHO in bringing this agenda forward. Amongst his list of hurdles to overcome, Ghebreyesus said on Monday that one of the challenges ahead is the increase of public skepticism with regard to institutions and science.

December is the month that they are going to try to push the Pandemic treaty forward. Remember, there’s no ratification process for a convention agreement, it exists because the Convention of Parties decides it exists, and with the powers that will be granted to the WHO should this convention agreement move forward, we would all be subject to the will of the WHO and its primary funders should another pandemic mysteriously appear.

 

Author’s Note:

I realize that this might all sound a lot more frightening than it really is. It is a pressing situation that deserves our attention, to be sure, but it is not a death sentence for the Constitution.

I’ve been trying to imagine how any of this would actually be enforced. The WHO is like a paper tiger, it doesn’t have its own policing force unless the Federal gov can convince State and local authorities to sell out the people in their communities, and given the current climate and the disillusionment that came after the response to COVID, I don’t know how that would play out. Maybe I’m too optimistic.

Additionally, for a more learned opinion on the subject, I would direct folks to the great James Roguski. I recommend checking out his latest post on the “Treaty” linked HERE.