WHO backs off on Pandemic Treaty, makes substantive changes to address tyranny concerns
By ethanh // 2024-04-23
Copy
 
Some good things happened this past week concerning the World Health Organization's (WHO) Pandemic Treaty. In response to widespread public outcry, the WHO substantially revised its proposed International Health Regulations (IHR) amendments, dialing the tyranny back a notch. According to the group Us for Them UK (@UsforThemUK on X), the changes represent a serious victory "for national democracy, free speech and human rights." Almost all of the substantive concerns presented to the WHO Working Group for the IHR amendments have been trimmed back, one of the biggest changes being that the WHO's recommendations will be non-binding. "Article 13A.1 which would have required Member States to follow directives of the WHO as the guiding and coordinating authority for international public health has been dropped entirely," Us for Them UK tweeted. Another change is the erasure of a proposal that would have struck from the amendments wording that recognizes the "dignity, human rights and fundamental freedoms" of human beings. "This proposal marked a particularly low water-mark, and should never have been suggested," Us for Them UK says. If you are concerned about the WHO suddenly attaining dictatorial powers at the mere "potential" of a public health emergency, worry not: the WHO will only be able to gain total control if it can demonstrate "that coordinated international action is necessary." (Related: Victims of the COVID jab genocide are taking action with new lawsuits.)

WHO won't be your daddy; corrupt Congress will

As for the controlled flow of information by the government, a process more commonly known as censorship, the WHO will have no jurisdiction over this, either. What happened during the Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) "pandemic" in terms of how the WHO applies its IHRs will also remain the same rather than be expanded to also include "all risks with a potential to impact public health." Of great remaining concern, however, is the explicit recognition in the revised IHR amendments that Member States – in our case, the United States – will be the ones responsible for implementing whatever WHO recommends, as they so choose. What this means, of course, is that the always smart and never corrupted U.S. Congress, meaning the Zionists and multinational corporations that control them, will have the full and unfettered privilege of deciding how We the People get treated during the next public health "crisis." Other provisions that were "diluted," according to Us for Them UK include details about the surveillance mechanisms that would have allowed the WHO to mandate the finding of thousands of potentially new so-called pandemic "signals," as well as provisions that would have pushed the adoption of digital health passports. Keep in mind that the entire published document as it currently exists from the WHO remains an interim draft, so it could be modified further. The IHR Working Group will pore over it and make final negotiations as to how it will appear in its final form. If you would like to read over the latest draft of WHO's IHR Amendments, you can do so at this link. "We won't be safe until the WHO are disbanded, though," commented someone on X (@Free_ByTheSea). "It is not acceptable that our nation is influenced by an unelected group who conceived the original amendments. Nor is it reasonable that members of our government tried to persuade us they were nothing to worry about. We shouldn't have to defend ourselves from groups like this. The WHO needs to go." Another responded that while these latest developments might seem like a win for medical freedom, we must still be vigilant because the WHO is untrustworthy. "WHO has shown itself to be an abusive partner to free nations," this person added. "The solution to a relationship with an abusive partner is to LEAVE. Leave the WHO." More related news can be found at Tyranny.news. Sources for this article include: Twitter.com NaturalNews.com WHO.int
Copy