There is nothing so personal as our health and nothing so private as our own body. Yet there is an organisation which seeks to take control of your very body and hold the right to treat it as it sees fit. Us for Them website warns:
“While international cooperation and coordination in public health makes sense, proposals for an unprecedented ceding of rule-making powers and national sovereignty from national governments to the unelected World Health Organisation and related erosions of cornerstone human rights are gravely concerning.”
The WHO endeavours to assist the vulnerable through better health worldwide. In its own words, it seeks in promoting: “the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of health” with health being “a state of complete physical, mental and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity”.
This is a benevolent mandate surely, so what concern could be viewed about this organisation? While it is not the purpose presently to dissect the World Health Organization in detail; briefly, it came into existence on April 7, 1948, incorporating the assets, personnel and duties of the former ‘League of Nations Health Organization and the Paris-based Office International d’Hygiene Publique, including the International Classification of Diseases…’
The WHO is headquartered in Geneva, Switzerland, with six regional offices and one hundred and fifty field offices throughout the world. It is a ‘specialised agency’ of the United Nations and governed by the World Health Assembly, comprising 194 member states. The WHO is funded by these member states contributions as well from private donors so that its annual budget is approximately seven billion dollars.
The issue revolves around two documents, the existing International Health Regulations 2005 and a proposed Pandemic Treaty. The WHO wants to add amendments to the IHR. ‘The current draft of the IHR Amendments proposes significant new supra-national powers to be exercised exclusively by the WHO during public health emergencies, and broadens and brings forward in time the circumstances in which those powers could be triggered.’
The Us for Them briefing paper, 2023, continues – emphasis mine:
“The IHR Amendments, if adopted, will fundamentally change the relationship between national governments and the WHO and would hardwire into international law a top-down supranational approach to public health – in particular as relating to public health emergencies of international concern – including pandemic preparedness and pandemic response policies. It would place the WHO at the helm of that approach, giving an unelected and democratically unaccountable organisation sweeping national and international-level powers to control, direct and interfere in the affairs of its member States and to override fundamental rights of individual citizens.
Whereas to date the WHO has been empowered to issue recommendations, the proposed updates would empower the WHO to give legally-binding directions effective at the level of individual States, regions or globally, for example, to:
- mandate financial contributions to fund pandemic response activities
- require the surrender of intellectual property and technologies
- mandate the manufacture and international sharing of vaccines and other health
products capable of “improv(ing) quality of life” - override national safety approval processes for vaccines, gene-based therapies,
medical devices and diagnostics - require citizens to disclose their medical status
- forcibly quarantine or prevent citizens from travelling
- medically examine, inject or otherwise medicate citizens
While all seven of these points are of grave concern, read the last three and particularly the seventh again, for they deeply impinge on every human right an individual possesses.
“These proposals, if adopted, will also greatly expand the WHO’s public health surveillance mechanism with a global workforce whose continuing employment will depend on the need (actual or perceived) to identify more viruses and variants of concern. This global workforce will be subsidised by taxpayer funds but can also expect to receive substantial funding from private and corporate interests that stand to gain from the vaccine-based responses envisioned for infectious disease outbreaks.
The WHO’s aim is to have both the Treaty text and the IHR Amendments ready for adoption at the 77th meeting of the World Health Assembly… in May 2024.”
The existing IHR document requires only a simple majority of WHA member states. The signatories to the IHR which includes the United States and the United Kingdom then have ten months in which to opt out, otherwise they will be deemed to have accepted these unilateral amendments. The new treaty on the other hand requires the WHA to have a two-thirds majority. Observers have noted that both document processes appear unusually rushed in the past three years, with the United States ‘given only four months to table amendments to the IHR.’
While nearly all the focus has been on the Treaty, it is the IHR amendments ‘which contain the more concerning proposals from the perspective of national sovereignty and individual human rights.’ For the WHO is manoeuvring to become the exclusive global controller of the identification of pandemics; potential pandemics; the design and execution of pandemic responses; and pharmaceutical interventions. These are sweeping totalitarian powers. The implications of the surrender of national sovereignty and individual rights and freedoms is significant.
It is important to note that as sponsors can direct how their contributions are used and what they fund, it is invariably their interests which are prioritised. Therefore projects based on disease burden are over ridden by commodities such as vaccines that generate profit for private and corporate donors. One such example already touched upon in the article, The Great Reset & the Fourth Industrial Revolution, is that of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. It has risen as a ‘private extra-budgetary’ contributor to the second largest donor to the WHO.
Thus Bill Gates exerts signifiant influence on the WHO and it his aim to make vaccinations a primary focus of their policy. ‘In 2011, Gates spoke at the WHO, and declared: “All 193 member states (must) make vaccines a central focus of their health systems.”
The following year, the World Health Assembly adopted a “Global Vaccine Plan” that the Gates Foundation co-authored, and it has been suggested that over half of the WHO’s total budget is now devoted to vaccines. It is also no secret that the Gates Foundation has significant ties to the pharmaceutical industry, and since its creation it has owned material stakes in several pharmaceutical companies. The foundation’s website candidly declares a mission to pursue “mutually beneficial opportunities” with vaccine manufacturers’ – refer article: Covid 19 Injection.
Us for Them note: ‘In the years leading up to the pandemic, Gates’ activities had been focused on the topic of pandemic preparedness in particular. Speaking at an event hosted by Massachusetts Medical Society and the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) on April 27, 2018, Gates said he believed “the world needs to prepare for pandemics in the same serious way it prepares for war. This preparation includes staging simulations, war games and preparedness exercises so that we can better understand how diseases will spread and how to deal with responses such as quarantine and communications to minimize panic.”
The Treaty and IHR Amendments are set to create an ‘international bureaucracy with vast funding’ generating as much $40 billion a year. Recall the current WHO annual budget is approximately $7 billion. This powerful bureaucracy would surveil new and variant viruses; identify them; determine their potential threat; and then mandate and control a pharmaceutical response not just for member states, but for their individual citizens. In other words… you.
For those readers who would like to read the briefing paper in full, it is available at:
Finally, to leave you with the chilling words of author Thomas Fazi:
“It would be concerning even if the organisation had maintained its original funding model, institutional structure and underlying philosophy. But it’s particularly concerning if we consider that the WHO has fallen largely under the control of private capital and other vested interests. It would mark the definitive transformation of global health into an authoritarian, corporate-driven, techno-centric affair – and risk making the Covid response a blueprint for the future rather than a disaster which should never be repeated.”
Don’t fear those who aim to kill just the body but are unable to touch the soul. The One to fear is He who can destroy you, soul and body, in the fires of hell.
Matthew 10:28 The Voice
© Orion Gold 2023 – All rights reserved. Permission to copy, use or distribute, if acknowledgement of the original authorship is attributed to orion-gold.com
The Lightkeeper 