Biden may bypass Senate for WHO power transfer
A private citizen may soon be ordered to roll up their sleeves for an injection, or go into quarantine, because a politician in Geneva says so, Principia Scientific International reports.
A longtime opponent of efforts to relinquish sovereignty to the global bodies like the United Nations (UN), Australian Senator Malcolm Roberts has posted a video warning that the 75th World Health Assembly of the World Health Organization (WHO), starting at its Geneva headquarters today (Sunday, May 22), will include a vote to make its International Health Orders (IHOs) mandatory for each of its 194 member states, including the United States.
No choice
According to the senator representing Queensland, “. . . compulsory vaccination is part of the International Health Regulations, and may now be forced on all Australians if this vote succeeds [acting as a] comprehensive guidebook to implement even worse restrictions [than what Australia already implemented].”
From global cooperation to global government
The World Health Organization (WHO) is a specialized agency of the United Nations, i.e., an autonomous organization working with the United Nations through the “coordinating machinery of the United Nations Economic and Social Council.”
The WHO is governed by 194 member states through the World Health Assembly. The vote to transform the WHO’s IHOs from recommendations to mandatory regulations will be by majority. The US, even if it wanted to oppose the measure, would have just one vote and could not overcome the will of 98 member states.
U.S. leading the globalist move
As it is, the U.S. is not just failing to fight the initiative. President Joe Biden has taken the lead in amending the WHO treaty, submitting amendments and garnering the support of 47 nations already, according to Dr. Peter Breggin, a clinical psychopharmacologist.
Complain to Geneva
Senator Roberts says that every party in the parliament other than his One Nation party is already prepared to approve this grant of authority over Australian citizens to the WHO, in a parliamentary vote. Following such approval, any future protest would need to be directed at unelected WHO officials in Geneva if one were to be unhappy with any of the following rules that may, in the future, be decided upon in WHO offices:
. . . lockdowns, hard borders around quarantine zones, vaccine passports, mandatory check-in, and contact tracing, mandatory health tests, mandatory removal, and quarantine.
Can Congress stop it?
What can be worse than a parliamentary vote with a negligible chance of success in blocking this extraordinary power transfer to the UN? No vote at all.
It turns out that it’s not clear whether Australia, the US or any other national legislative body is actually entitled to vote on this profound change in governance.
Investigative reporter Leo Hohmann believes that the WHO is purposely setting this as a vote to amend the existing international health treaty (the International Health Regulations of 2005 (IHR) treaty), as opposed to a creating a new treaty, in order to bypass the constitutionally required approval of two-thirds the U.S. Senate. “[This move] means no public debate and no media coverage of this sovereignty-killing power grab. It will all be done under the cloak of darkness in Geneva.”
Not just viruses
While nothing generates health fears more than claims of novel, deadly and contagious germs, the WHO, together with the CDC, has announced its public health approach to gun violence prevention. This and other “dangers” may be addressed with measures against U.S. citizens directed from Geneva. Hohmann warns of the WHO’s politicizing of public health:
All that’s required is a simple majority vote and, poof, there goes the sovereignty of 194 nations of the world over matters of “public health emergencies,” which could include a wide range of issues, not just viruses. . . .
The CDC has already declared that “firearm injuries are a serious public health problem.” So is falling in the bathtub, skydiving, riding a bicycle on a busy highway, and mountain climbing, but you don’t see the CDC getting involved in any of those dangerous activities. This is all political and has nothing to do with your health.
The Marxist in charge
Breggin notes,
. . . Director-General . . . Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, commonly known as 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 . . .
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. . .
Tedros is not just an academic Marxist.
Before setting up shop at WHO, he played a leading role in the murderous Tigray People’s Liberation Front (TPLF) in his native Ethiopia. This Marxist terror organization declared war on other ethnic groups. Tedros served as a top member of TPLF’s Politburo Central Committee.
The czar ruling North America
The amendments, according to Hohmann, set up an infrastructure in which the U.S. will have to answer to a regional director who will only answer to the head of the WHO and will have vast powers.
The changes to the 2005 treaty also include the addition of new “regional” health czars under the authority of the WHO.
These czars will have their own bureaucratic cohorts to police the policies they impose on the nations.
Aid can be withheld, punishing economic sanctions can be placed on any nation that deviates from the prescribed WHO remedy for whatever health emergency has been declared by the WHO director general.
Countdown to implementation
If approved, the amendments will come into effect in November of this year. Breggin explains the urgency of opposing this power grab now:
. . . 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.
Last resort
Hohmann sees only one way out if the Biden amendments are voted in:
If these amendments get passed and the WHO member nations abide by them, there will be catastrophic consequences for the world. The lights will go out on individual freedom in the U.S. and every other formerly free country …
If that happens, every nation that voted against the Biden amendments needs to pull out of the WHO.
You may also like to read:
Issue Brief: WHO Pandemic Treaty
World Health Assembly to vote on IHR amendments in unprecedented WHO power grab
WHO floats international pandemic treaty
‘War' against virus used to justify censorship, loss of sovereignty and individual rights
