WHO: International Health Regulations (IHR)

All info related to the new biggest hoax of our time.
User avatar
rachel
Posts: 2683
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 9:04 pm
Location: Liverpool, England
Has thanked: 781 times
Been thanked: 1113 times

WHO: International Health Regulations (IHR)

Unread post by rachel »

Below is a section from an article talking about the proposed amendments to the Who's 'International Health Regulations', remember, Tedros declared a monkeypox public health emergency back in 2022 when COVID was dying a death.

Why the WHO finally declared monkeypox a global public health emergency
https://www.vox.com/science-and-health/ ... tion-pheic
On Saturday, July 23, World Health Organization Director General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus declared the spread of monkeypox to be a public health emergency of international concern (PHEIC), the organization’s loudest alarm bell signifying an emerging outbreak.
Tedros_1495593744.jpg

Do you think it's curious that Tedros' hand does not match the colour or tone of his face? Well, I can tell you what we're looking at is a face full of badly oxidised makeup. It always goes orange, though terracotta on him apparently. - "You’ve probably been there: flawless foundation in the AM and the oh-so-dreaded I-can’t-believe-I’ve-been-walking-around-like-this glimpse in the mirror come afternoon. Honestly, how does makeup go from looking stunning and airbrushed to looking, well, straight-up orange?" - But why is Tedros wearing a face full of makeup, and what is the actual colour of his skin underneath it?

Would you trust this guy with anything personal to you? Because he's set to be the new health dictator of the world telling you what you must inject into your body. Here's a section of the article about proposed changes to the regulations:


Amendments to WHO’s International Health Regulations: An Annotated Guide
https://brownstone.org/articles/amendme ... ted-guide/
Major amendments proposed for the IHR

The amendments to the IHR are intended to fundamentally change the relationship between individuals, their country’s governments, and the WHO. They place the WHO as having rights overriding that of individuals, erasing the basic principles developed after World War Two regarding human rights and the sovereignty of States. In doing so, they signal a return to a colonialist and feudalist approach fundamentally different to that to which people in relatively democratic countries have become accustomed. The lack of major pushback by politicians and the lack of concern in the media and consequent ignorance of the general public is therefore both strange and alarming.

Aspects of the amendments involving the largest changes to the workings of society and international relations are discussed below. Following this are annotated extracts from the WHO document (REF). Provided on the WHO website, it is currently under a process of revision to address obvious grammatical errors and improve clarity.

Resetting international human rights to a former, authoritarian model

The Universal Declaration on Human Rights, agreed by the UN in the aftermath of World War Two and in the context of much of the world emerging from a colonialist yoke, is predicated on the concept that all humans are born with equal and inalienable rights, gained by the simple fact that they are born. In 1948 the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was intended to codify these, to prevent a return to inequality and totalitarian rule. The equality of all individuals is expressed in Article 7:

“All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law. All are entitled to equal protection against any discrimination in violation of this Declaration and against any incitement to such discrimination.”

This understanding underpins the WHO constitution, and forms a basis for the modern international human rights movement and international human rights law.

The concept of States being representative of their people, and having sovereignty over territory and the laws by which their people were governed, was closely allied with this. As peoples emerged from colonialism, they would assert their authority as independent entities within boundaries that they would control. International agreements, including the existing IHR, reflected this. The WHO and other international agencies would play a supportive role and give advice, not instructions.

The proposed IHR amendments reverse these understandings. The WHO proposes that the term ‘with full respect for the dignity, human rights and fundamental freedoms of persons’ be deleted from the text, replacing them with ‘equity, coherence, inclusivity,’ vague terms the applications of which are then specifically differentiated in the text according to levels of social and economic development. The underlying equality of individuals is removed, and rights become subject to a status determined by others based on a set of criteria that they define. This entirely upends the prior understanding of the relationship of all individuals with authority, at least in non-totalitarian states.

It is a totalitarian approach to society, within which individuals may act only on the sufferance of others who wield power outside of legal sanction; specifically a feudal relationship, or one of monarch-subject without an intervening constitution. It is difficult to imagine a greater issue facing society, yet the media that is calling for reparations for past slavery is silent on a proposed international agreement consistent with its reimposition.

Giving WHO authority over member States

This authority is seen as being above states (i.e. elected or other national governments), with the specific definition of ‘recommendations’ being changed from ‘non-binding’ (by deletion) to ‘binding’ by a specific statement that States will undertake to follow (rather than ‘consider’) recommendations of the WHO. States will accept the WHO as the ‘authority’ in international public health emergencies, elevating it above their own ministries of health. Much hinges on what a Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC) is, and who defines it. As explained below, these amendments will widen the PHEIC definition to include any health event that a particular individual in Geneva (the Director General of the WHO) personally deems to be of actual or potential concern.

Powers to be ceded by national governments to the DG include quite specific examples that may require changes within national legal systems. These include detention of individuals, restriction of travel, the forcing of health interventions (testing, inoculation) and requirement to undergo medical examinations.

Unsurprising to observers of the COVID-19 response, these proposed restrictions on individual rights under the DG’s discretion include freedom of speech. The WHO will have power to designate opinions or information as ‘mis-information or disinformation, and require country governments to intervene and stop such expression and dissemination. This will likely run up against some national constitutions (e.g. the US) but will be a boon to many dictators and one-party regimes. It is, of course, incompatible with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, but these seem no longer to be guiding principles for the WHO.

After self-declaring an emergency, the DG will have power to instruct governments to provide WHO and other countries with resources – funds and commodities. This will include direct intervention in manufacturing, increasing production of certain commodities manufactured within their borders.

Countries will cede power to the WHO over patent law and intellectual property (IP), including control of manufacturing know-how, of commodities deemed by the DG to be relevant to the potential or actual health problem that he /she has deemed of interest. This IP and manufacturing know-how may be then passed to commercial rivals at the DG’s discretion. These provisions seem to reflect a degree of stupidity, and unlike the basic removal of fundamental human rights, vested interests here may well insist on their removal from the IHR draft. Rights of people should of course be paramount, but with most media absent from the fray, it is difficult to see a level of advocacy being equal.
User avatar
rachel
Posts: 2683
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 9:04 pm
Location: Liverpool, England
Has thanked: 781 times
Been thanked: 1113 times

Re: WHO: International Health Regulations (IHR)

Unread post by rachel »


I’m not sure how much u are aware… but the EU has been very busy, supported by our governments BUT when the news break everywhere, they will have the audacity to say: “the EU is obliging is to do so”.

Here we go:
⚠️ Emergency Platform
The EU & the UN setting the stage for Antonio Gutteres to be declared dictator of the world under ANY circumstances, literally obliterating ALL power of sovereign countries, calling in foreign troops under military operations disguised as “field missions,” and more.
FuN9Fl1XoAU1EHE.jpg
User avatar
rachel
Posts: 2683
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 9:04 pm
Location: Liverpool, England
Has thanked: 781 times
Been thanked: 1113 times

Re: WHO: International Health Regulations (IHR)

Unread post by rachel »

This stuff with the WHO seems clear to me. The whole point of the BREXIT vote was to remover the principles of Magna Carta, to lie to the British people and offer them baubles like being able to travel to the EU without waiting in line, in order to convince us to give up our unalienable rights. And when we fall, so does the Commonwealth.

But these can never be taken away, only given away by people who fear death. And death takes us all, anyway.

WHO new treaty

Fear God Alone - Luke 12:4-7
I tell you, My friends, do not be afraid of those who kill the body and after that can do no more. But I will show you whom you should fear: Fear the One who, after you have been killed, has authority to throw you into hell. Yes, I tell you, fear Him!

Are not five sparrows sold for two pennies? Yet not one of them is forgotten by God. And even the very hairs of your head are all numbered. So do not be afraid; you are worth more than many sparrows.

I know some readers will be thinking, she's banging on about bloody religion again. No, I'm taking back the Vantage Ground. Please join me.

Vantage Ground - Nader Mansour
User avatar
rachel
Posts: 2683
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 9:04 pm
Location: Liverpool, England
Has thanked: 781 times
Been thanked: 1113 times

Re: WHO: International Health Regulations (IHR)

Unread post by rachel »

I mentioned The Telegraph's highlights of Dominic Cummings Lockdown testimony in Muppet Show, but I didn't post it there. I think this post is mainly for my reference, below is the Telegraph cut, and also the full 7 hours version. I listened to some interesting exchanges of Test and Trace data, but I need to have another look. In light of the WHO treaty, this stuff is important.

tardis.gif
tardis.gif (2.16 MiB) Viewed 283 times

The Telegraph: Key moments from Dominic Cummings' attack on Boris Johnson's government



Guardian News: Former government advisor Dominic Cummings testifies to joint parliamentary committee – FULL
Dominic Cummings, the prime minister’s former top adviser, is preparing to expose many of the mistakes he claims the government made as the Covid pandemic hit Britain last year. Cummings will give evidence to a joint inquiry of the health and social care and science and technology committees on Wednesday.

8e7d271261c7b2470e6fd070f184c5b6.jpg
User avatar
rachel
Posts: 2683
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 9:04 pm
Location: Liverpool, England
Has thanked: 781 times
Been thanked: 1113 times

Re: WHO: International Health Regulations (IHR)

Unread post by rachel »

Now the Queen is dead, the cunts are in charge.




Image

tusk end.png
User avatar
rachel
Posts: 2683
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 9:04 pm
Location: Liverpool, England
Has thanked: 781 times
Been thanked: 1113 times

Re: WHO: International Health Regulations (IHR)

Unread post by rachel »

The Road to Fascism – an interview with Simon Elmer
5th February 2023


https://thinkingcoalition.org/news/the- ... mon-elmer/
Very early on in the pandemic, Simon recognised that the changes that we were witnessing, particularly the coercive behaviour of the State, were not a temporary phenomenon but actually part of a deep seated process. In his early blogs he spoke about the collectivisation of individuals and the creation of a “biosecurity state”. Initially, even we found this concept hard to accept, but Simon’s work is meticulously well researched and well written.

In the interview we talk about Simon’s motivation for writing the book and discuss the unpleasant censorship that he himself was subjected to do by the Architects Registration Board. We cover important subjects, but in a clear and engaging manner. We discuss the road to fascism and why it is important that we rejected the Davos designed dystopia. We are talk about the merger of State and corporate interests and the appearance of “woke” as a new totalitarian religion. For anyone who wants to understand the structural forces in play in society today this interview is a must watch.
User avatar
rachel
Posts: 2683
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 9:04 pm
Location: Liverpool, England
Has thanked: 781 times
Been thanked: 1113 times

Re: WHO: International Health Regulations (IHR)

Unread post by rachel »

Another Simon Elmer interview.

Campfire Conversation: Simon Elmer - The Road To Fascism
Simon Elmer in conversation with Pete Lawrence and Q&A with the Campfire community. Elmer talks about his book 'The Road to Fascism', the questions it raises and the calls to action it invites around the need for systemic change.

What are we up against? It has become impossible not to describe the society in which we live now as totalitarian.

How did we get here? What can we do about it?

"Our politics is so compromised now. Nobody believes in it as a forum or a medium for change. Our resistance to digital ID and everything that is going to come from that comes from a different source of resistance.
User avatar
rachel
Posts: 2683
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 9:04 pm
Location: Liverpool, England
Has thanked: 781 times
Been thanked: 1113 times

Re: WHO: International Health Regulations (IHR)

Unread post by rachel »

I've got an interesting clip of the WHO's Tedros when I get around to posting it. But in the mean time this is one of the videos from:

WHO Do You Think You Are - An Exposé of the World Health Organisation
https://www.ukcolumn.org/series/who-do- ... ganisation

This video is very stark about the corporate capture of the WHO, and the numbers of people killed as a direct result of lockdowns dropping people into absolute poverty. He also talks about the upcoming International Health Regulations and what they practically mean.

David Bell - Why policymakers should reject WHO’s pandemic proposals
David Bell, Senior Scholar at Brownstone Institute, is a public health physician and biotech consultant in global health. He is a former medical officer and scientist at the World Health Organization (WHO), Programme Head for malaria and febrile diseases at the Foundation for Innovative New Diagnostics (FIND) in Geneva, Switzerland, and Director of Global Health Technologies at Intellectual Ventures Global Good Fund in Bellevue, WA, USA.
User avatar
rachel
Posts: 2683
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 9:04 pm
Location: Liverpool, England
Has thanked: 781 times
Been thanked: 1113 times

Re: WHO: International Health Regulations (IHR)

Unread post by rachel »

A Swiss lawyer's perspective on the International Health Regulations. Out of the two, I think I'd watch this one, as he gets to the two parts, the IHR and the Treaty.

Philipp Kruse - WHO: Unprecedented Threat to Health and Democracies
Philipp Kruse is a Swiss Attorney. After a career in commercial and constitutional law, he dedicated his life to challenge the path Switzerland is moving along with many other nations. He has run several cases in relation to regulations impacting children, constitutional controversies and is leading several initiatives supporting activists.
And get this, pandemics are rename PHEIC-times. That's pronounced FAKE-TIMES.

pheic.png
timeline.png

This is the clause that suspends all national laws and bodily rights when fake events are called by the WHO. Right.

article-13a.png
User avatar
rachel
Posts: 2683
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2018 9:04 pm
Location: Liverpool, England
Has thanked: 781 times
Been thanked: 1113 times

Re: WHO: International Health Regulations (IHR)

Unread post by rachel »

Lets's collect a little data.

Maria Van Kerkhove
https://twitter.com/mvankerkhove

A11-76.png

From 2 Dec 2021 when they were in the process of trying to boot another round of lockdowns to once again ban Christmas travel.
#COVID19 vaccines have very strong protection against the dominant variant [Delta] that is circulating globally - Dr @mvankerkhove
Get vaccinated when it's your turn and stand up for #VaccinEquity especially for those at risk in all countries!


It's interesting, some of the comments under that thread. Most people, if they were not required for work, got the vaccine to travel. But like DVD region codes, only certain vaccines where available and approved in certain regions, so didn't matter if you were fully vaccinated, you still couldn't use your vaccine status in a different region.
Please approve CanSino vaccine! Millions are denied entry in the majority of the world even though we were responsible to get vaccinated with the vaccines that arrived to our countries. Many of us want to visit our familys!!! Help us please! We are being discriminated!
Do not boycott Sputnik and you will improve equity!!! Do not allow rich countries to hoard vaccines and you will improve equity!!! Do not consider fully vaccinated.with Sputnik as non vaccinated and you will improve equity!!! Do not manipulate no more!!!
------

What Maria Van Kerkhove is currently plugging.



EPI-WIN webinar: Emerging Zoonotic diseases and the One Health approach
https://www.who.int/news-room/events/de ... h-approach
This extended EPI-WIN webinar provides the overview for a series of webinars about One Health and emerging zoonotic diseases, covering key issues related to using the One Health approach for tackling emerging zoonotic diseases in health emergencies.

One Health is an integrated, unifying approach that aims to sustainably balance and optimize the health of people, animals, and the environment. A panel of speakers from the One Health Quadripartite of intergovernmental agencies (Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), World Health Organization (WHO), World Organisation for Animal Health (WOAH) and United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP)) and a partner organization (International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, IFRC) will discuss how the One Health approach works in their organization and in collaboration with other organizations. In specific examples from the field, speakers will illustrate how the One Health approach can tackle emerging zoonotic diseases and improve epidemic and pandemic preparedness in tangible ways.

Why is the One Health approach so important in tackling emerging zoonotic diseases and in epidemic and pandemic preparedness and response? How has the COVID-19 pandemic changed the One Health approach? What are some challenges in applying the One Health approach to emerging zoonotic diseases and epidemics and pandemics? How can partners and communities better work together to overcome these challenges?
According to the WHO, we are just another animal.
Post Reply