STOP The WHO’s Global Pandemic Treaty
The Patriot Act on Steroids
In what could be a turning point for efforts to hold COVID-19 treatment manufacturers accountable for the dangers of their products, a California medical freedom attorney says he has been able to circumvent a legal defense based on a federal law immunizing drug companies from liability under certain circumstances.
The federal Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness (PREP) Act of 2005 “authorizes the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) to limit legal liability for losses relating to the administration of medical countermeasures such as diagnostics, treatments, and vaccines,” according to the Congressional Research Service (CRS). Near the beginning of the pandemic, the Trump administration’s HHS invoked the Act in declaring the virus a “public health emergency.”
But it’s not too late to do something about it. Sign the petition to STOP this madness! Click Below:
URGENT: STOP the WHO’s Global Pandemic Treaty.
The past two years have been rife with infringements on personal liberties and civil rights by national governments, but now the World Health Organization is seeking to appropriate those same abusive powers to itself at a global level.
194 member states representing 99% of the world’s population are expected to sign pandemic treaties with the WHO that would allow Tedros, or any future Director General, to dictate exactly how your nation would respond to a new disease outbreak which they consider a pandemic.
This attack on national sovereignty will come as no surprise to those who for years have listened to elites like Klaus Schwab and Bill Gates discussing their vision for the centralization of power into globalist organizations like the World Economic Forum (WEF), the WHO and the rest of the United Nations.
Ludicrously, 20 world leaders (Click HERE for a complete list.) calling for the treaty, including Tedros, Boris Johnson and Emmanuel Macron, compared the post-Covid world to the post-WWII period, saying similar co-operation is now needed to “dispel the temptations of isolationism and nationalism, and to address the challenges that could only be achieved together in the spirit of solidarity and co-operation – namely peace, prosperity, health and security.”
Australian PM Scott Morrison is the latest leader to express support for a “pandemic treaty”.
The stated intention of the WHO is to “kickstart a global process to draft and negotiate a convention, agreement or other international instrument under the Constitution of the World Health Organization to strengthen pandemic prevention, preparedness and response.”
The wheels are already in motion, with the Biden administration officially proposing the initial steps towards handing global pandemic control to the WHO.
Biden’s representatives have submitted amendments to the WHO’s International Health Regulations (IHR), which would give the Director General the right to declare health emergencies in any nation, even when disputed by the country in question.
These amendments, which would be legally binding under international law, will be voted on by the World Health Assembly (the governing body of the WHO) at a special convention running from May 22-28th and set the stage for a fully-fledged pandemic treaty to be passed.
The ball has been rolling since the last World Health Assembly meeting in December, where the United States launched negotiations “on a new international health instrument on pandemic prevention, preparedness, and response,” a U.S. statement read.
“This momentous step represents our collective responsibility to work together to advance health security and to make the global health system stronger and more responsive.
“We look forward to broad and deep negotiations using a whole-of-society and whole-of-government approach that will strengthen the international legal framework for public health/pandemic prevention, preparedness, and response and enable us to address issues of equity, accountability, and multi-sectoral collaboration evident in the COVID-19 pandemic.
“We know it will take all of us working together across governments, private sector, philanthropy, academia, and civil society to make rapid progress towards a long-term solution for these complex problems,” the U.S. statement added.
Under this “sweeping” immunity, CRS explains, the federal government, state governments, “manufacturers and distributors of covered countermeasures,” and licensed or otherwise-authorized health professionals distributing those countermeasures are shielded from “all claims of loss” stemming from those countermeasures, with the exception of “death or serious physical injury” brought about through “willful misconduct,” a standard that, among other hurdles, requires the offender to have acted “intentionally to achieve a wrongful purpose.”
The PREP Act has made it difficult to penalize doctors, hospitals, and pharmaceutical companies for deaths and other harms attributable to the COVID vaccines, lockdowns, ventilators, and other measures.
Ten Things Everyone Should Know About the Proposed “Pandemic Treaty”
Currently referred to as the”Conceptual Zero Draft” or “WHO CA+”
POWER GRAB: The WHO wants to be in charge so badly that they mentioned it three separate times in the “WHO CA+”
Page 10 – “Recognizing the central role of WHO in pandemic prevention, preparedness, response and recovery of health systems as the directing and
coordinating authority on international health work, and in convening and generating scientific evidence, and, more generally, fostering multilateral cooperation in global health governance;
Page 13 – “Central role of WHO – As the directing and coordinating authority in global health, and the leader of multilateral cooperation in global health governance, WHO is fundamental to strengthening pandemic prevention, preparedness, response and recovery of health systems.’
Page 22 – “Enhance WHO’s central role as the directing and coordinating authority on international health work, mindful of the need for coordination with entities in the United Nations system and other intergovernmental organizations;”
UNDEFINED WORDS: The “WHO CA+” repeatedly used the following words even though none of them are legally defined. Article 1 (page 11)
Pandemic – 112 times
Recovery – 52 times
Response – 106 times
Public Health – 44 times
Preparedness – 74 times
Equity – 32 times
Prevention – 68 times
Pandemic Response Products – 27 times
IGNORING THE OBVIOUS: The WHO CA+” never once mentions any of the following terms: Doctor, early treatment, natural, vitamins, herbs, gain-of-function, essential medicines.
SPEED KILLS: In Article 7 (pages 15-16) the “WHO CA+” supports speeding up the process by which emergency drugs and vaccines are to be approved.
MORE SIMULATIONS: In Article 12 (page 21) the “WHO CA+” advocates for regular simulations and “tabletop” exercises.
COMPLIANCE: Also in Article 12, the “WHO CA+” advocates for a “global peer review mechanism” to assess each nation’s preparedness, and in Article 20 (page 27) it also advocates that at its first meeting, the “Governing Body” of the “WHO CA+” will approve procedures and mechanisms to promote compliance.
CENSORSHIP: Article 16 (page 24) would essentially set up “The Ministry of Truth” that, in addition to “tackling misleading misinformation or disinformation” would also “strengthen research into the behavioural barriers and drivers of adherence to public health measures, confidence and uptake of vaccines, use of therapeutics and trust in science and government institutions.’[emphasis mine]
MORE DRUGS: Article 17 (page 25) describes, as part of “a national One Health Action Plan” which, in the human and animal sectors: “optimizes consumption, increases investment in, and promotes equitable and affordable access to new medicines, diagnostic tools, vaccines and other interventions.
MONEY GRAB: Article 18 (pages 25-26) makes it clear that if the “WHO CA+” Is enacted, then an enormous amount of money is going to be transferred to businesses that provide “pandemic response products.
BUREAUCRACY: Article 19 (pages 26-27) would institute a new bureaucracy for the “WHO CA+” that would essentially duplicate the World Health Assembly with a “Governing Body” ruled over by two Presidents and four Vice-Presidents and a Conference of the Parties much like that which promotes “climate change.’★ ★ ★ ★