- No products in the cart.
Although the mainstream media are keeping the issue practically under wraps, it has now leaked out that the WHO, in conjunction with the EU and the other WHO member states, wants to conclude a global pandemic treaty in 2024. What comes across as preventive health care actually amounts to the disempowerment of sovereign states.
This is now abundantly clear from an application by the USA1 in the framework of the International Health Regulations (IHR). A vote on this issue is already scheduled for this year's annual World Health Assembly from 22-28 May.
What is it about?
If the US proposal is accepted, the WHO can declare a global health emergency and impose countermeasures even without the consent of the member states.
This submission has been before the Secretary General since 20 January. However, he has not found it necessary to present it to the member states for discussion. At least, the media have reported on it practically nowhere.
Apparently, more than 40 countries support this alleged "health reform", Switzerland is also in on it. Countries that want to evade this undermining of their sovereign rights and refuse such cooperation with the WHO must expect sanctions.
What is required of member states?
If an "incident" occurs somewhere, i.e. a hitherto unknown virus emerges, the assessment of the potential danger that could be contained in this "incident" must take place within two days. Only another 24 hours would then remain to report the assessment of this "incident" to the WHO. And the WHO could then prescribe measures as it deems appropriate.
The door is wide open for arbitrariness.
Third countries could also report an incident in another country, which would then also authorise the WHO to take action against this country and the alleged danger with all means it deems appropriate. The government of the affected country would not be able to do anything about it, or even be heard.
The Secretary General could do as he pleases. He would only have to inform the affected state of his intentions. The government in which an "incident" has taken place must accept the WHO's "offer of help" within two days. If it refuses, it must justify this to all other states. Moreover, imagine the moral pressure that would be exerted on this country from all sides.
Resistance will of course be difficult under these circumstances. Not least because the WHO is likely to send foreign teams of experts into the country who will henceforth dictate what is to be done. Is it a coincidence that Bill Gates, in his latest book "How to Prevent the Next Pandemic".2 proposes such an international team of experts called GERM? Is it at all surprising that this team of experts would immediately take rigid measures such as lockdowns, mass testing and blanket vaccination?
Imagine that worldwide testing is carried out incessantly by default. On this basis, it will be easy to create a threat scenario at any time.
Time is of the essence!
Only six months are left for a government to object to these massive rule changes as envisaged in the US proposal. One must bear in mind that the pandemic treaty is to be adopted as early as 2024.
It is inconceivable that the US proposal is supported by the EU and Switzerland. Switzerland's participation is only understandable against the background that most globally active pharmaceutical companies have their headquarters here.
The question is always: Cui bono? Who is the beneficiary?
The answer is obvious. Regular tests and compulsorily prescribed vaccinations flush billions in profits into the coffers of pharmaceutical companies. And the IT industry profits from contact tracing, digital vaccination cards and the digitalisation of health care, homeschooling and home office during lockdowns.
Who is shooting in the background?
The WHO does act as an actor in this disempowerment of the sovereign member states. But it is controlled, steered and dependent on the donations of those who would profit massively.
In this context, it is worth watching the documentary film "Profiteers of Fear".3 to watch it again. It was already broadcast on Arte in 2009 and is nevertheless more topical than ever. The WHO appears here in a different, rather dubious context. It is not people's health that is in the foreground, but profit. The WHO had to admit serious misjudgements at that time and also in the last two years. Coincidence? Hardly. The devastating measures had already been implemented and the pharmaceutical and IT industries were enjoying billions in profits!
We must prevent this dangerous development! We must not let our children go into a world that deserves no other name than "pharmaceutical dictatorship"! We want a health care system that is oriented towards people and not towards the profits of Big Pharma and Big IT!