- June 5, 2023, the World Health Organization and the European Commission announced the launch of a digital health initiative in which the WHO will establish a global COVID-19 vaccination certification system based on the European Union’s (EU) already existing Digital COVID Certificate
- This vaccine passport system will be expanded into a Global Digital Health Certification Network (GDHCN) run by the WHO that will include “a wide range of digital products to deliver better health for all.” The vaccine passport will also, in time, cover all recommended vaccinations
- WHO members have approved a $6.83 billion budget for the next two years, which will require a 20% hike in mandatory member fees
- The budget increase is needed because the WHO is being set up as the sole decisionmaker over public health globally through the proposed pandemic treaty and International Health Regulation (IHR) amendments, each of which reinforces the WHO’s authority and power through different avenues while erasing national sovereignty and human rights
- Baked into the pandemic treaty we also have One Health, which perfectly dovetails with The Great Reset narrative. When you add the treaty, the IHR amendments and One Health together, it becomes clear that the WHO is being set up as the de facto power center of the deep state, and this One World Government will rule everything
As explained in the press release, as of this month, the WHO will establish a global COVID-19 vaccination certification system based on the European Union’s (EU) already existing Digital COVID Certificate (EU DCC) to “help facilitate global mobility and protect citizens across the world from ongoing and future health threats.”
Eventually, this vaccine passport system will be expanded into a Global Digital Health Certification Network (GDHCN) run by the WHO that will include “a wide range of digital products to deliver better health for all.” The vaccine passport will also, in time, cover all recommended vaccinations, not just COVID-19. The press release continues:
This partnership will work to technically develop the WHO system with a staged approach to cover additional use cases, which may include, for example, the digitization of the International Certificate of Vaccination or Prophylaxis. Expanding such digital solutions will be essential to deliver better health for citizens across the globe.
This cooperation is based on the shared values and principles of transparency and openness, inclusiveness, accountability, data protection and privacy, security, scalability at a global level, and equity. The European Commission and WHO will work together to encourage maximum global uptake and participation.
Why implement COVID passport when shots don’t work?
As reported by The Daily Sceptic, the announcement raises many questions:
Vaccine passports are controversial, even in the United Nations … June 30th 2021 … the UNESCO World Commission for the Ethics of Science and Technology and the UNESCO International Bioethics Committee released a joint statement warning that ‘any COVID-19 certificate … should account for scientific uncertainty regarding the degree of protection that specific vaccines, past infections and negative COVID-19 test results provide’ …
In light of these concerns, the UN agencies proposed that ‘a research program should be developed to assess their impact on society and public health, and the risks they might bring.’
The new press release from the WHO and EU makes no mention of the progress of this research program, or whether it has been established at all. Is it not necessary to ascertain the effectiveness and cost-benefit profile of an intervention before rolling it out globally and making it permanent?
Given how leaky COVID vaccines are, and how short-lived any protection offered by them might be — some studies even show the vaccinated suffering higher infection rates than the unvaccinated — it’s hard to imagine that vaccine passports delivered any real limitation of disease transmission.
But the WHO and EU don’t appear to regard this as a relevant question to ask. Is that because they blindly assume they are beneficial, or because they have other reasons for wanting to roll out this restrictive technology globally?
The implementation of a vaccine passport system — which the WHO claimed it did not support when concerns were initially raised about it in 2021 — is a clear sign that the WHO fully expects to take the reins on global health, and that public health is not the primary incentive behind this power grab.
WHO takeover moves full speed ahead
Already, WHO members have approved a $6.83 billion budget for the next two years (2024 through 2025), which will require a 20% hike in mandatory member fees. “Strategic priorities” that will receive large chunks of this funding include:
- Expanding universal health coverage to at least 1 billion people who do not currently have it
- Ensuring 1 billion more people are “better protected from health emergencies”
- Ensuring 1 billion more people can enjoy “better health and well-being”
- Developing more effective and efficient WHO support to member countries
- Eradicating polio (most likely through expanded vaccination programs)
That budget increase is also needed because the WHO is being set up as the sole decisionmaker over public health globally through the proposed pandemic treaty and International Health Regulation (IHR) amendments, each of which reinforces the WHO’s authority and power through different avenues while erasing national sovereignty and human rights.
If the WHO gets its way, it will no longer be a body that makes recommendations that countries can choose to follow. Rather, its “advice” will be akin to declarations of international law. Member states will be required to follow the WHO’s “recommendations” or face costly consequences.
Once the pandemic treaty and the IHR amendments are implemented, the WHO will have the authority to impose everything from climate lockdowns and border closures to mandatory vaccinations of all kinds. We’ve also warned that the WHO would implement a mandatory vaccine passport system for population control purposes, and with the announcement above, we can consider that a done deal.
The WHO will even have the authority to dictate what is truth and what is misinformation that must be censored. The WHO will essentially outlaw democracy worldwide because democracy cannot exist unless there is freedom of speech in public discourse.
Member states will have no choice but to censor what the WHO wants censored, because each country is also required to set up an enforcement agency to ensure the WHO’s edicts are followed nationwide, and that includes censorship activities.
Understand where we’re headed
For a further review of the WHO’s new Global Digital Health Certification Network, see Dr. John Campbell’s video.
It’s now beyond imperative that people understand where we’re headed, and that the COVID measures weren’t just responses to a given pandemic, but rather were the foundation for a totalitarian one world government where human rights and freedoms will no longer exist.
Indeed, the pandemic treaty redefines human rights as “health equity” and nothing else. The IHR amendments also eliminate individual rights and freedoms specifically. IHR Article 3 is being amended as follows (strikethroughs in the text indicate that the text is to be deleted, and the additions or revisions are underlined in bold):
The implementation of these Regulations shall be with full respect for the dignity, human rights and fundamental freedoms of personsbased on the principles of equity, inclusivity, coherence and in accordance with their common but differentiated responsibilities of the States Parties, taking into consideration their social and economic development.
In other words, bodily autonomy and personal choice are being replaced by one-size-fits-all medicine that has no regard for human dignity, human rights or fundamental freedoms. The right to opinions that differ from the WHO’s is also being removed on the national level.
IHR Article 2 is also being amended in such a way that the WHO will have the authority to take action on ANYTHING that has the “potential to impact public health,” and this includes everything from climate and pollution to agricultural land use and the food industry, as specified under the One Health agenda, which is baked into the pandemic treaty.
To understand what’s at stake, please review the article-by-article compilation of the proposed IHR amendments, found here, and then compare that to the proposed treaty. A “Zero Draft” dated February 1, 2023, can be found here.
As explained by the WHO back in 2021, the treaty is the “framework that recognizes the central role of the IHR.” So, these two instruments are designed and intended to work as a unit, with the treaty giving recognition to the IHR, and the IHR amendments stripping nations of their sovereignty.
But that’s not all. Baked into the pandemic treaty we also have One Health, which perfectly dovetails with The Great Reset narrative. When you add these three things together — the treaty, the IHR amendments and One Health — it becomes clear that the WHO is being set up as the de facto power center of the deep state, and this One World Government will rule everything.
Treaty expands WHO’s power beyond pandemics
As illustrated in the graphic below, the One Health agenda is based on the premise that a broad range of aspects of life and the environment have the potential to impact human health.
In addition to the life segments listed on this graph, the scope of One Health, according to a One Health Commission document, also includes communications, economics, civil society, global trade, commerce and security, public policy and regulation, research, noncommunicable diseases and much more.
Under the new treaty, the WHO will have unilateral power to make decisions about all of these areas, and its dictates will supersede and overrule any and all local, state and federal laws. In short, if the pandemic treaty is enacted, the WHO will not merely have the authority to dictate how countries prepare for and respond to pandemic threats: It will have the authority to dictate every aspect of our lives.
The WHO, in turn, is beholden to and does what its funders want, and the largest funder is Bill Gates (when you add together all his various donation sources). Gates, of course, is invested in all primary Great Reset necessities, including fake food, drugs, vaccines, surveillance and climate modification technologies.
One Health is the subversion of holistic health
As noted by David Bell, a senior scholar at Brownstone Institute, a public health physician and former medical officer and scientist at the WHO, the One Health agenda is really the subversion of the age-old holistic concept of health:
Ill health is a lever for fear, and death even more so, especially to those who believe that we are simply organic constructs that end in dust and decay. A cult feeding off these fears, holding that the entire biosphere is threatening us with diseases and death, would therefore have real potential for mass control.
Convince followers that humans are the poison that made this world so destructive, and you will also have a means to stoke hate against non-believers whilst adding guilt to the tools for compliance.
A cult based on fear of the world and the people who poisoned it, dressed up in philanthropy and virtue, has risen amongst us. Co-opting One Health terminology, it is now funded by the spoils of COVID, and empowered by technology that can take this medieval witch-hunting sect global.
The environment, everywhere, should be managed and protected for human benefit — physical, mental, and social. The One Health concept, centered in such common sense, was once no more than this. It is a rational way to express an age-old principle … Sanitation and improved nutrition will save more lives than the next round of profiteering brought to us by Pfizer.
However … One Health has been hijacked by self-proclaimed philanthropists … One Health is being corrupted in two ways, but for the same ends and by much the same people. Understanding one tells us about the people we are dealing with, the other reveals their motives.
The One Health ideology is anti-human
As explained by Bell, One Health is an ideology that places human life and welfare on par with all other life, including plants and animals. This means that your life, and the lives of your children, are no more important than the lives of polar bears, trees, waterways and soil.
If your actions cause ecological harm, and the polar bear doesn’t, then you are the one who must be eliminated from the equation. That’s really the crux of this ideology. It’s not pro-environment but, rather, anti-human at its core.
‘Within this ‘equitable’ worldview, humans become a pollutant,’ Bell writes.
‘Ever-growing human populations have driven other species to extinction through environmental change, from the megafauna of ancient Australasia to the plummeting insect populations of modern Europe.
Humans become a plague upon the earth, and their restriction, impoverishment and death may therefore be justified for a greater good.
It is difficult for people to grasp that this is a guiding ideology of public figures, as it runs counter to most human moral systems or Natural Law … We must understand the ideology driving this movement, as they intend for us to follow their dictates, and they intend to indoctrinate our children.’
Expose the barren ideology of One Health
One Health is also designed to control the masses through fear. We’re constantly bombarded with predictions of doom and told we must be protected for our own good.
“Expanding this approach from a single virus to any aspect of the biosphere impacting human well-being, such as climate, provides an opportunity to use this totalitarian tool of population control to reshape society to the model that the purveyors of fear desire,” Bell notes, adding:
Through amendments to the International Health Regulations (IHR) and a new ‘pandemic treaty,’ the WHO is coupling this broad definition of One Health with a definition of ‘emergency’ that simply requires recognition of a threat rather than actual harm.
When applied to the WHO’s broad definition of health, ‘physical, mental and social well-being,’ almost all aspects of normal life could be included in its scope. Addressed through a proscriptive public health paradigm that encompasses global mandates, restrictions and censorship, and those running this agenda have an opportunity for unprecedented power …
[In] 2019, the WHO stated in its recommendations for pandemic influenza that border closures, quarantine, and prolonged business closures should never be undertaken in response to a pandemic. These measures would drive inequality and disproportionately harm low-income people, destroying both economies and social capital.
In 2020, refocusing priorities on a new constituency, the WHO promoted these same inequitable policies. The evidence did not change, but the constituency did. Wealthy people and corporations had become significant directive funders of WHO programs. Those who benefit from improved nutrition and sanitation cannot fund the WHO’s growing staff, but those profiting from the largesse of the COVID response can …
Evil is not defeated by hiding from it. It is fought by exposing the ideology that drives it, the greed, the lies, and the deceit … In the end, mad ideologues collapse under the weight of their own deceit and the shallowness of their dogmas.
The earth-mother religion of a corrupted One Health and the feudalist ambitions of its priests will be no different. We should not fear public health or a holistic view of the world. They are ours and can be a force for good. Rather, we should expose the hollowness of the people who would subvert them, driven by their own greed and barren ideologies.
We’re running out of time
Importantly, as noted by comedian Jimmy Dore in the featured video below, the pandemic treaty is not something that member nations must opt into. It’s an opt-out proposition. If a nation fails to opt out before the deadline, they automatically accept the treaty.
Importantly, as noted by comedian Jimmy Dore in the featured video above, the pandemic treaty is not something that member nations must opt into. It’s an opt-out proposition. If a nation fails to opt out before the deadline, they automatically accept the treaty.
Based on the current timeline, the World Health Assembly (WHA) will vote on the pandemic treaty in May 2024, and it will take force 30 days later. That gives us just under a year and a half to get the U.S. to either opt out, or better yet, exit the WHO altogether.
The IHR amendments will also be voted on in May 2024. The 10-month deadline for member states to reject the amendments will expire in March 2025, and the amendments will come into force for any nation that did not reject them in May 2025. For any member that rejects the amendments, the 2005 IHR will apply.
Strangely enough, some of the IHR amendments have been adopted already. As reported by author and researcher James Roguski, they were adopted during the 75th World Health Assembly, May 27, 2022, even though nothing was signed. This is yet another testament to the rampant lawlessness and subversive tactics we’re dealing with.
Disturbingly, many Americans aren’t even aware that the U.S. government is about to relinquish our national sovereignty and everyone’s personal bodily autonomy to the WHO because mainstream media aren’t talking about it.
So, please, share this and any other articles you find on this subject with everyone you know, and continue to educate yourself. By far, these are the greatest threats to freedom the world has ever seen, and the risks apply evenly to everyone, no matter where you live.
Fact-checkers take advantage of confusion
Keep in mind that while the IHR amendments and treaty address different areas of the WHO’s new power structure, they will work together to massively empower the WHO once both come into force. Also be aware that since the global takeover is happening on several fronts at the same time, it’s easy to get confused on the details, and this confusion can easily become fodder for fact checkers. As reported by The Defender:
The AP recently ‘fact-checked’ claims that the pandemic treaty endangers national sovereignty. According to the AP, it ‘does not overrule any nation’s ability to pass individual pandemic-related policies’ and ‘does not overrule any nations’ individual health or domestic policies.’ There would be ‘effectively no legal consequences for signatories who fail to adhere to it or violate its terms.’
The AP ‘fact-check’ doesn’t mention the proposed IHR amendments. [Author and researcher James] Roguski cited this as an example of the frequent conflation of the pandemic treaty and the IHR amendments. He said language eroding national sovereignty is not found in the pandemic treaty — but is found in the IHR amendments.
‘Everyone’s paying attention to the treaty,’ Roguski said. ‘They’re completely and totally cross-pollinating the details that are in the amendments, attributing them to the treaty, and getting ‘fact-checked’ to high heaven.
Call on Congress to withdraw from the WHO
While the U.S. House and Senate have introduced identical bills to thwart the WHO’s power grab through the proposed pandemic treaty, that still might not protect us, because the treaty is specifically written to circumvent the Senate-approval process.
A far more effective strategy would be for Congress to withhold its annual contributions to the WHO, and then withdraw the U.S. from the WHO altogether. I believe it may be worth supporting all these strategies. So, please, contact your representatives and urge them to:
- Support the No WHO Pandemic Preparedness Treaty Without Senate Approval Act
- Withhold funding for the WHO
- Support U.S. withdrawal from the WHO
We also need to protect our nation against the IHR amendments. To that end, the World Council for Health has launched a global #StopTheWHO campaign. Here’s how you can get involved:
Reprinted with permission from Mercola.