WHO global coup: International Health Regulations

Analysis of the latest version of the amendments

By Prof. Fred Nazar, SCIENTIFIC PROGRESS    27 April 2024

A global government needs a global Constitution.

A global coup needs the appearance of a legally binding document which acts like a Constitution.

That’s why they try to use the WHO pandemic agreements to be voted at the end of May 2024, as a first step in a scissor move:

• One blade of the scissor is the Pandemic Accord (they don’t call it Treaty so that people won’t realize that Congress should approve it)

The threat of the International PLANdemic Treaty

• Another blade of the scissor is the modifications to the International Health Regulations, a legal scheme that was first weaponized in 2005, after SARS-CoV-1, adding to the WHO Director General, the discretionary superpower to declare an emergency, called Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC), coincidentally pronounced as FAKE, since all 7 PHEICs were FAKES:2009 H1N1 swine flu pandemic
  2014 setbacks in global polio eradication efforts
  2013–2016 Western African Ebola virus epidemic
  2016 Zika virus outbreak
  2018–19 Kivu Ebola epidemic
  2019–23 COVID-19 pandemic
  2022 monkeypox outbreak

Even if we succeed with the public opinion pressure and both strategies become non-binding, country governments could use such “legal” instruments (emergency executive order/ presidential decree or even through emergency response laws giving special super powers in case of an emergency as defined by the WHO) as the base to trigger, local emergency rules overriding the country’s Constitution and human rights.

That’s why all countries represented at the WorldCouncilforHealth.org (a citizen’s institution to counteract the WHO) voted unanimously to request governments to exit the WHO. Even Donald Trump said that he wants to create a parallel institution to substitute the WHO.

WHO IHR Amendments – it’s NOT over

It’s right to celebrate some of the concessions made in the latest amendments, yet having read the entire document, the whole document is still predicated on two flawed assumptions:

1) The idea that naturally occurring pandemics are highly probable (and that constant, international surveillance is required)

2) That the mechanisms used to tackle Covid-19 are effective and should be deployed again.

The WHO also maintains the three crucial tools:

(1) the capacity to declare a PHEIC (Public health emergency of international concern) on any ONE HEALTH pretext, they can imagine (eg genomic sequenced pathogen from waste water, which is an illusion of a real pathogen with pandemic potential, but not a real evidence for an effective pandemic danger). Annexes 2&3 give enormous power for the WHO to raise the alarm as they deem fit.

(2) the demand of surveillance; each country must increase its surveillance capacity within 5 years to abide by the IHR amendments- creating an inevitability that further pathogens will be ‘discovered’ and potentially deemed a public health risk.

(3) The WHO has the right to manipulate our capacity to judge by doing (1) and by making their NARRATIVE of FEAR the only accepted one (INFODEMICs being all over WHO’s and UNO‘s homepage, incl. WHO-resolution on Behavioural Sciences of May 2023).

If we add up (1), (2) and (3) the WHO can still create the illusion of a pandemic threat out of thin air, and if necessary even produce real pathogen with G-of-function.

The whole document still presents the WHO as a sole co-ordinating authority and too much power is placed in the hands of the Director General (DG), including article 48 which affords the DG the luxury of hand picking the ‘emergency and expert committees’. Even the review committee is selected by the DG, this is a clear conflict.

The WHO can set in motion their pandemic creation cycle at any given time, for as long as they want, and thereby direct and foster a global pandemic industry, that will make their astronomic gains and will become ever more powerful.

The following clauses also represent a significant cause for concern;

• Article 13 is a significant enabler for the pharmaceutical industrial complex and requires close attention.

• Articles 15-17, though referring to recommendations, places an undue emphasis on the centralised role of the WHO to direct and co-ordinate any pandemic or emergency response. This remains an unprecedented power grab in my eyes.

• Articles 18-34 stipulates and normalises all of the flawed methods deployed during Covid.

• Articles 35-39 and annex 6 essentially mandates documentation, including proof of vaccination, thus applies a pre-supposition that people will need to take up the offer of ‘health products’ including vaccines in order to travel etc and paves the way for vaccine mandates.

• Article 43 overemphasizes the need for “health products” for access to ‘normal life’ ie vaccines

• Article 55 seems to include a waiver on the 4 month procedural rule by stipulating these will come into affect from 31/5. We need to refer to the existing clause on notice period of amendments. There is also very confusing timescales and language around reservation and rejections and the due process around this in articles 61-63

Therefore, as far as the latest version of the IHR-amendments is concerned, there are some positive concessions but these merely represent a temporary victory.

We cannot allow this document or the Pandemic Agreement to come into force and MUST keep moving forward.

Source: Telegram group: Road to Geneva Convoy 2024