ALERT Biden Handing Over U.S. Sovereignty to WHO on May 22-28, 2022

L.A.B.

Has No Life - Lives on TB
Hate becomes anger,
Anger becomes pain,
Pain leads to suffering.

~Yoda

Between objective observation and proper response, pacification can accommodate subjugation, thereby forgoing the decision to side step, challenge, or negate.

When the initial observation has compromised self by allowing emotion to taint any proactive response…

An act of passion becomes a vehicle where truth is lost to the uncontrollable emotions.

The truth is a tolerant combatant. It patiently waits for us to give up the illusion of just.

View: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=rhnOB8PlMCY


This is what Yoda might of said if his lungs were larger, thereby allowing him to speak in longer parables.
 
Last edited:

Wyominglarry

Contributing Member
Only the Senate can pass a treaty by 2/3 votes. This piece of shit regulation from the WHO is worthless. Of course just look what happened to our country when everyone went along with the lockdown and vax. I think people have woken up to the fact our government is evil and corrupt. Run by self serving criminals.
 

Knoxville's Joker

Veteran Member
Wait a minute here. We are a sovreign nation. relinquishing of rights is not something that can just happen without things going through a very specific process. If that process is not followed everything that results or tried is invalid. Not to say we will not be lied to and told it is valid.
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment
The United States already signed the Treaty in 2005 to become a member of WHO. As such, we have HHS delegates that participate in the World Health Assembly. These are Amendments to the International Health Regulations which were proposed by the Biden Admin on January 18. The World Health Assembly will vote the week of May 22-28 in Geneva as to whether to adopt the Amendments. The vote is by a simple majority. There are already at least 40 major countries who have indicated they will vote in the affirmative.

This is not a "treaty" requiring the advise and consent of the Senate.

(1) The US could withdraw its proposed Amendments. A General Strike of Republican Senators and Congressmen is being proposed for next week. This would mean that they would not show up on the Floor for a vote or in Committee hearings - hopefully causing the lack of a quorum to do business. This world bring pressure on the Biden Administration and the legislature to withdraw the Amendments.

(2) If passed, countries have 6 months to leave WHO and the UN. That would be November. If the US stays in, they would be subject to the Director General of WHO declaring a health emergency and dictating the steps that would be taken in our country. (It has been pointed out that the timing is concurrent with our federal elections. Also, gun violence has been declared a public health crisis by Biden) He can use UN resources to implement his response, including troops, as apparently were used in the Ottawa Convoy "police action."

Note that the CCP and the Gates Foundation are major funders of WHO and have exerted a great deal of influence there.
 

ghost

Veteran Member
Biden Handing Over U.S. Sovereignty to WHO

by Peter Breggin MD and Ginger Ross Breggin | May 4, 2022 | Feature 2, Healthcare, Politics, World
WHO-nerve-center.jpg



Please take seriously the severity of this existential threat to everything free people hold dear. Do everything in your power to pass this report on to others and to find ways to communicate with and to influence people to stop empowering WHO to take over our national sovereignty and freedom.

On May 22-28, 2022, ultimate control over America’s healthcare system, and hence its national sovereignty, will be delivered for a vote to the World Health Organization’s governing legislative body, the World Health Assembly (WHA).

This threat is contained in new amendments to WHO’s International Health Regulations, proposed by the Biden administration, that are scheduled as “Provisional agenda item 16.2” at the upcoming conference on May 22-28, 2022.1

These amendments will empower WHO’s Director-General to declare health emergencies or crises in any nation and to do so unilaterally and against the opposition of the target nation. The Director-General will be able to declare these health crises based merely on his personal opinion or consideration that there is a potential or possible threat to other nations.

If passed, the Biden Administration’s proposed amendments will, by their very existence and their intention, drastically compromise the independence and the sovereignty of the United States. The same threat looms over all the U.N.’s 193 member nations, all of whom belong to WHO and represent 99.44% of the world population.2

These regulations are a “binding instrument of international law entered into force on 15 June 2007.”3 U.N. members states can be required by law to obey or acquiesce to them.

How It Became Official

On January 18, 2022, with no public awareness, officials from the Biden Administration sent the World Health Organization these extensive amendments to strengthen WHO’s ability to unilaterally intervene into the affairs of nations merely suspected of having a “health emergency” of possible concern to other nations.4 The U.S. amendments cross out a critical existing restriction in the regulations: “WHO shall consult with and attempt to obtain verification from the State Party in whose territory the event is allegedly occurring…”5 By eliminating that, and other clauses (see below), all the shackles will be removed from the Director-General of WHO, enabling him to declare health emergencies at will.

The amendments would give WHO the right to take important steps to collaborate with other nations and other organizations worldwide to deal with any nation’s alleged health crisis, even against its stated wishes. The power to declare health emergencies is a potential tool to shame, intimidate, and dominate nations. It can be used to justify ostracism and economic or financial actions against the targeted nation by other nations aligned with WHO or who wish to harm and control the accused nation.

Although sponsored by an American administration, WHO’s most significant use of this arbitrary authority to declare national emergencies will be used against the United States if our government ever again dares to take anti-globalist stands as it did under the Trump administration.

How Much Time Do We Have to Stop the Amendments?

The contents of the proposed amendments were not made public until April 12, 2022,6 leaving little time to protest before the scheduled vote. As noted, the amendments are scheduled and almost certainly will be enacted May 22-28, 2022.

The existing WHO regulations then provide for an 18-month grace period during which a nation may withdraw its “yes” vote for amendments, but the current proposed amendments would reduce that opportunity to six months. If the U.S.-sponsored amendments are passed, a majority of the nations could, in the next six months, change their individual votes and reverse the approval. But this is a much more difficult proposition than stopping the whole process now.


Without Organized Resistance, the Amendments Will Definitely Pass

On January 26, 2022, the same U. S. Permanent Mission to the United Nations in Geneva sent a one-page memo to WHO confirming that the amendments had been sent. It also contained a brief report by the same Loyce Pace, Assistant Secretary for Global Affairs HHS.7 Most importantly, the memo listed all the nations backing the U.S. amendments. The size and power of the group guarantee that the amendments will be passed if unopposed by significant outside pressure.

Here are the 20 nations, plus the European Union, listed by the U.S. as supporting the amendments:

Albania, Australia, Canada, Colombia, Costa Rica, Dominican Republic, Guatemala, India, Jamaica, Japan, Monaco, Montenegro, Norway, Peru, Republic of Korea, Switzerland, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United States of America, Uruguay, Member States of the European Union (EU).

The European Union, a globalist organization, has been among the biggest backers of increasing WHO’s global power. The EU includes the following 27 Western nations:

Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Republic of Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, and Sweden.

That’s a total of 47 nations supporting the U.S.-authored amendments. All of them have endorsed empowering WHO to declare a possible or potential health emergency or crisis within any nation despite its objections and refusal to cooperate. To repeat, these amendments will pass unless American citizens, as well as citizens worldwide, mount a very strong opposition.


World Health Organization
Defining “Health” and WHO’s Domain of Authority

According to the Foreward to WHO’s regulations, there is no specific limit to what constitutes a health emergency, and it is certainly not limited to pandemics. WHO’s domain includes:8

a scope not limited to any specific disease or manner of transmission, but covering “illness or medical condition, irrespective of origin or source, that presents or could present significant harm to humans…

WHO’s powerful reach is also defined by the number of other organizations it is authorized to cooperate with once it has declared an emergency or health crisis: “other competent intergovernmental organizations or international bodies with which WHO is expected to cooperate and coordinate its activities, as appropriate, include the following: United Nations, International Labor Organization, Food and Agriculture Organization, International Atomic Energy Agency, International Civil Aviation Organization, International Maritime Organization, International Committee of the Red Cross, International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, International Air Transport Association, International Shipping Federation, and Office International des Epizooties.”9

The Preamble to the WHO Constitution (separate from the International Health Regulations) summarizes WHO’s concept of what is included under its mandate of improving, guiding, and organizing world health:10

WHO remains firmly committed to the principles set out in the preamble to the Constitution

  • Health is a state of complete physical, mental and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity.
  • The enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of health is one of the fundamental rights of every human being without distinction of race, religion, political belief, economic or social condition.
  • The health of all peoples is fundamental to the attainment of peace and security and is dependent on the fullest cooperation of individuals and States.
  • The achievement of any State in the promotion and protection of health is of value to all.
  • Unequal development in different countries in the promotion of health and control of diseases, especially communicable diseases, is a common danger.
  • Healthy development of the child is of basic importance; the ability to live harmoniously in a changing total environment is essential to such development.
  • The extension to all peoples of the benefits of medical, psychological, and related knowledge is essential to the fullest attainment of health.
  • Informed opinion and active co-operation on the part of the public are of the utmost importance in the improvement of the health of the people.
  • Governments have a responsibility for the health of their peoples which can be fulfilled only by the provision of adequate health and social measures.
Given WHO’s assessment of the breadth of its health concerns, mandates, and goals — almost any kind of problematic situation that affects the people of a nation could be considered a health problem. Indeed, under WHO’s approach, it would be difficult to find any important national issue that was not a potential health problem. With the imminent passage of the American-sponsored amendments to the International Health Regulations, WHO will have free reign for using these expansive definitions of health to call a crisis over anything it wishes in any nation it desires.

WHO’s Sweeping New Powers

The sweeping new powers will be invested in the Director-General of WHO to act on his own. The Director-General is Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, commonly known as Tedros. Tedros, the first non-physician director-general of WHO, is an extremely controversial Marxist activist and politician from Ethiopia installed by the Chinese Communist Party. Despite the fact that his role as the cover-up apologist for the Chinese Communists at the onset of COVID-19, this “dear friend of Anthony Fauci” was re-elected without opposition in 2022 to a second five-year term.11 His original election in 2017, followed by his re-election without opposition in 2022, is an ominous display of Chinese Communist influence over WHO,12 which makes further empowering the U.N. agency extremely dangerous.

Under the new regulations, WHO will not be required to consult with the identified nation beforehand to “verify” the event before taking action. This requirement is stricken by the U.S. amendments (Article 9.1). The amendments require a response in 24 hours from the identified nation, or WHO will identify it as “rejection” and act independently (Article 10.3). If the identified nation “does not accept the offer of collaboration within 48 hours, WHO shall … immediately share with the other State Parties the information available to it…” (Article 10.4).


Under the proposed regulations, WHO itself would develop and update “early warning criteria for assessing and progressively updating the national, regional, or global risk posed by an event of unknown causes or sources…” (New article 5). Notice that the health-endangering event may be so nonspecific as to have “unknown causes or sources.” Thus, Tedros and any future Director-Generals of WHO will be given unrestricted powers to define and then implement their interventions.

The proposed regulations, in combination with existing ones, allow action to be taken by WHO, “If the Director-General considers, based on an assessment under these Regulations, that a potential or actual public health emergency of international concern is occurring…” (Article 12.2). That is, Tedros need only “consider” that a “potential or actual” risk is occurring.

continued...........
If Biden is doing this, he just committed treason against the United States and should be arrest for such !!!!
Next for his the you no what !
 

end game

Veteran Member
The United States already signed the Treaty in 2005 to become a member of WHO. As such, we have HHS delegates that participate in the World Health Assembly. These are Amendments to the International Health Regulations which were proposed by the Biden Admin on January 18. The World Health Assembly will vote the week of May 22-28 in Geneva as to whether to adopt the Amendments. The vote is by a simple majority. There are already at least 40 major countries who have indicated they will vote in the affirmative.

This is not a "treaty" requiring the advise and consent of the Senate.

(1) The US could withdraw its proposed Amendments. A General Strike of Republican Senators and Congressmen is being proposed for next week. This would mean that they would not show up on the Floor for a vote or in Committee hearings - hopefully causing the lack of a quorum to do business. This world bring pressure on the Biden Administration and the legislature to withdraw the Amendments.

(2) If passed, countries have 6 months to leave WHO and the UN. That would be November. If the US stays in, they would be subject to the Director General of WHO declaring a health emergency and dictating the steps that would be taken in our country. (It has been pointed out that the timing is concurrent with our federal elections. Also, gun violence has been declared a public health crisis by Biden) He can use UN resources to implement his response, including troops, as apparently were used in the Ottawa Convoy "police action."

Note that the CCP and the Gates Foundation are major funders of WHO and have exerted a great deal of influence there.

Power only exists when they have a consenting populace. There is no treaty, statute, law, or paper that will stop any action once people decide to become ungovernable. It's a descent into unmitigated chaos but ultimately better if one choose their ticket out of life rather that the decision being left to some "authoritarian" behind a podium.
 

pauldingbabe

The Great Cat
Sad thing is most people don't know/care enough to say NO, ENOUGH!

As long as people have an expectation of returning to "normal" they won't lift a finger and will WELCOME this travesty.

The masses are complaining but they will roll over willingly for their own comfort.

We have seen it time and again. Especially in the last 2.5 years. This "health crisis " is in the terrible 2s. Still a toddler. Wait for the teen years...
 

pinkelsteinsmom

Veteran Member
If you perused the Great Reset thread, you would already know this. This morning was the deadline to comment. Congress has no say as these are internal Amendments to the World Health Organization convention. They could hold hearings to provide information and pressure on our delegates, but the vote begins the week of May 22. If the WHO Assembly passes it, our only recourse is to withdraw from the WHO and UN. We will have 6 months to do so.
Well here we are people. It is time for musical chairs, where will we all be when the music stops. Get to where you need to be, red state etc and get ready for the south and southwest will not take this sitting down. THIS is where she will split down the middle.. For me and mine we will go down swinging like the last Samurai
 

Marie

Veteran Member
It's all part of the plan. So many keep saying they can't do this.
I haven't seen any takers for the resistance yet, have you?
The plan has been successfully implemented for centuries.
 

NoDandy

Has No Life - Lives on TB
Tic Tock Tick Tock Tic Tock Tic Tock Tick Tock Tic Tock Tic Tock Tick Tock Tic Tock Tic Tock Tick Tock Tic Tock

:ld:
:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :hmm: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:
 

Publius

TB Fanatic
The story is growing legs and is showing up in other places on the internet.
He is brain damaged, but would his staff allow him to do this knowing full well is violates his oath of office and his duty to the country. Now they will firmly stand their ground that you have no choice but accept it, but I would not convict anyone in a court of law that went after them with the intent to kill them and actually kill a few of them.
 

Chance

Veteran Member
I read that Tedros is Fauci on steroids.


Heck, if this goes into effect in six months, Tedros could shut us down for obesity...as an epidemic. Biden and his people are so evil!!
 

Ragnar

Senior Member
Here is the body of the document (at least this is what several site/ videos are referring to ... As I read it it is a big nothing - unless i am not reading the document they refer to correctly.

Link

1652733119655.png
1652733257989.png
1652733279678.png
1652733302632.png
1652733325136.png
1652733345244.png
1652733399309.png
1652733419895.png
1652733461329.png
 

marsh

On TB every waking moment
[This gentleman, who is a US Attorney, is adamant that it will not have any legal effect in the US because the original agreement to join WHO was NOT by treaty, but by Joint Resolution only. Sounds good, but can so many other respected people be incorrect in their assessment? If it does have legs will it get people off their chairs into action or impact the elections?]

Ep. 113: WHO Treaty; Israel-Palestine; Dominion; Mules AND MORE! Viva & Barnes LIVE! 2:06 :26 min

Ep. 113: WHO Treaty; Israel-Palestine; Dominion; Mules AND MORE! Viva & Barnes LIVE!
vivafrei Published May 15, 2022

Discussion of the WHO Treaty at 17:00 min to 26 min(I believe both gentlemen are attorneys. Viva is Canadian and Robert is US)

"Viva" - David: Establishing a global pandemic response and many nations have become signatories.

Robert: It's misunderstood. There is a belief out there that the Biden Admin is lobbying the WHO to adopt a range of rules governing its members that would empower the WHO to centralize responses to a pandemic. Those rule changes are not legally binding on the US until a treaty is proposed to the US Senate.

We joined the WHO by a Joint Resolution of Congress - not by treaty. This is why Trump was just going to unilaterally withdraw from it and was on pace to do so before the election of 2020.

There will be misleading talk in the press of it being binding; talk of it being a treaty - it's not. The WHO was not formed by a treaty as far as the US participation in it. The only thing we said in Congress was that we would give one year's notice and pay our dues when we leave. Only treaties are the "Supreme Law of the Land." No treaty has passed giving the WHO any legal power in the US.

So even if these rule changes of the Biden Admin. pass, they do not become legally binding on the US until and unless a treaty. They are talking about taking these rules and conforming them into a treaty and proposing a treaty, but that is still, by their own time table, several years away. Also, several nations have already said that they are not interested in delegating that kind of power to the WHO.

So there is a desire for it to occur, but there has been over-reaction from some parts of the political universe because they think it is politically binding. It is not. Any statement you see that it is politically binding is from someone in good faith that has misunderstood it - or someone in bad faith that is trying to mis-portray it.

Whichever that may be, it is not legally binding until a treaty passes and that requires 2/3 of the Senate. It has to go to the Office of Legal Council. It has to go through the State Dept. and have multiple levels of review before it is even proposed to the Senate. Then the Senate has to debate on it and more than 2/3 have to approve it for it to become binding law and we're not near that.

Viva: There are people out there who want to get people to repeat misinformation either to make them look stupid or to create a panic that might serve their interests. Some people might say it doesn't matter if it is in a treaty or not if nations have a willingness to abide by them, treaty or no treaty it becomes a defacto treaty even though it hasn't been passed.

Robert: It is not legally binding in the US. It is like the Climate Accords that we ignored and just walked away from. It is not something that is legally binding. It is something that can be taken on an advisory basis. Countries vary as to the enforceability of such an agreement. For instance, the Geneva Convention is something most countries have joined, Russia and Ukraine are not abiding by it because what's the disciplinary mechanism? There isn't one. That's the other factor - a law isn't a law if it's not enforced.

This goes back to the old UN Treaty. There was a lot of talk in the 50s that it meant they could govern the US. No it didn't. That wasn't the scope of the treaty and it had no enforcement power. So that is even more true with the WHO.

So people have been e-mailing me that it looks like WHO is going to be able to run US policy. No they're not. Nothing about these rule changes gives them any legally binding power in the US.

Viva: I look at Canada and similar it needs to be a treaty. The problem is if the Prime Minister and the Provinces are going to behave in a manner according to the rules

Robert: Nothing is going to prevent Biden from doing what he's going to do but the laws and Constitution, but there were people who thought this rule change would supersede US law, it does not. It doesn't stop politicians from doing what politicians are currently able to legally do, but it does not give them the power to circumvent or over-ride existing domestic law in the US.

Viva: So people can now not panic that it is now International Law applicable to all nations, rather than an indication of where things might go. But the bottom line is in any country, in any given state or province, the government might, nonetheless, implement these rules regardless of whether it is part of a treaty - we'll see.

Robert: Kinda like the Iran deal. Obama used the Iran deal to do what he did, but it was not legally binding, so that is how Trump could reverse it once he got in. Biden is still limited by the Constitution and the laws as to what he's got power in. You can't change the Constitution by just the Executive branch declaring something. You need a treaty to pass 2/3 of the Senate for that to happen.

Viva: Interesting, no panic but...

Robert: People should be aware of it and resisting it and what the Biden Admin is pushing is a bad idea, and treaties would be a disaster of an idea, Part of his concern is that some people are over-reacting now and will lead people to not be alert when the treaty is proposed.

Viva: People say China runs the WHO

Robert: China has influence over the WHO - there is no question about that. They didn't do the meaningful inquiry and covered up in the beginning. China is one of the biggest participants in the WHO. They don't really run it. The US with Biden probably has more influence right now. It varies as to who has power. He would call it a globalist institution that more often serves globalist purposes than any individual nation.

Viva: So be aware of it and we are not yet subject to international Law.
 

energy_wave

Has No Life - Lives on TB
If Biden is doing this, he just committed treason against the United States and should be arrest for such !!!!
Next for his the you no what !

This will allow China to use eugenics to sterilize white people, via mandatory global vaccines or those who's race the CCP doesn't want left alive. The CCP could be the ones behind the white supremacy issues. They want white people eradicated. Jesus was white and look at what they did to him in China.
 

vector7

Has No Life - Lives on TB

Jeep

Veteran Member
It looks like China is finally getting what they paid for with the checks/cash to the Biden cartel. Greed will be the downfall of the US.
 
Top