Tedros Talks with forked Tongue. Here’s the evidence. Let’s look at a few things he told Agence France Press and The Guardian. What does the draft treaty really say?

 

I
have come to love making powerpoint slides, as they seem to convey
ideas better than I can do in just words. You get the idea from the
Guardian’s photo and text that Tedros is troubled. Will the treaty (aka
agreement) (aka accord) pass?

The powers behind the WHO throne
knew they could only win if they could outsmart us. And they had the
ability to pay for the world’s finest sociopathic lawyers. They had to
sneak the bad stuff past us.

1. One way of doing that is to deny it exists.

2. Another is to misrepresent what their proposed documents show.

3. Yet
   another method is to include contradictory passages in the treaty, and
   refer back to one claim, without revealing that the opposite claim is
   also embedded in the treaty.

4. Another method runs through everything the WHO does. Financial guru Max Keiser coined the perfect term for this: Complexification.
   Deliberately complicate things so they are very hard to unravel and
   understand. The two WHO documents are completely different, treated
   differently, yet have many overlapping provisions. It is extremely
   difficult to keep them straight in your head. And their use of language
   is deliberately confusing. Tedros routinely claims that one document
   does not say “X,” when it is the other document that says “X”.

Here is the Guardian article. Let’s look at some of the tricks pulled in just one article.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/jan/22/global-pandemic-agreement-at-risk-of-falling-apart-who-warns

1. Make it about the children, always.
   “Plans for a global pandemic preparedness agreement risk falling apart
   amid wrangling and disinformation, according to the chief of the World Health Organization, who has warned that future generations “may not forgive us”.

2. Projection. Accuse the other side of doing what you are doing, i.e., spreading lies and disinformation.

3. Conflate two very different things.
   “Tedros said all countries needed the capacity to detect and share
   pathogens presenting a risk, and timely access to tests, treatments and
   vaccines.” What he fails to admit is that the treaty and amendments
   want nations to go out and find potential pandemic pathogens (aka
   biological warfare agents) all the time, not just during pandemics, and
   give them to the WHO for wider distribution. This is code for
   proliferation of biological weapons. If nations actually went along
   with this plan, I can virtually guarantee hundreds of lab leaks and
   possibly deliberate biological attacks with these agents.

   Sharing biowarfare agents is very different than timely access to tests and treatments.

4. Use code, and make it about the children. “He called for a “strong agreement that will help to protect our children and grandchildren from future pandemics”.’ The word strong
   in this coded context means enforceable. Nations will be obligated to
   obey the WHO. They must be accountable and compliant, according to the
   treaty draft.

5. Lie outright,
   and when challenged, show the claim in the treaty that nations are to
   remain sovereign, and hide the parts of the treaty that show that
   nations must cede sovereignty to the WHO.

6. Claim universal agreement with the treaty.
   “The WHO emergencies director, Michael Ryan, reminded countries how
   the pandemic “ripped apart our social, economic and political systems
   and became a multi-trillion dollar problem”.

   In the midst of major geopolitical conflicts, “this is one thing the world agrees on”, he said.”

What
is sovereignty? The ability to rule yourself. If you allow someone
else to rule you, in whole or part, you are ceding sovereignty over
whatever it is they can command.

Let’s look at page 20 of the treaty
for an example of how sovereignty is to be lost. The WHO requires
nations to pass certain laws, using the word shall, which in legal
language, in international treaties, means MUST.

Article
14 paragraph 1 tells nations they must expedite approvals (i.e.,
licenses) and authorizations (i.e., EUAs) of pandemic drugs and
vaccines. Decoding this, it means nations need to find ways to get
drugs and vaccines into their populations without going through full
testing and licensing. In the US, an EUA can be issued without testing
the product in even one experimental animal.

Article 14 paragraph
5 tells nations they must have laws and regulations in place to push
pandemic drugs and vaccines out quickly.

Article 15 paragraph 1
tells nations they must “manage” liability for these hastily produced
pandemic drugs and vaccines. Decoded, this means that manufacturers,
WHO and government officials must be held harmless for injuries from the
hastily made products that WHO will help produce.

Does it seem
like nations are retaining control of the approval processes for
pandemic products? Are they in control of the liability provisions?
The WHO is telling them what they must do. Nations are expected to
follow the WHO’s orders if they sign on to the treaty and/or amendments.
However, because nations are told they themselves must pass such laws,
the WHO claims the nations have retained sovereignty.

And WHO says so with its forked tongue in Article 3, paragraph 2:

Sovereignty
– States have, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations and
the general principles of international law, the sovereign right to
legislate and to implement legislation in pursuance of their health
policies.

And by the way, the following is a list of possible recommended actions (Article 18) that comes from the International Health Regulations (IHR).
The WHO’s Director-General will be able to issue orders for any of
these measures to be applied anywhere in the world (as 196 countries are
already parties to the IHR) once the IHR amendments become BINDING—if
the amendments are passed in May 2024.

He could order
vaccine passports, quarantines, lockdowns, mandate vaccines and/or
“treatment,” close borders, impose contact tracing or require you to be
swabbed or examined. Although Tedros claimed he would not have the
power to impose vaccine mandates or lockdowns, you can verify for
yourself that he would have precisely those powers, granted by the IHR,
not the treaty.

Does Tedros speak with forked tongue?

What do you think? Is WHO trying to pull a fast one, or not?