Times Examiner Facebook Logo

Sunday, July 14, 2024 - 03:57 PM

INDEPENDENT CONSERVATIVE VOICE OF UPSTATE SOUTH CAROLINA

First Published in 1994

INDEPENDENT CONSERVATIVE VOICE OF
UPSTATE SOUTH CAROLINA

WHO Declares War on Sovereignty

As we reported last May, the World Health Organization is trying to amass authority to take control of our country during a “pandemic.”

The New Americanreported last week, “The Biden administration is in the active phase of drafting a legally binding pandemic agreement that would empower the UN’s World Health Organization (WHO) to shape national policies concerning pandemic ‘prevention, preparedness, and response.’”

Within the first year of the “pandemic,” such globalist architects as the Council on Foreign Relations were using the response to Covid as an excuse to bemoan the inadequacies of the WHO, suggesting that Covid could only be defeated “with a truly global response.”

Its members and contributing writers attacked President Trump’s response of focusing on America first and cutting funding to the WHO.

Philip Gordon, a senior fellow in U.S. Foreign Policy at the Council on Foreign Relations, wrote in Foreign Affairs, “Secretary of State Pompeo should start to build a coalition to combat the pandemic through existing organizations such as the WHO, G-7, and G-20, or new ones if necessary.”

Another CFR man suggested the WHO was set up to fail.

Stewart Patrick, a senior fellow in Global Governance at the Council on Foreign Relations, wrote in Foreign Affairs, “The WHO has a mandate that exceeds its capabilities. Member states have assigned it more and more tasks while limiting its independence and resources, setting the organization up for failure. To the extent that global health governance has failed, it has failed by design, reflecting the ambivalence of states torn between their desire for effective international institutions and their insistence on independent action.”

So, what is their solution? Less freedom, and more global control, of course! Mr. Patrick wrote in the same article,

But a truly empowered WHO could have done more. With enhanced political powers and a more flexible budget, the agency might have spearheaded a coherent multilateral response to the pandemic, persuaded nations to harmonize their border closures and travel restrictions, shamed laggards into fulfilling their binding treaty commitments under the IHR, and deployed significant resources and personnel to the shifting epicenter of the pandemic. The main obstacle to this outcome, and the reason for the haphazard global response, was the persistent ambivalence that all countries, particularly great powers, feel toward global health governance. All governments share a fundamental interest in a multilateral system that can respond quickly and effectively to stop potential pandemics in their tracks. They are less enthusiastic about delegating any of their sovereignty to the WHO, allowing it to circumscribe their freedom of action, or granting it the authorities and capabilities it needs to coordinate a pandemic response.

Truly empowering the WHO is what has been proposed since at least last 2005 with the introduction of the International Health Regulations, the IHR, that have been designed to instill some type of government responsibility for the health of its citizens. You’ll find no such power for the federal government in the U.S. Constitution. Yet, the initial draft of strengthening the WHO has been released and is to be considered and adopted by WHO members in mid-2024.

It’s titled the Zero draft of the WHO CA+. The CA+ stands for Convention, Agreement or other international instrument on pandemic prevention, preparedness, and response.

The entire 32-page document is written is such a way that the text could mean nothing or it could mean everything. It’s a complete mess of a word salad that won’t mean much to the average reader, but for those that have studied the nature of government and, specifically, the build-up of world government, the text is a rambling power grab that would result in the deaths of many more Americans, would leave American healthcare reeling, and would trample on the God-given rights of all Americans.

As we go through this, keep in mind what this country has been through with Covid, and how much worse it will be if the Communists and dictators at the United Nations get their hands on American sovereignty.

Here we go. The first eight pages are a listing of stated opinions, much like a resolution would be with all the whereases and wherefores, before it finally gives a vision of what they hope to accomplish.

Vision: The WHO CA+1 aims for a world where pandemics are effectively controlled to protect present and future generations from pandemics and their devastating consequences, and to advance the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of health for all peoples, on the basis of equity, human rights and solidarity, with a view to achieving universal health coverage, while recognizing the sovereign rights of countries, acknowledging the differences in levels of development among countries, respecting their national context and recognizing existing relevant international instruments. The WHO CA+ aims to achieve greater equity and effectiveness for pandemic prevention, preparedness and response through the fullest national and international cooperation.

Again, the nature of government is to grow, sucking up as much power and authority as it can from those it should be serving, but instead forces them to serve it. In essence, we can interpret this as a plan to usurp authority from legitimate government based on fear of the next pandemic. However, the largest fear from the last so-called pandemic came from government, especially the WHO. Dr. Robert Malone, an inventor of the mRNA technology used in the shots, called it fear porn in order to get Americans and others to submit to government edicts of forced masks, vaccinations, quarantine, and isolation lockdowns.

It’s a means to an end — an end of the ability of America to govern itself, which brings with it the end of the American experiment of freedom. Sound too harsh? Then let’s read on.

Article 1 is a definition of terms. Then Article 2 spells out implementation.

It says, “The implementation of the WHO CA+ shall be guided by the Charter of the United Nations and the Constitution of the World Health Organization.”

That lone statement automatically disqualifies American participation. The Charter of the United Nations is antithetical to the Declaration of Independence and to the U.S. Constitution. America’s founding documents embrace God as the creator of rights and point out that governments are instituted to protect those God-given rights. It’s the opposite for the UN, where they point to human rights being granted by government as well as limited by government.

However, many in the Biden administration, as well as many in Congress, including Republicans, have ignored this fact and think that the UN and its many affiliates are actually legitimate authorities that are worthy of time, attention, and resources.

Article 3 spells out the objective, which includes this little nugget: “progressive realization of universal health coverage and ensuring coordinated, collaborative and evidence-based pandemic response and resilient recovery of health systems at community, national, regional and global levels.”

The current dismal state of American healthcare is due to “progressive realization” of the takeover of healthcare by the federal government. What began as socialized medicine decades ago with Medicare, and then hastened by ObamaCare, is well on its way to universal coverage, which means a government monopoly of healthcare with no competition, which will lead to overpricing, sub-par quality, rationing of products and services, and an overall disrespect for life, especially through abortion and euthanasia.

Now, think of this on a global scale, with nobody left behind.

In Article 4, the document establishes a right to health. This is merely another leftist talking point that gets thrown in as an excuse to take control through an international governing body. An interesting point is that when this right is established, then it means government is the vehicle in which it is delivered. At least, that’s been the argument from the Left for many years.

Also in Article 4 is the topic of sovereignty. It reads, “States have, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations and the principles of international law, the sovereign right to determine and manage their approach to public health, notably pandemic prevention, preparedness, response and recovery of health systems, pursuant to their own policies and legislation, provided that activities within their jurisdiction or control do not cause damage to their peoples and other countries. Sovereignty also covers the rights of States over their biological resources.”

Of course, the idea of sovereignty falls apart in two places, which we’ve underlined. The UN Charter and its principles are not compatible with U.S. law, while the second underline gets sovereignty thrown out the window as it is easily argued that a country’s independent actions during a pandemic will cause harm to other countries by getting its people sick.

Article 4 also describes accountability and says that “All Parties shall cooperate with other States and relevant international organizations, in order to collectively strengthen, support and sustain capacities for global prevention, preparedness, response and recovery of health systems.”

Meaning that the WHO cannot be thrown out of a country. Remember that the track record of the United Nations to protect human rights is abysmal, with hundreds of allegations of sexual assault, rape, and murder against its own peacekeeping forces.

The next paragraph establishes that “All States are responsible for the health of their people, including pandemic prevention, preparedness, response and recovery, and previous pandemics have demonstrated that no one is safe until everyone is safe. Given that the health of all peoples is dependent on the fullest cooperation of individuals and States, all Parties are bound by the obligations of the WHO CA+.”

Again, another excuse to take control. No where will you find this as a power of the federal government in any of the founding documents. Why would we give this power to an international body that has no clue of American founding principles?

In the final paragraphs of Article 4, the health of people, animals, and ecosystems are equated under the label of One Health. The extreme Left’s obsession with bringing humans down to the level of animals helps them get rid of moral absolutes. That way they can act like an animal without human moral consequences. Later in the document, One Health is used as an excuse to potentially take over or have access to various parts of the livestock industry in the name of protecting people and animals from microbes.

Also brought up is the declaration that “Science, evidence and findable, accessible, interoperable and reusable data should inform all public health decisions and the development and implementation of guidance for pandemic prevention, preparedness, response and recovery of health systems.”

More word salad that reminds us of the type of science that is currently used to lie to humanity about Covid, hydroxychloroquine, ivermectin, remdesivir, the Covid shots, and man-made global warming. You can bet that these global forces will be doubling down on their efforts to control the narratives through their censorship and propaganda.

Moving further into the document, remember that this is supposedly about health, so the logistics of supply chains are also covered. Article 6 actually establishes the WHO Global Pandemic Supply Chain and Logistics Network, which all members are expected to participate in its development and operations especially in between pandemics. Remember that this is being planned and facilitated by government officials, who will need to have manufacturers do their bidding. How is not mentioned. Perhaps lucrative government contracts or perhaps even invoking some measure to force companies to manufacture specific items that it deems needed.

Article 7 is more blatant in its takeover. It partly reads, “strengthen coordination, with relevant international organizations, including United Nations agencies, on issues related to public health, intellectual property and trade, including timely matching of supply to demand and mapping manufacturing capacities and demand.”

History proves to us that governments trying to micro-manage or dictate supply and demand issues to industry are never successful. Communist regimes are well-known for this, destroying industry in order to control the people. Allowing the UN and the WHO anywhere near the controls of private industry is suicide to freedom.

Article 8 places Operation Warp Speed on steroids and could end up leading to more deaths than what we saw through the initial months of COVID. It reads, “Each Party shall build and strengthen its country regulatory capacities and performance for timely approval of pandemic-related products and, in the event of a pandemic, accelerate the process of approving and licensing pandemic-related products for emergency use in a timely manner, including the sharing of regulatory dossiers with other institutions.”

Given what we know now, how many of you are willing to trust the government to accelerate approval for pandemic-related products?  Not me. I didn’t trust them the first time, and certainly won’t in the future.

It also said, “The Parties shall, as appropriate, monitor and regulate against substandard and falsified pandemic-related products, through existing Member State mechanisms on substandard and falsified medical products.”

Based on this, do you think cheap and effective products like hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin will be available? Highly unlikely.

Article 9 anticipates that there will be injuries from pandemic vaccines, so it sets up a “global compensation mechanism.” Makes you wonder how long into the next pandemic we need to be before a vaccine mandate is rolled out under this new authority.

Article 11 encourages all parties “to establish global, regional and national collaborative genomics networks that are dedicated to epidemiological genomic surveillance and the global sharing of emerging pathogens with pandemic potential.”

Perhaps that means a monitoring of your health records that is easily accessed from a digital ID.

Article 13 suggests that countries run “table-top exercises” with support from the WHO to help gauge readiness and response.  We’ve seen this before with a pandemic exercise just weeks before COVID-19 was introduced into the world.

Also in Article 13, as seen throughout the rest of the document, invokes the phrases “whole-of-government” and “whole-of-society” to help battle pandemics. Again, government’s unconstitutional response to COVID-19 was all we need to know about what these phrases may mean for the future.

Article 15 gives the responsibility to declare a pandemic to the WHO director-general. Let us remind you that Dr. Tedros is the current Director-General, who has been described as a “Marxist revolutionary” and is not a medical doctor. He served in the top echelons of an Ethiopian “murderous communist organization” that the US previously classified as a terrorist organization. That’s the type of person who would be allowed to declare a pandemic, helping to unleash more deaths by government than would be taken by virus.

Article 20 establishes a governing body, as well as a consultative body for overseeing this WHO initiative.

Article 27 establishes that each member will have one vote, and economic unions, like the EU, can be represented by individual members or by the collective governing body.

The draft document also highlights how no exceptions will be made, and that a reservation any country may have that is incompatible with the object and purpose of the draft is not allowed.

Article 28 offers a way to withdraw from the WHO initiative, but not until two years after the agreement has come into force, and only after a year once notice is given. As it reads, “Any Party that withdraws from the WHO CA+ shall not be considered as having also withdrawn from any protocol to which it is a Party, or from any related instrument, unless such a Party formally withdraws from such other instruments, and does so in accordance with the relevant terms, if any, thereof.”

It’s a whole lot harder to get out than it is to not join in the first place.

I could go on and on and offer even more examples of why this is a bad idea, but you get the point.

So where does that leave us?

The Epoch Times reported that “A meeting of the WHO’s Intergovernmental Negotiating Body (INB) is scheduled for Feb. 27 to work out the final terms, which all members will then sign. … Once a health emergency is declared, all signatories, including the United States, would submit to the authority of the WHO regarding treatments, government regulations such as lockdowns and vaccine mandates, global supply chains, and monitoring and surveillance of populations.”

The draft mentions that this would be officially adopted sometime between May and November of 2024.  It’s been reported that it was written in such a way as to not trigger a vote by the U.S. Senate regarding treaty ratifications, but Congress would certainly need to legislate these provisions into law to give it the force of law.

Fox News reported this week, “Senate Republicans warned Tuesday they will oppose any attempt by the Biden administration to adhere to an emerging World Health Organization treaty on how to respond to future pandemics unless that treaty first wins Senate approval.”

That’s an excellent first start. Use our Legislative Alert to contact your Senators and let them know you disprove of the WHO.

The Big Media fact-checkers are already providing cover for the WHO by downplaying what is in the draft, totally ignoring the nature of government to grow and seize authority, as well as ignoring the threat that international or world government bodies represent to American liberties, freedom and independence.

The Epoch Times reported this week, “The U.S. pandemic negotiator for the proposed accord, Ambassador Pamela Hamamoto, said this week that the United States is committed to forming the accord as part of a ‘major component of the global health architecture for generations to come.’”

This just shows that the enemies of Americanism are in this for the long haul. However, the WHO and others of its globalist ilk that want to circumvent American sovereignty have their work cut out for them.

Yet, as the lockdowns demonstrated, a certain segment of the population will follow government edicts without question, while those that know their rights and how government is supposed to operate will take appropriate measures to protect their rights.

The Founding Fathers set up a series of protections for our God-given rights. These include the many layers of government from local to federal with its various checks and balances that are tasked with protecting our God-given rights, as exemplified in the Declaration of Independence. However, the ultimate protector of rights is the American people. The founders expected those that elected their representatives to understand and be engaged in the civic process.

Thomas Jefferson once said, “I know no safe depository of the ultimate powers of the society but the people themselves; and if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise their control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is … to inform their discretion by education. This is the true corrective of abuses of constitutional power.”

How well did that work in the beginning? Alexis de Tocqueville said in 1831, “Every citizen … is … taught … the history of his country, and the leading features of its Constitution…. It is extremely rare to find a man imperfectly acquainted with all these things, and a person wholly ignorant of them is sort of a phenomenon.”

Unfortunately, that’s not the case today.

Yet, President Biden cannot sign this treaty or agreement and expect the country to just fall in line. However, with federal dollars leading the way, he might be able to get the medical and health care establishment to follow suit — just as they did and continue to do with COVID protocols that continue to claim lives.

But here’s the key question, “Who will enforce these edicts?” Knowing what we do now about the asinine lockdowns and government guidelines, there’s not much of a chance that the majority of Americans will once again fall into lock-step. We predict that many more Americans, law enforcement, business owners, and elected officials will nullify these edicts coming from the WHO, the federal government, and any entity claiming authority.

Remember that your God-given rights are not subject to the whims of society or government. The Founding Fathers expected us to nullify anything that is unconstitutional, which isn’t something that is left to the U.S. Supreme Court. If the government hasn’t been allocated that power, it has no business legislating it. Again, nullification—the practice of a lesser magistrate protecting those it serves from government tyranny. It’s what helped bring immediate relief to many Americans during COVID and it must be utilized more regularly to help deter international “authorities.”

Your help is needed to stop this giveaway of American sovereignty. Don’t leave that responsibility to the other guy. An organized and well-informed We the People can stop this.

The best long-term solution is to follow the Founders’ advice of avoiding entangling alliances and to defund and get out of the WHO and the United Nations.

There are already two bills introduced in the House of Representatives to help stop the WHO. Use our online pre-written and customizable Legislative Alerts to contact your U.S. senators and representative via email, phone call, or video call.

Then share this information with your state legislators and put them on notice. Tell them they will need to watch for provisions of this treaty that supporters may try to sneak into related state legislation.

Also pass this along to your county sheriff and other elected officials and influencers in your community to inform them of this attempted power grab. If you’re not sure how to do this, The John Birch Society will teach you. Join us at JBS.org to work with others in your area to protect American freedom.

I’m Bill Hahn for The John Birch Society, and until next time, stay informed and get involved, patriots!

------------------------------

Bill Hahn is the CEO of The John Birch Society.