Tools to Fight the W.H.O.'s proposed 2024 'International Health Regulations'
April 17, 2024
Bill Gates’ G.A.R.S. and Bill Gates’ G.E.R.M.
Please see below several images that I hope will be useful in opposing, then routing, the United Nations World Health Organization’s proposed changes to its own ‘International Health Regulations.’
Bill Gates is the Bogey presented here. A truer, more destructive and obviously threatening Bogey than Bill Gates has yet to arise in our 21st century. Hundreds millions of people round the world already detest Bill Gates. Billions are alarmed by his April 30, 2020 statement on his ‘Gates Notes’ online platform that mRNA ‘vaccines’ must go into ‘seven billion arms’ … to combat the ‘Global Pandemic’ declared by the WHO and named ‘COVID-19’.
Millions also know that Gates and fellow multi-billionaires of ‘Big Tech’ have gained hundred of billions of Dollars in wealth since COVID-19 became our reality— $448 BILLION the Washington Post-quoted amount of wealth added by ten people between March 2020 and March 2021. Millions round the world also know that Bill Gatges and his ‘vaccines’ have been charged in India and Kenya and elsewhere with engineering mass sterilization, injuries, and deaths.
In 2015 Gates spoke at both the World Economic Forum and a Technology Entertainment Development (TED) gathering on the need for s ‘Global Alert & Response System’, or G.A.R.S.. to “deploy” against “an epidemic.” He likened his GARS to a ‘mobile unit’ such as the North American Treaty Alliance (N.A.T.O.) readies through ‘war games.’
Gates spoke to the WEF’s 2015 Annual Meeting in Davos, Switzerland. He said: “NATO has a mobile unit that is ready to deploy quickly. NATO members do joint exercises where they work out logistics like how troops will get food and what language they will use to communicate [….] The world does not fund any organization (not even the W.H.O.) to coordinate all the activities needed to stop an epidemic. In short, in a battle against a severe epidemic, we would be taking a knife to a bazooka fight." ' (1)
Gates told his TED audience in 2015, according to a transcript of his madly garbled syntax then: ‘The best lesson I think on how to ger preated or again, what we do for war. For soldiers, we have full time waiting to go. We have reserves that can scale up to large numbers. And NATO has a mobile unit that can deploy very rapidly. NATO does a lot of war games to check, are people well trained? Do they understand about fuel and logistics and the same radio frequencies? So they are absolutely ready to go. So these are the kinds of things we need to deal with a ep[demic.’ (2)
Gates’ orders are for ‘a mobile unit’, such as NATO’s, ready like ‘soldiers’ trained for rapid deployment and invasions.
Please make Bill Gates’ 2015 plans known through screen-shot and reproductions of the the Graphic-Card, proportioned at 6”-by-9”, below.
Psychopaths are notable for their persistence. By 2022 Gates had through the WHO-declared ‘COVID-19’ the ‘epidemic’ that he’d predicted in 2015 and the ‘GREAT EPIDEMIC’ that he’d predicted on CBS News and numberless other platforms in 2017.
In 2022 Bill Gates’ special force to combat ‘the Next Pandemic’ was named by him the ‘Global Emergency Response and Mobilization’, or G.E.R.M.. ‘team’.
He told his audience of $5000-paying attendees at the TED 'New Era’ gathering in Vancouver, British CVolumbia on April 12, 2022 that his proposed GERM would involve at least 3000 specially trained professionals. “ ‘'The cost of this team is significant. It's over a billion a year to support the 3,000 people who would be on this team.’ “
Such a team’ would be able to deploy at the strength of more than 12 Companies. It would hold the numbers of at least three Batallions, if Batallion is counted at 1000.
“ ‘The work would be coordinated by the WHO,’ ” Gates told the ‘New Era’ TED attendees. His GERM Team would be '“ ‘be present in many locations around the world, stationed in public health agencies. They'd work closely with the national teams, depending on the income level. They'd have more in the lower-income countries....' “
Gates’ Millions of Dollars and His Billions of Dollars
Bill Gates through his Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (BGMF) and the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization (Now Gavi) that he founded in that key year of 2000 is by many multiples the LARGEST PRIVATE FUNDER of the United Nations’ World Health Organization. According to Quartz, Gates’ two tax-deductible Charities funded 17.3% of the WHO’s 2021 Budget. (3) The BGMF nominally gave the WHO $375 million in 2021, according to USA Today.
$375 MILLION may seem a lot, even if tax-deductible, but the amount is dwarfed by Bill Gates’ revenue in merely the first year of the WHO-declared “ ‘COVID-19’ “ Global Pandemic, March 2020 to 2021.
Gates’ wealth increased by $22 BILLION in the March 2020 to March 2021 year through Microsoft alone. He ranked a mere 9th among fellow multi-billionaires’ gains in the 12-months’ time-span. The ten’s total gain: $448 BILLION.
In April of 2021 Forbes magazine did the following tally.
‘Total American billionaire wealth stands at $4.6 trillion as of the stock market close on April 28, by our count. That’s up 35% from $3.4 trillion when markets opened on January 1, 2020, just as Covid-19 was beginning to take the world by storm.
In other words, U.S. billionaires have gotten about $1.2 trillion richer during the pandemic.’ (6)
The WHO’s Proposed New Powers Advance through Two Means—‘Pandemic Treaty’ and ‘Amendments’ to the IHR
Beginning this Post, we referred to the knowledge and dispositions of millions and billions of people round the world. Their concerns are represented by countless organization and physicians. The World Council on Health and Shabnam Palesa Mohamed have coordinated opposition in Africa and Europe. (7) On March 26, 2024 World Council for Health hosted a discussion on how Nations can exit the WHO. (8)
Dr. Meryl Nass of Maine in the U.S. has provided many links. On April 6, 2024 Dr. Nass delivered through her Substack two pages of ‘Congressional Briefing Notes’. (9)
The Notes are highly useful. Dr. Nass and her collaborator, attorney Thi Tuy Van Dinh, write that ‘two documents are being prepared through the WHO: a broad series of amendments to the existing International Health Regulations (2005) (IHRs)[1] and a proposed pandemic treaty, accord or instrument[2] (it has no definite name yet).’
The Notes distinguish between the two means and procedures. The Amendments appear far more sinister an agency for the WHO to seize powers.
Dr. Nass and attorney Van Dinh write.:
‘A treaty requires a two-third vote of the Health Assembly (194 States) to be adopted and is binding to only States that have ratified or accepted it (Article 19 and 20, WHO Constitution). It could potentially be enacted into force in the US as an executive agreement by a simple signature, without Senate ratification.’
Dangerous enough, Amendments post even more opportunities for treachery.
Nass and Dinh: ‘However, the IHRs and any amendments thereto are adopted by simple majority, and become binding to all WHO Member States that didn’t reject or make reservations to them within predefined timeframes (Articles 21 and 22, WHO Constitution; Rule 72, Rules of procedures of the World Health Assembly).
In 2022 amendments to 5 articles of the IHRs were considered in opaque committee meetings during the 75th annual meeting, and then adopted 'by consensus' without a formal vote[3]. Amendments are passed by simple majority.
The current draft of the IHR Amendments would allow the Director-General of WHO or Regional Directors to declare a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC), or the potential for one, without meeting any specific criteria (Article 12). The WHO would then assume management of the PHEIC and issue binding directives to concerned States.
1. PHEICS and potential PHEICs could be declared without the agreement of the concerned State or States.
2. WHO's unelected officials (Director-General, Regional Directors, technical staff) could dictate measures including quarantines, testing and vaccination requirements, lockdowns, border closures, etc.
WHO officials would not be accountable for their decisions.’
Proposed Article 3 removes rights that have been intrinsic to the IHRs until now.
Removed are basic rights under international law. Struck from the 2005 IHRs is the crucial guarantee of human rights as a foundation of public health: "The implementation of these Regulations shall be with full respect for the dignity, human rights and fundamental freedoms of persons..."
This has been replaced with the following legally meaningless phrase: "based on the principles of equity, inclusivity, coherence..."
Among many egregious proposals, one example encapsulates the extraordinary nature of what is being proposed. Proposed article 43.4 notes that the WHO could ban the use of certain medications or other measures during a pandemic, since its 'recommendations' would be binding:
"WHO shall make recommendations to the State Party concerned to modify or rescind the application of the additional health measures in case of finding such measures as disproportionate or excessive. The Director General shall convene an Emergency Committee for the purposes of this paragraph."
States' obligations in the proposed Amendments would include:
1. Conducting extensive biological surveillance of microorganisms and people (Article 5);
2. Monitoring mainstream and social media and to censor “false and unreliable information” regarding WHO-designated public health threats (Article 44.1(h)(new));
3. Providing medical supplies for use by other States as determined by the WHO (New Article 13A);
4. Giving up intellectual property for use by other States or third parties (New Article 13A);
5. Transferring genetic sequence data for "pathogens capable of causing pandemics and epidemics or other high-risk situations" to other Nations or third parties, despite the risks this entails (Article 44.1(f) (new)).
The engagement of WHO with non-State actors (non-governmental organizations, private sector, philanthropic foundations, and academic foundations) is foreseen in multiple proposals, raising enormous concerns about conflict of interest (Articles 12. New 7, 13. New 7, New 13A.7).
It is expected that to implement these proposals, WHO will require a massive increase in its budget. The World Bank estimated the cost at over $40 billion per year, roughly ten times the current WHO budget.
The role of the WHO will change from assisting Nations to manage public health challenges on request, to becoming the manager of a massive network of bio-surveillance activities and becoming the enforcer of its public health policies.’
The Congressional Briefing Notes come with the direct Linmks that are copied below.
[1] https://apps.who.int/gb/wgihr/pdf_files/wgihr1/WGIHR_Compilation-en.pdf
[2] https://apps.who.int/gb/inb/pdf_files/inb4/A_INB4_3-en.pdf
[3] A/75/67 (https://apps.who.int/gb/ebwha/pdf_files/WHA75/A75_67(draft)-en.pdf)
Let’s review highlights. Proposed Amendments to the WHO’s International Health Regulations enable:
•’The Director-General of WHO or Regional Directors to declare a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC), or the potential for one, without meeting any specific criteria (Article 12). The WHO would then assume management of the PHEIC and issue binding directives to concerned States.’
•WHO officials from its Director General downward and outward then decide actions that must be adopted within Nations: Lockdowns, Quarantines, Vaccinations, …
•’Proposed article 43.4’ lets the WHO ‘ban the use of certain medications or other measures during a pandemic, since its 'recommendations' would be binding’/
•Nations would be bound to conduct ‘extensivie biologial surveillance of microorganisms and people (Article 5)’ and feed their data to the WHO.
•Nations would have monitor media within their borders and to censor WHO-deemed “false and unreliable informaton.”
•Nations would have to share ‘medical supplies’ per directive—and thus to accept medicines and presumable ‘vaccines’ per WHO directive.
•Surrender rights to citizens’ intellectual property within and outside Nations.
•Transfer findings of genetic sequences to the WHO or to WHO-designated to ‘other nations or third parties.’
The proposed IHR Amendments are thus, as related by Dr. Nass and Attorney Van Dinh, an Invitation to Dictatorship and Theft through the WHO even if a Nation may be among the minority who refuse such an absurd and ruinous abrogation of their independence and self-rule. That is: ‘the IHRs and any amendments thereto are adopted by simple majority, and become binding to all WHO Member States that didn’t reject or make reservations to them [… ] ‘ Only Iran, the Netherlands, New Zealand, and Slovakia have so far said No to compliance with the WHO’s new IHR.
Bill Gates’ WHO wants to dictate our futures. Bill Gates’ G.E.R.M. wants to invade our countries. Graphic-Cards. RESIST! RISE! WIN!
LINKS
1. https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2015/03/how-to-fight-the-next-epidemic/
3. https://qz.com/2102889/the-who-is-too-dependent-on-gates-foundation-donations
5. https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2021/03/12/musk-bezos-zuckerberg-gates-pandemic-profits/
8. https://worldcouncilforhealth.org/multimedia/expert-hearing-who-power-grab/
RELATED
Gates Debugged over 24 Years: The Most Destructive Person Alive
