WHO Treaty: Marry in Haste, Repent at Leisure
Countries can Sign as Early as June 17th, 2024.
Home | All Posts | Notes | Clips
1. Marry in Haste, Repent at Leisure
Despite lack of clarity and details, the unfinished treaty can be signed as early as June 17, 2024, although significant details do not have to be worked out until mid 2026. For nations that sign the agreement, it would come into legally-binding force 30 days later on July 17th, 2024.
Article 33. Signature
2. This Agreement shall be open for signature at the World Health Organization headquarters in Geneva, following its adoption by the World Health Assembly at its Seventy-seventh session, from 17 June 2024 to 28 June 2024, and thereafter at United Nations Headquarters in New York, from 8 July 2024 to 7 July 2025.
Article 35. Entry into force
1. This Agreement shall enter into force on the thirtieth day following the date of deposit of the sixtieth instrument of ratification, acceptance, approval, formal confirmation or accession with the Depository.
Why rush into force a half-baked treaty?
Are the WHO and co afraid if nations have time to think, they will reject the treaty? Can they see the WHO treaty slipping through their fingers?
If more time is allowed, is the WHO afraid too many of its harmful Covid 19 policies will become more widely known in the general population?
Is this also the case with many leaders around the world, leaders who continue their attempts to censor the truth. Countries, like New Zealand, are still promoting the “vaccine” as safe and effective and therefore without proper informed consent.
Do the WHO and world leaders via the treaty want to impose more censorship under the guise of protecting us from “misinformation” i.e. the truth? In other words, to protect themselves.
But the truth is coming out and spreading.
Listen to or read Dr Guy Hatchard’s recent article: The Labour Government Deliberately Gaslit the NZ public.
From the article:
Not only did the Ardern government hide the information it was receiving from its Five Eyes intelligence partners about Covid’s origins, it also kept quiet about information it received from Pfizer in April 2021 detailing a massive range of adverse effects and health issues occurring subsequent to Covid mRNA vaccination.
Worse, they mandated the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines, told the public they were safe and effective, and refused to grant exemptions except to health service cronies. We now know they were playing a double game.
Listen to Guy Hatchard on RCR talk about the Ardern government’s cover-ups and more.
In the article and on air, Guy Hatchard also mentioned a New York Times article titled: Thousands Believe COVID Vaccines Harmed Them. Is Anyone Listening” Slowly, mainstream media are dipping their toes into subjects they not so long ago classified as taboo or misinformation, subjects the WHO tries to bury.
Court cases are also putting Covid 19 policy harms more in the spotlight. See here (Dr.Aseem Malhotra testifies in Helsinki District Court); and here; and here (The WHO ignored their leading vaccine expert!); and here.
Guy Hatchard on RCR said it was a scandal, an absolute scandal that the NZ government is prosecuting Barry Young who leaked information. This man is an honest man…he didn’t name any individuals.
‘River of Lies’ a well-organised documentary delves into NZ Labour Government’s Covid 19 response. It also refers to the WHO’s influence.
Even the Japanese people are now protesting in large numbers against the “vaccines” and the WHO. See here.
2. The Proposed Treaty Does Not Right the Wrongs.
We need an investigation into WHO’s fearmongering, their war against the unvaccinated, the cruel and fraudulent PCR testing, the masking, the social distancing, the lockdowns, the isolation, the mandates, and the safety of mRNA “vaccines”; otherwise, many more novel vaccines will be coerced onto us.
Norman Fenton in his article The Covid Testing Swabs Debacle stated:
Even if the PCR (or lateral flow) test had been an accurate method to determine if a person had the virus, there was never any need for anything more than the normal saliva test. But it was not just the unnecessary pain and humiliation of the test that was a problem. This type of invasive testing also led to catastrophic injuries.
Cease and desist letters to the WHO.
Swiss lawyer, Phillip Kruse, recently hand-delivered notices of personal liability to four top people at the WHO, including the Director General Tedros Ghebreyesus and Chief Scientist Jeremy Farrar.
The letters provide notice to the recipients that their actions are causing harm and call for them to cease and desist. Phillipp Kruse points out they can be held liable for their Covid 19 policies.
The WHO Constitution states in Article 67 that members of the WHO may enjoy ‘such privileges and immunities as may be necessary for the fulfilment of its objective and for the exercise of its functions.’ Such privileges and immunity…only apply when fulfilling the Article 1 objective.
The objective of the World Health Organization (WHO), according to Article 1 of the WHO Constitution, is the attainment by all peoples of the highest possible level of health.
Phillipp goes on to state, if their actions are found to be in contravention of Article 1, they will not be covered by Article 67 of the WHO Constitution.
The harms are listed and expanded on under the headings of Immeasurable suffering and death; Human rights violation; Failure to recommend inexpensive, safe and effective treatments and remedies for Covid 19; Dangerous gene therapies deployed in the guise of vaccines; Violation of informed consent.
The points made under each heading are significant. You can find out more and read the letter here and here.
3. The Treaty Centres Around Vaccine Development and Employment
John Leake sums up his view of the treaty in one minute. Listen to this video clip from The Hot Zone Episode mentioned in the previous article.
He says it is very clear what this complex is most interested in. They want emergency authorisation for vaccines so that new and novel vaccines can be rapidly developed and are NOT subjected to the same regulatory testing.
Highly qualified Japanese professor warns against new Japanese vaccines.
Listen to what this highly qualified Japanese professor has to say about the new vaccines coming out of Japan. Listen to what is in store for us if we do NOT wake up to the dangers of the WHO complex. Japanese Professor’s message to the world.
Japan's most senior oncologist condemns mRNA vaccines.
Also out of Japan, Japan's Most Senior Oncologist, Prof. Fukushima condemns mRNA vaccines as 'Evil Practices of Science'. See here.
It's as if we've opened Pandora's box and are now encountering all sorts of diseases. We're facing them. Autoimmune diseases, neurodegenerative diseases, cancer, and infections. All of these, including rare and difficult diseases, even those rare conditions are happening. Even diseases unheard of are being encountered by ordinary doctors.
This isn't science; it's more akin to faith, hysteria, or even cult behavior, in my opinion…
We really must take these damages seriously and address them earnestly. Any efforts to dismiss these damages as if they didn't happen are, frankly, the work of evil. This is a quintessential example of the evil practice of science.
… the WHO should lead a comprehensive outcome research on this gene vaccine used on humanity on a large scale for the first time, and all countries should cooperate with it. We should never again use such vaccines. This is a shame for humanity. It's a disgrace!
However, the WHO is NOT doing this. They are turning a blind eye. They want more and more of the same type of vaccine. That’s all you need to know to realize the WHO are unfit to be the authority on health as stated in the preamble of the proposed treaty.
On page 4 (3) the Treaty states that Parties to the WHO Pandemic Agreement recognize 'that the World Health Organization is the directing and coordinating authority on international health work, including on pandemic prevention, preparedness and response.'
4. Countries that Did Not Follow the WHO Fared Far Better than Countries that Did
Dr David Bell:
Moreover, many of the points in the proposed treaty are based on the precedents from the Covid pandemic. It is an understatement to say the WHO’s policy recommendations were not always correct. Some caused tremendous damage. And there has been no serious effort to understand how countries like Sweden fared so well during Covid while ignoring virtually every piece of the WHO’s advice.
Africa also fared extremely well. James Roguski pointed out in this article:
According to the World Health Organization, at least 6,700,506 total deaths have been attributed to COVID-19, but only 2.6% of those deaths occurred in the WHO’s African region.
They used Ivermectin. They had low vaccination rates. They did not follow the WHO’s recommendations. See here. The site also shows a significant number of other places that used Ivermectin and had positive outcomes. Papua New Guinea also had extremely low vaccination rates. They also did far better than highly vaccinated countries. See here.
If Africa had received an equitable share of vaccines, would they have seen the excess deaths rates and more deaths from Covid 19 due to immune dysfunction? Did Africa suffer far less deaths because of their use of cheap, effective repurposed drugs like Ivermectin?
The WHO should be investigating, learning from, and sharing what the countries and places etc. with the best outcomes did. This seems to me the best way to be prepared and respond to the next outbreak or pandemic.
The fact that the WHO is NOT investigating this shows they are more in line with vaccine production for profit than for the health of nations.
They should NOT be promoting profiteering policies before policies that promote health. See ‘Who is Pulling WHO’s Strings?’
5. The Treaty Promotes Fascism
Watch this two minute clip from The truth about the Pandemic Treaty. James Roguski explains in no uncertain terms what the WHO Treaty is all about.
I think anyone who agrees with this treaty must NOT have read it and/or be one or more of the following: too trusting, unthinking, naive, easily fooled, afraid to speak out, a herd follower, captured, or sees too many $.
Dr Robert Malone says in his recent article Fascism, Globalism, and the Medical-Industrial Complex:
“Medical Industrial Complex” refers to the increasingly powerful, transnational, public-private partnerships…
These types of public-private cooperative relationships have a name. That name was created by Benito Mussolini. We know this name. The name is Fascism (corporatism). That is the union of the state and corporate power…
Pharma and biotech are major global economic engines, and the profit and power of this sector have allowed managerial leaders in this sector to become more powerful than individual nation-states through corruption…
The COVID crisis provides abundant examples to illustrate this. Weaponized fear of a modestly pathogenic respiratory virus has enabled the sector to extract concessions and wealth from both national and supernational (EU) organizations. At this point, there does not appear to be any organization that can hold these “public-private partnerships” accountable for their actions and misdeeds.
History has shown Fascism is not good for the people. People get abused by those in authority. The Covid 19 years is a example of that in recent history. Corporate interests were put before those of the people. People got harmed socially, financially, mentally, and physically. People were lied to. People were coerced. People were censored. People were isolated. People were betrayed. People were beaten by police. People were treated cruelly.
6. Withdrawal Takes 3 Years
Once signed, the agreement is NOT easy or quick to get out of. It will take THREE years from notification. Therefore, it is NOT a document you want to sign up to lightly. Our government needs to be absolutely sure it will result in health benefits and NOT harms and they need to be absolutely certain the associated exorbitant expenditure will NOT be wasted money and will NOT result in increased poverty.
Article 32. Withdrawal
1 At any time after two years from the date on which the WHO Pandemic Agreement has entered into force for a Party, that Party may withdraw from the Agreement by giving written notification to the Depositary.
2. Any such withdrawal shall take effect upon expiry of one year from the date of receipt by the Depositary of the notification of withdrawal, or on such later date as may be specified in the notificationof withdrawal.
Which brings us Back to:
Marry in Haste, Repent at Leisure.
Conclusion
Why is NZ even contemplating signing an agreement with a compromised organisation that got so much wrong with Covid 19? Ever since the vaccine rollout, far too many young people are suffering injuries or dropping dead. The WHO should be more concerned about that than trying to coerce governments into signing an agreement that puts so much focus on the very mRNA shots that may be in part responsible for the significant increases in hospitalisations from heart problems and many other ailments. See: Science summary: COVID-19 vaccines’ effectiveness and safety exaggerated in clinical trials & observational studies, academics find.
The WHO and their proponents claim:
If successful, a pandemic treaty could better prepare the world for future health emergencies and help ensure that a global health crisis the magnitude of COVID-19 does not occur again.
HOW? WHO policies failed with Covid-19. If you want a safer world, stop mucking around with viruses! In my opinion, WHO’s claim is propaganda, gaslighting, wishful thinking. Their statement is not based on reality. Countries that followed WHO’s recommendations fared heaps worse than countries that did not.
The WHO and others have not demonstrated how such an agreement would have reduced the harms that accrued during the Covid-19 pandemic, the consequences of which are still unfolding in those nations that implemented lockdowns; social distancing; masking; mRNA mandated 'vaccines'; censorship of opinion, research, science and early treatments etc. that didn't fit the official narrative.
We do NOT need a new treaty. We do not need the WHO. We need commonsense, kiwi initiatives, community solutions and the TRUTH.
What You Can Do
The Ministry of Trade and Fisheries are asking for your views on the WHO Treaty. You can read the most recent draft here: Proposal for the WHO Pandemic Agreement, 22 April 2024 and here.
You can also inform our politicians about how you feel. Here are their contact details. Also, spread the word as much as you can to help inform others as mainstream media are neglecting to do that.
I feel the Cease and Desist Notification to the Director General of the WHO and top officials as mentioned above need to be widely circulated. Perhaps send them to our politicians and health authorities. I don’t think anyone who reads the letter would take another jab. I have repeated the link here for convenience.
Share the RCR talk with Guy Hatchard on Labour’s cover ups and more: ‘Was Covid-19 a Chinese Bioweapon?’