Elections, WHO and large decisions

Recently, our interest has focused on the election campaign. Politicians from all sides are trying to convince us of the importance of these choices, due to the fact that we will supposedly decide in them the most crucial issues that will importantly affect our future. What if individual told you that much more crucial decisions were made above our heads, without our participation or even without our knowledge. However, it will not only depend on our lives but besides on the lives of the children and grandchildren of those who will now go to elections for the first time.

The problem is that it is not publicized in the media that is close to us, simple and exciting, frequently down to clearly outlined local disputes. These are undiscounted matters in the media, distant and boring as boring papers of global agreements can be. Despite their large importance, they are of as small interest as Dr McCullough's fresh speech in the European Parliament, which is virtually unnoticed.

Speech by Dr McCullough in the European Parliament 14 September 2023

Jacek Hoffman

·

Sep 19

In his speech to the European Parliament, Dr Peter McCullough presented the activities of the WHO, their partners and many highly serious threats to the "vaccinating" on COVID-19. It calls for the immediate cessation of all "vaccinating" on COVID-19 and the complete withdrawal from the WHO.

Read full story

I have written many times about distortions and corruption in healthcare, which are the greater, the higher the level. For example, I recalled how European Commission bought vaccines for associate States. Fortunately Poland rapidly disposed of the surplus of this treasure, but now Germany Disposal of 242 million dosesAnd that's 50 million more than it was used. And the injections themselves have negative efficacy, but a long list of side effects (calculated by Dr. McCullough). The same is actual of intensively recommended HPV vaccinations, the efficacy of which has not been demonstrated, while the list of adverse reactions is long. I have written about them respective times, and references to entries on HPV vaccines and pathology in wellness care will be found on my home page https://jacekkh.substack.com/archive?sort=new

At the top of the pyramid of decision-making and profiting on our wellness is the planet wellness Organization, which is connected mostly informal ties to private foundations, corporations, pharmaceutical companies. It is mentioned in his speech by Dr. McCullough. If individual has doubts about this, they should check the presented diagrams indicating the sources of WHO funding, remembering that the Bill&Melinda Gates Foundation, the GAVI Alliance and a fewer insignificant ones belong to Bill Gates. In 2018, their full contribution was practically equal to US funding. B&MGF itself has a larger share than Britain. Meanwhile, late in the United States, the home of Representatives adopted a bill on means for abroad operations not predicting WHO backing — https://www.congress.gov/118/bills/hr4665/BILLS-118hr4665rh.pdf. Since then, Gates' foundations have become the dominant origin of WHO funding. And let's remember, it's not Trump's responsibility that the U.S. stopped financing, it's those who let Gates grow so large that it can bend global regulatory institutions to its whims. You don't think he's completely selflessly subsidizing the WHO, due to the fact that as a philanthropist, he has the wellness and well-being of all the people in the world.

Currently, the second word of manager General of the WHO is held by Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, who is not a doctor and had small to do with medicine. He was elected unanimously, which is 1 vote. The voice of Mr Gates' chief sponsor of the WHO. For specified an crucial figure, the Director-General has an astonishingly modest, even residual direction in WikipediaIt's worth a look in there to see for yourself. Thus, it can be presumed that his earlier work is not a origin for glory. According to reports, he did not rather get free of his old habits, even now indirectly fueling Ethiopian civilian war (in short time due to hunger, cultural cleansing, and warfare, more than 600,000 people lost their lives, have you heard of this war?). He's accused of delivery of weapons to 1 of the partiesBut what the hell. It is simply a crystal clear luminous figure, an excellent expert, so with joy and full trust we will all trust him with our wellness and life. (Sponsor is most likely comfortable to have hooks on the director, due to the fact that this makes certain he will obey)

From 2020 to 2022, the arbitrary actions of the WHO resulted in a crucial increase in the harm caused by covid itself, followed by injections to prevent it (the second phase has mostly missed us). Now the WHO is reaching for even more power. It wants to seriously limit both the sovereignty of the associate States and the individual freedoms of their citizens, including freedom of movement and freedom of speech and the right to decide on its body.

The tools for the WHO to take power, and in practice by its powerholders, consist of 3 main elements: the Pandemic Treaty, amendments to global wellness Regulations (IHR — global wellness Rules) and the Agreement with the European Union. All 3 are rather extended papers of global agreements written in hard legal language, so there is no anticipation to discuss them in this place. I mention curious parties to the following pages.

More detailed discussions and references to the first WHO papers can be found on the website of civilian organisations:

Brownstone Institute - https://brownstone.org/

(at the top of the page you can choose language, but automatic translation can be confusing and sometimes warps sense)

Door to Freedom - https://doortofreedom.org/

Here I will focus on a brief summary of any of the amendments to the IHR, as this is now the most urgent issue. I hope that even specified a modest example will tell readers the importance of danger.

The IHR is simply a legally binding global instrument adopted under Article 21 of the WHO Constitution, which requires acceptance only by the average majority of associate States. The paper was first adopted in 1951 and was periodically modified. The current version was adopted in 2005 and entered into force in 2007. IHR (2005) contains provisions and annexes setting out different levels of responsibilities for States Parties, including the surveillance of outbreaks, reporting, information exchange and capacity building of national wellness authorities. Regulations in their current wording guarantee respect for the sovereignty of states, leaving countries with large flexibility, discretion and decision-making freedom with respect to the outbreaks assessed, at the same time containing certain required measures to be taken.

The Director-General of the WHO (DG) is entitled to declare a public wellness emergency of global scope (PHEIC). The WHO is obliged to inform another countries of specified a threat, even without the consent of the State concerned, and to convene an Emergency Accident Committee. DG is entitled to issuing temporary country recommendations under PHIEC in for persons, cargo, containers, means of transport, goods and postal parcels.These include restrictive measures specified as border closure, forced quarantine of persons, compulsory medical examinations, investigating and vaccination, establishment of infectious contacts and screening (Article 18). It can besides make constant recommendations.

The recommendations to date are non-binding (Article 1), which means that countries may choose not to apply them without consequences. This is what the countries that adopted subsequent versions of IHR, including the 1 from 2005, decided to do, due to the fact that they wanted to keep their sovereignty from possible abuse by unelected and non-responsible officials international.

There is no good reason why the current IHR required further amendments beyond the desire to increase the power of the WHO. Part of the first set of amendments was adopted in May 2022 by consensus by the A 75th WHA Committee, and so without formal vote. These amendments, which will enter into force in 2024, will shorten the period during which reservations may be rejected or raised against (future) IHR amendments from 18 months to 10 months.

The amendments to the IHR that are presently being introduced are intended to extend the IHR nonsubjective and scope to "all risks that may affect public health” (amendment to Article 2). Non-binding recommendations would become binding (amendment to Article 1 and fresh Article 13A). Many proposals are aimed at Limiting sovereignty countries and giving WHO officials (DG, regional directors, method staff) new and broad powers, including binding recommendations. Countries that do not reject amendments "obligation" to follow DG recommendations (Article 13A). They are accompanied by proposals to establish a wider public wellness bureaucracy at national, regional and global level, as well as fresh actors and platforms to monitor and guarantee State compliance. The fresh proposals call for closer respect for the IHR, greater control of the WHO and the states over the actions of citizens and, consequently, restrictions on human rights and individual freedoms. This is allegedly introduced in the name of equality and common good, reflecting the disastrous policy implemented in consequence to Covid-19 contrary to earlier Public wellness guidelines and Human rights standards.

If changes in IHR are adopted, DG WHO will be able to at any time dictate restrictions and another measures besides in the case of only possible risks. Freedom of discussion and opposition to WHO recommendations will besides be severely reduced. The proposals call on the WHO and States to countering false information and misinformation (amendment to Article 44.2(XNUMX)) as if Scientific cognition and the principles of sound public wellness activities were owned by a single organisationand, not the consequence of a continuous open investigation process, doubts, questions and discussions involving various researchers and technological and clinical centres around the world.

Currently, countries can measure public wellness incidents themselves and decide what measures and policies to take. Under fresh proposals WHO can announce emergency, of which due to average potential risk, without the consent of the State and impose measures which must be strictly applied on public wellness (amendment to Article 12, fresh Article 13A). Recommendations (Article 18(1)) concerning persons shall include:

• review the past of people travelling in affected areas;

• examine evidence of medical examinations and any laboratory analyses;

• require medical examination;

• examine the evidence of vaccination or another preventive measures;

• require vaccination or another prevention;

• place suspects under public wellness surveillance;

• implement quarantine or another wellness measures against suspects;

• implement isolation and treatment of affected people;

• implement tracking of contacts of suspected or affected persons;

• refuse entry of suspects and affected persons;

• refuse to enter unsuspected persons into affected areas;

• implement exit control and/or restrictions on persons from affected areas.

It is worth recalling again that specified measures can besides be taken in the case of potential threat, i.e. despite the deficiency of real threat. For example, erstwhile a laboratory finds the presence of selected pathogens in the test samples. So fundamentally always, at any time. The mention level is missing, that is, there are only a fewer studies that can service as a comparison, and these can besides be ignored.

For example, a year-long survey of visitors to a large museum in the United States showed the presence of in healthy people the full household of richly represented strains of all the viruses tested: influenza, coronaviruses and rhinoviruses. Their common proportions changed with the seasons, and there was no emergency or epidemic throughout the investigation period. Now a single survey showing the presence of any of these viruses may be utilized to impose restrictions. It is good to know that the creator of PCR tests awarded for this by Noblem 1993 Kary Mullis during his life has repeatedly protested against their usage as a tool to diagnose the illness in peculiar individuals. For this purpose, PCR tests are not suitable, but who cares? Now it is learning on business services and politics.

Amendments to the IHR so mean the complete submission of States and their citizens to the whims of service to WHO officials who will be competent to halt the functioning of the State and its economy and to suspend citizens' rights on the basis of a decision taken arbitrarily on a weak but irrevocable basis. This powerfully resembles the “protection” imposed by the mafia on its victims. If you do not obey, DG WHO will announce your emergency situation due to possible threat and order your neighbours to make a cordon at the borders.

To be completed on 5 June 2023. The planet wellness Organisation and the European Commission have announced the launch of a digital wellness initiative in which the WHO will establish a global vaccination certification strategy against covid-19 based on the already existing European Union's digital COVID certificate. This vaccine passport strategy will then be extended to the global digital wellness certification network (GDHCN) run by the WHO, which will include "a wide scope of digital products for better wellness for everyoneIt’s okay. ” In time the vaccine passport will besides cover all recommended vaccines. And then Nobody gets distant with it anymore.. Digital surveillance will enable all citizens to obey and submit to medical procedures. It is worth recalling that the European Commission has worked on this solution much earlier, even before covid-1984.

Our reality?

What is the attitude of Polish political parties and politicians to the problem presented? most likely none. It is reasonable to fishy that most have not even heard of him. So they're focused on our backyard stuff and each other's backlashes that they've completely lost their perspective. Moreover, there is no specified thing as a non-media subject. So let's ask why the media, including those pretending to be independent and open to the world, don't talk about it? Did you hear about the TVN case? What did the Electoral Paper or Politics write?

However, 1 can effort to guess what the attitude of Polish politicians will be erstwhile they are yet informed by someone. The earlier attitude to the pandemic and its restrictions and orders is simply a valuable indication.

The basic problem is intellectual limitations. The request to note and accept the fact that respectable global institutions are not doing anything for our good, that it is on the contrary. These institutions are rather corrupt and service their powers in carrying out their interests, and our welfare is not even taken into account in the calculations. They're only after us. However, most politicians, and fundamentally the full of society, will not think that way. They cultivate the idealized image and are incapable to abandon it.

In the light of specified a situation, it is hard to hope that any organization wishes to argue Poland's submission to the authority of the WHO, and even more so to origin Poland's withdrawal from this organization. After all, we are part of a “international society” and this organization serves our welfare. I'm certain no of the current opposition parties will. They don't see the danger, and they won't want to see it, even if individual shows it to them. During the pandemic, the MPs of these parties completely accepted the WHO communicative and corrupt medical authorities, attacked the government for insufficient restrictions on our freedoms, for the deficiency of restrictions and orders in Poland in another countries. They have equally uncritically demanded that the lockdown be extended, as they are now criticizing the government for the advanced inflation caused by it.

Also a manifestation of a complete deficiency of critical reasoning and confusion of values was attacking the erstwhile wellness minister for revealing a kind of medicine on prescriptions issued by a doctor (without revealing the people for whom it was issued), or a terrible sin of breaking medical secrecy. I mean, with large conviction, he was attacked by the same people who had seen nothing incorrect with revealing someone's vaccination position for almost 3 years, demanding that employers check our medical records, accept or participate in forcing people to submit to untested medical procedures, that is, taking injections with an experimental product. This is all in complete disregard. Nuremberg Code. Now they see nothing incorrect with the thought of vaccine passports. And where is the legal awareness, logic and intellectual integrity of enlightened democrats?

While most opposition organization members may not be aware, there is no uncertainty about Donald Tusk's knowledge. He can't cover himself with ignorance. He was the president of the European Council. As a WEF and a erstwhile EU officer, he surely knows all this, but for the same reasons he knows he will do nothing about it. Its task as a WEF janchar is to introduce us to the WHO gulag, and the little society knows about something, the easier it is to do so.

Unlike the "democratic opposition", Law and Justice and the Confederacy are known for their skeptical attitude towards all incoming news from abroad, especially erstwhile they may lead to a regulation of sovereignty. Unfortunately, 1 can fear that Jarosław Kaczyński did not necessarily hear about the existence of the WHO. All that remains is to hope that there will be advisors among him, who will indicate a threat and propose sensible actions. It is besides hard to hope with the Confederation, not due to the fact that they are supposedly fascists, but due to the fact that it has serious intellectual deficiencies. The Confederation is mentally in the first half of the 20th century, so its ideas and actions in the 21st century are seldom adequate. The Confederacy in the U.S. Republicans has a chance, and erstwhile they move, possibly the Confederate, too, while besides prompting the Law and Justice to act. And we must hope that, contrary to their current inability in the global field, both parties will take effective action.

Of course, the problem of external conditions remains. Officials of the European Commission are working hand in hand with WHO, and even if Poland resigns from WHO, we will meet with force from neighbours and the Union. In addition, without being a associate of the WHO, you can besides fall victim to a decision announcing our emergency situation.

The optimal solution would be to reject IHR amendments by voting. That's the hardest part. It is hard to number on the countries of the “democratic West”. The U.S. under Democrats are among the initiators of change. However, 1 can hope, since there have been specified cases in fresh WHO history. The 3rd planet countries, especially Africa, have quite a few merit here, unlike most of Europe, they are aware of what a failure of sovereignty may mean.

What answers can we anticipate erstwhile asking questions about amendments to the WHO IHR at election meetings? erstwhile giving our vote in elections, we should remember the WHO's actions and the political parties' relation to our place in the world. Unreflective and unconditional submission to dictatorships of global organizations, which are supposedly good by definition, does not service Poland or our freedom.