On 1 December 2021 the 194 members of the World Health Organization (WHO) reached a consensus to begin the process of drafting and negotiating a convention, agreement or other international instrument under the Constitution of the World Health Organization to strengthen pandemic prevention, preparedness and response.

An intergovernmental negotiating body was constituted and held its first meeting at the beginning of March 2022, with the purpose of agreeing on the process and the timelines for reaching consensus on a so-called “Pandemic Treaty”.

A second meeting is planned for 1 August 2022 to discuss progress towards an agreement on the contents and legal bearing of such a treaty. The interim result will then be presented to the 76^thWorld Health Assembly in 2023, with the aim of adopting the new instrument, the so-called infamous “Pandemic Treaty” by 2024.

Why infamous Pandemic Treaty?

In a recent European Parliamentary session, Ms. Christine Anderson, Member of the European Parliament (MEP), from the German party an “Alternative for Germany”, made the following very pertinent comment and posed an appropriate question –

“Many who favor the treaty believe that it offers the best way to increase political commitment from states to reform global health governance. However, the COVID-19 pandemic demonstrates that this proposition has no basis in fact. Government responses to COVID-19 have purportedly violated or manipulated many treaties, including human rights agreements.”

“To what extent will the Commission ensure that the citizen, who has no direct vote in a body such as the WHO, is not bypassed in the decision-making process and that a shift of competence further and further away from the voter does not lead to an increasing ‘de-democratization’ of our society?”

See the full 6-min. video below.

This was indeed a benign question – one that underscores the gravity of the new Pandemic Treaty. If approved by the World Health Assembly, the Pandemic Treaty will be above and overarching the sovereignty of the 194 WHO member countries.

WHO could declare a pandemic whenever it decides, or gets instructions from the dark Financial and Power Cabal pulling the strings behind the UN-curtain.

The World Health Organization could decide on international lockdowns, mask wearing, social distancing – and much worse, like forced vaccination – with, as we now know from the covid-19 vaxxes, causing disease or even death. By now the world knows or ought to know, that these vaxxes are not vaccines, but experimental mRNA injections – injections containing varying bio-chemical and mostly poisonous, even deadly concoctions.

WHO could declare a worldwide pandemic for the common flu – pretty much what they did with the so-called Covid-19, a virus that was never isolated, never identified as anything else than the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) virus that hit China from 2002 to 2004. SARS was, in fact a trial, for what was to follow 17 years later – on a worldwide scale.

The SARS virus was tailor-made in a class-3 US bio-lab. The virus was based on extensive blood samples taken from Chinese rural populations, to target the Chinese genome. Chinese authorities learned about this western blood-harvesting by “scientists” of famous US learning institutes, such as Harvard and others, in the 1990s.

See section ”The Human Genome Diversity Project (HGD project) in China” of this text.

This was the reason for China’s extraordinary preparedness at the first announcement of the “new” / old virus, the Covid-19 virus, hitting again China (the city of Wuhan) first, in the early days of 2020.

Because China knows that bio-war labs can design specific DNA-directed viruses, and because China is also aware of the 20-some war-grade (grade 3) US-funded bio-labs in Ukraine which Russia in her ongoing military intervention in Ukraine is aiming at dismantling, and China is also aware of the risks that viruses may have been intended to again attack the Chinese genome, like the SARS virus in 2002-2004 – therefore, China’s authorities are proceeding with a “zero covid” policy. Therefore, is the current Shanghai lockdown a severe precautionary measure?

As was demonstrated by the Ebola outbreak – 2014 – 2016 in West Africa – Liberia, Guinea and Sierra Leone – fatality rates of Ebola and similar epidemic diseases can be as high as 40% when compared to the infection rate. See this. That’s a stark contrast to the low covid death rate of 0.07 to 0.1%.

*

Under the new “Pandemic Treaty” WHO would have the authority to vaccinate children, babies right after birth, when their immune system is still basically zero and damages could be lasting or even killing newborns.

WHO could mandate general vaccination against any disease deemed “dangerous” by the powers that be, with an injection that is not really a vaccination but an “experimental jab” – possibly leading to millions of deaths, if the current covid crisis and “covid-vaxxes” are any indication. Exponentially more deaths are caused by the fake and criminal covid-19 vaxxes, than by the covid infections which have similar symptoms to those of the common flu.

As we now know, the purpose of the covid-vaxxes is not the prevention of a disease, quite the contrary – it’s the wanton promotion of massive disabilities and death caused by experimental substances injected into human bodies.

The “Masterminds” behind WHO, as well as their invisible handlers, are eugenists, interested in a drastic reduction of the world population. The new Pandemic Treaty is an ideal tool for an eugenist agenda.

*

Under the New Pandemic Treaty, the WHO would convert into the World Health Tyranny, the WHT.

That’s where we are at today. WHO, alias WHT, today is funded by two thirds to three quarters by interest groups, like the pharma industry and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Only about a quarter or one third (variable by year) of the WHO budget is funded by the member countries. The bulk of WHO funding comes from interest groups.

The Gates Foundation is a key donor, the largest after United States. Gates also appointed the current Director General of WHO, Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus. He was before the head of GAVI, The Vaccine Alliance, housed just next door to WHO in Geneva. GAVI is also a Bill Gates creation. Dr. Tedros is WHO’s first DG, who is not a medical doctor.

See this 5-min video interview of Dr. Astrid Stuckelberger, a former World Health Organization (WHO) scientist, describing how the WHO is months away from overriding the U.S. Constitution and those of all 194 WHO member countries.

If this new WHO “Pandemic Treaty” is adopted by the World Health Assembly, then national laws, those of sovereign countries, made to protect their citizens from diseases and pandemic outbreaks, are overruled and made worthless.

*

Logically, an agency in charge of world health, should basically focus on disease prevention. WHO is wired as a curative agency, mostly staffed by medical doctors and scientists, thereby playing into the interests of the pharma-industry.

For those who are not yet aware, how WHO came into being as a specialized UN agency, just a quick reminder who invented and created WHO – and with what purpose.

WHO was created by the Rockefeller foundation in 1948 – and following the pattern of the Pan-American Health Organization (PAHO), in existence since 1902 and integrated in 1948 into the new World Health Organization. The motto: Who decides over health and disease, decides over life and death. Sounds like a suitable axiom for eugenists.

At that time, the Rockefeller magnate also owned Standard Oil, a worldwide hydrocarbon corporation, mostly a petrol monopoly. Up to the 1950’s medicines were largely plant-based. Rockefeller’s petro-clan geniuses felt medication or modern pharma might as well be “crafted” from petro-chemicals. Thus, grew a new pharma-industry – exponentially. The drugs available today are an umpteen-multiple of those available when medication was plant-based. Today plant-based medicines are almost exclusively used by indigenous people.

Petrochemical-based pharma produces generally also myriad of side effects. These side effects have to be fought with new medication with other side effects – some of them deadly. And so, the spiral spins along.

The new medical apparatus – to which Rockefeller gave the impetus – has produced a medical labyrinth – a mill of health and disease, once caught in it, escaping from it is not easy. So-called health services have become an important economic growth factor. U.S. health care spending grew 9.7 percent in 2020, reaching $4.1 trillion, or 19.7% of GDP. Once-upon a time a patient, has become an income-producing client in today’s medical factory.

The new Pandemic Treaty of the WHO might render the world health system in a prison-like spiral, to the point where people are totally in the hands of one tyrannical world organization – in charge of health and disease, or life and death.

We the People, must not allow the creation of a health tyranny as envisaged today, and supported by the WEF and its henchmen of darkness.

We must stop WHO from becoming a World Health Tyranny. In fact, we should collectively deny the authority of WHO, requesting our governments to exit WHO. We do not need or want a Global World Health Tyranny. By dismantling it, we the People, would also put a nail in the WEF’s coffin.

*

Note to readers: Please click the share buttons above or below. Follow us on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.

Peter Koenig is a geopolitical analyst and a former Senior Economist at the World Bank and the World Health Organization (WHO), where he has worked for over 30 years on water and environment around the world. He lectures at universities in the US, Europe and South America. He writes regularly for online journals and is the author of Implosion – An Economic Thriller about War, Environmental Destruction and Corporate Greed; and  co-author of Cynthia McKinney’s book “When China Sneezes: From the Coronavirus Lockdown to the Global Politico-Economic Crisis” (Clarity Press – November 1, 2020)

Peter is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG).

Article cross-posted from Global Research.