This treachery is two-pronged: 1) The "Agreement," and 2) the IHR Amendments. Hard to follow these over the last two years due to WHO deception, stealth, revision, and questions of what material belongs to what document. As details on ratification of 2) unfold, that is also important. Might 2) be ratified independently of 1)?
This treachery is two-pronged: 1) The "Agreement," and 2) the IHR Amendments. Hard to follow these over the last two years due to WHO deception, stealth, revision, and questions of what material belongs to what document. As details on ratification of 2) unfold, that is also important. Might 2) be ratified independently of 1)?
I'll also still be interested in what transpires up to 1 June, when this session ends and these snakes are scheduled to slither home.
Yes, quite possible. In spite of the fact that the intended changes to the content of the IHR actually usurp national sovereignty by changing the role of the WHO from advisory to dictatorial, they were advertised as being mere adjustments to an existing, government-approved international treaty that would not require further ratification--tacit approval for all member countries would be assumed unless explicitly rejected at the general meeting. So we cannot relax our guard but need to continue monitoring the WHO lest they again attempt this global takeover down the road.
This treachery is two-pronged: 1) The "Agreement," and 2) the IHR Amendments. Hard to follow these over the last two years due to WHO deception, stealth, revision, and questions of what material belongs to what document. As details on ratification of 2) unfold, that is also important. Might 2) be ratified independently of 1)?
I'll also still be interested in what transpires up to 1 June, when this session ends and these snakes are scheduled to slither home.
Yes, quite possible. In spite of the fact that the intended changes to the content of the IHR actually usurp national sovereignty by changing the role of the WHO from advisory to dictatorial, they were advertised as being mere adjustments to an existing, government-approved international treaty that would not require further ratification--tacit approval for all member countries would be assumed unless explicitly rejected at the general meeting. So we cannot relax our guard but need to continue monitoring the WHO lest they again attempt this global takeover down the road.
^^^^
Thanks for this info - I had to look up 'IHR Amendments' - every piece of the puzzle is important.