Tedros Talks with forked Tongue. Here's the evidence.

Let's look at a few things he told Agence France Press and The Guardian. What does the draft treaty really say?

I have come to love making powerpoint slides, as they seem to convey ideas better than I can do in just words. You get the idea from the Guardian’s photo and text that Tedros is troubled. Will the treaty (aka agreement) (aka accord) pass?

The powers behind the WHO throne knew they could only win if they could outsmart us. And they had the ability to pay for the world’s finest sociopathic lawyers. They had to sneak the bad stuff past us.

1. One way of doing that is to deny it exists.

2. Another is to misrepresent what their proposed documents show.

3. Yet another method is to include contradictory passages in the treaty, and refer back to one claim, without revealing that the opposite claim is also embedded in the treaty.

4. Another method runs through everything the WHO does. Financial guru Max Keiser coined the perfect term for this: Complexification. Deliberately complicate things so they are very hard to unravel and understand. The two WHO documents are completely different, treated differently, yet have many overlapping provisions. It is extremely difficult to keep them straight in your head. And their use of language is deliberately confusing. Tedros routinely claims that one document does not say “X,” when it is the other document that says “X”.

Here is the Guardian article. Let’s look at some of the tricks pulled in just one article.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/jan/22/global-pandemic-agreement-at-risk-of-falling-apart-who-warns

1. Make it about the children, always. “Plans for a global pandemic preparedness agreement risk falling apart amid wrangling and disinformation, according to the chief of the World Health Organization, who has warned that future generations “may not forgive us”.

2. Projection. Accuse the other side of doing what you are doing, i.e., spreading lies and disinformation.

3. Conflate two very different things. “Tedros said all countries needed the capacity to detect and share pathogens presenting a risk, and timely access to tests, treatments and vaccines.” What he fails to admit is that the treaty and amendments want nations to go out and find potential pandemic pathogens (aka biological warfare agents) all the time, not just during pandemics, and give them to the WHO for wider distribution. This is code for proliferation of biological weapons. If nations actually went along with this plan, I can virtually guarantee hundreds of lab leaks and possibly deliberate biological attacks with these agents.

   Sharing biowarfare agents is very different than timely access to tests and treatments.

4. Use code, and make it about the children. “He called for a “strong agreement that will help to protect our children and grandchildren from future pandemics”.’ The word strong in this coded context means enforceable. Nations will be obligated to obey the WHO. They must be accountable and compliant, according to the treaty draft.

5. Lie outright, and when challenged, show the claim in the treaty that nations are to remain sovereign, and hide the parts of the treaty that show that nations must cede sovereignty to the WHO.

6. Claim universal agreement with the treaty. “The WHO emergencies director, Michael Ryan, reminded countries how the pandemic “ripped apart our social, economic and political systems and became a multi-trillion dollar problem”.

   In the midst of major geopolitical conflicts, “this is one thing the world agrees on”, he said.”

What is sovereignty? The ability to rule yourself. If you allow someone else to rule you, in whole or part, you are ceding sovereignty over whatever it is they can command.

Let’s look at page 20 of the treaty for an example of how sovereignty is to be lost. The WHO requires nations to pass certain laws, using the word shall, which in legal language, in international treaties, means MUST.

Article 14 paragraph 1 tells nations they must expedite approvals (i.e., licenses) and authorizations (i.e., EUAs) of pandemic drugs and vaccines. Decoding this, it means nations need to find ways to get drugs and vaccines into their populations without going through full testing and licensing. In the US, an EUA can be issued without testing the product in even one experimental animal.

Article 14 paragraph 5 tells nations they must have laws and regulations in place to push pandemic drugs and vaccines out quickly.

Article 15 paragraph 1 tells nations they must “manage” liability for these hastily produced pandemic drugs and vaccines. Decoded, this means that manufacturers, WHO and government officials must be held harmless for injuries from the hastily made products that WHO will help produce.

Does it seem like nations are retaining control of the approval processes for pandemic products? Are they in control of the liability provisions? The WHO is telling them what they must do. Nations are expected to follow the WHO’s orders if they sign on to the treaty and/or amendments. However, because nations are told they themselves must pass such laws, the WHO claims the nations have retained sovereignty.

And WHO says so with its forked tongue in Article 3, paragraph 2:

Sovereignty – States have, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations and the general principles of international law, the sovereign right to legislate and to implement legislation in pursuance of their health policies.

And by the way, the following is a list of possible recommended actions (Article 18) that comes from the International Health Regulations (IHR). The WHO’s Director-General will be able to issue orders for any of these measures to be applied anywhere in the world (as 196 countries are already parties to the IHR) once the IHR amendments become BINDING—if the amendments are passed in May 2024.

He could order vaccine passports, quarantines, lockdowns, mandate vaccines and/or “treatment,” close borders, impose contact tracing or require you to be swabbed or examined. Although Tedros claimed he would not have the power to impose vaccine mandates or lockdowns, you can verify for yourself that he would have precisely those powers, granted by the IHR, not the treaty.

Does Tedros speak with forked tongue?

What do you think? Is WHO trying to pull a fast one, or not?