https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2023/06/05/why-countries-must-leave-who.aspx
PDF hyperlink in event above link becomes rendered non-functional (includes graphics but omits the 4 videos):
https://media.mercola.com/ImageServer/Public/2023/June/PDF/why-countries-must-leave-who-pdf.pdf
Analysis by Dr. Joseph Mercola
June 05, 2023
https://odysee.com/@Voorwaarheid:1/2023-05-22-One-World-One-Health-Met-Dr.-Meryl-Nass:e
Above
is my 44 minute interview on One Health, COVID origins, and defeating
the globalist agenda to achieve hegemony over the world, with Willem
Engel. Dr. Mercola embedded it but I could not. He has included 4
videos and several additional graphics at his site—so please read this
article there if you can. If not, read the denuded version below.
STORY AT-A-GLANCE
·
Countries that treasure individual freedom and respect bodily autonomy
have only one choice: Exit the World Health Organization
·
One Health is the culmination of a grand global plan that places human
health, animal health, environmental concerns, food, travel, housing and
everything else under a single umbrella, and the WHO is being set up as
the central decision-maker and overseer of it all
· One
Health is based on the premise that a broad range of aspects of life and
the environment can impact health and therefore fall under the
“potential” to cause harm. The One Health agenda includes medicine, food
and agriculture, communications, economics, civil society, global trade
and commerce, research, noncommunicable disease, mental health, land
use, disease surveillance and much more
· Behind the scenes,
One Health partnerships have already been formed in countries around
the world. The One Health network was built and expanded in the U.S.
primarily by cutting public health funding. One Health then stepped in
with funding but, of course, recipients of One Health grants had to
embrace the concept and push it out to others
· One Health
is also baked into the proposed amendments to the 2005 International
Health Regulations (IHR), which the World Health Assembly (WHA) is
scheduled to vote on in May 2024. This is how the WHO will gain the
authority to dictate how we live our lives
Countries that
treasure individual freedom and respect bodily autonomy have only one
choice: Exit the World Health Organization. It is now beyond clear that
the WHO intends to eliminate both of those, and then some, through an
international program called One Health, formally adopted by the WHO and the G20 health ministers in 2017.1
The term “One Health” was first coined by EcoHealth Alliance,2 the
group that subcontracted risky gain-of-function research to the Wuhan
Institute of Virology (WIV), the lab from which SARS-CoV-2 emerged.
In
hindsight, it’s easy to see that the globalists’ plan to concentrate
power has been in the works for decades, and the playbook is always the
same: “Give us more power so we can protect you and keep you safe.”
Alas, every time we give them more power, we find ourselves both less
safe and less free.
What Is One Health?
In
the video above, Dr. Meryl Nass explains the implications of One Health.
In short, our entire way of life, our freedom, our quality of life —
indeed, our very humanity, are now at stake.
One Health is
basically the culmination of a grand global plan that places human
health, animal health, environmental concerns, food, travel, housing and
everything else under a single umbrella, and the WHO is being set up as
the central decision-maker and overseer of it all.
As explained
by Nass, the One Health concept was initially based on the concept that
veterinarians and doctors stood a better chance of combating zoonotic
diseases — infections that jump species from animal to human — by
working together. While that’s a reasonable idea, the concept was
hijacked by globalists who saw that it could be used to gain power and
control over the whole world.
The One Health agenda is based on
the premise that a broad range of aspects of life and the environment
can impact health and therefore fall under the “potential” to cause
harm.
The graphic above illustrates some of the areas that fall within the scope of One Health.
But that’s not all. According to a One Health Commission document, One Health also includes:3
Communications
Economics
Civil society
Global trade, commerce and security
Public policy and regulation
Research
Noncommunicable diseases (basically human medicine as a whole)
Mental health
Agricultural land use (which involves forcing farmers off their land)
Disaster preparedness and response
Disease surveillance
The “human-animal bond” (the relationship with our pets) and much more
The WHO Will Have Power to Dictate Every Facet of Our Lives
If the WHO’s proposed pandemic treaty is
enacted, the WHO will have unilateral power to make decisions about all
of these areas, and its dictates will supersede and overrule any and
all local, , and federal laws.
For example, under One
Health, the WHO will be able to declare climate change as a health
emergency and implement climate lockdowns to address it. It will be able
to restrict local and international travel under the guise of
environmental and/or human health, implement a vaccine passport
requirement as a biosecurity measure, radically alter diets around the
world in the name of animal welfare and environmental protection, and
much more.
One Health is also baked into the proposed amendments
to the 2005 International Health Regulations (IHR). This is how the WHO
will gain the authority to dictate how we live our lives.
As noted
by Nass, “they’re basically trying to lasso everything in the world
under One Health.” Meanwhile, One Health “lacks a conceptual system,
real world evidence and a method for being implemented and evaluated,”
she notes.
The One Health joint plan of action itself is pure word
salad. It tells us nothing, really, other than it’s about forming a
global coalition to “drive change” and transform life at the “global,
regional and country level” under the guise of “health.”
The One Health Network Has Already Been Built
Behind
the scenes, One Health partnerships have already been formed in
countries around the world. According to Nass, the One Health network
was built and expanded in the U.S. primarily by cutting public health
funding. One Health then stepped in with funding but, of course,
recipients of One Health grants had to embrace the concept and push it
out to others.
The National Institutes of Health (NIH), the
National Science Foundation (NSF), the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), nongovernmental
organizations, and universities are all disbursing funds to expand the
One Health network in the U.S. “Advancement of a One Health approach” is
even included in the 2023 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA).4
The
One Health concept is also creeping into the school system, where
students are being taught the importance of “responsible citizenship,”
“cultural sensitivity,” and “global mindedness.” The same tactics are
used to build this network in other countries as well.
One Health Is Baked Into IHR Amendments
Importantly, as explained by Nass,5 One
Health is also baked into the proposed amendments to the 2005
International Health Regulations (IHR), which the World Health Assembly
(WHA) is scheduled to vote on in May 2024. This is how the WHO will gain
the authority to dictate how we live our lives.
“So,
people need to be aware that this is coming, it’s a runaway train and we
have to do what we can to stop it — which we can do by pulling out of
the WHO,” Nass says.
As noted by Nass, in the U.S., a small group of national legislators are introducing House6,7 and Senate bills8,9,10 to require Senate supermajority approval of the WHO treaty before it’s signed.
In
the U.K., conservative MPs are also warning ministers of an “ambition
evident … for the WHO to transition from an advisory organization to a
controlling international authority,” and are urging the Foreign Office
to block efforts to “intrude materially into the U.K.’s ability to make
its own rules and control its own budgets.”11
Andrew
Mitchell, the minister of the Foreign Officer, has vowed to “block any
law that prevents the U.K. from setting its own health policy,” but he
also stressed that the U.K. is “supportive of the pandemic treaty
currently being negotiated by national governments,”12 and that treaty, as it’s currently written, completely eliminates member states sovereignty.
People
in other countries also need to educate their legislators about the
dangers of One Health, the IHR amendments and the pandemic treaty under
consideration and call on them to protect their nations against this
stealth takeover.
So, to summarize, One Health is a global project
to centralize power with the WHO so that it will have the authority to
control every aspect of human life, across the world, without regard for
national sovereignty or human rights. Any number of countermeasures,
including those used during the COVID pandemic, can then be deployed to
combat things like climate change, loss of biodiversity, noncommunicable
diseases, pollution, hunger, poverty, and so on.
Overblown Warnings of Doom and Other Tactics
In
a May 25, 2023, Substack article, Nass highlights the three elements
used repeatedly to push what is ultimately a global takeover agenda:13
An overblown warning about impending doom
A totally inaccurate description of the cause
A vague solution that benefits the globalists at the expense of the population at large
These
were used during the COVID pandemic. They’re also being used to push
the false idea that antibiotic resistance is caused by global warming,
and therefore requires a more comprehensive approach — a One Health
approach.
Nass cites a February 2023 report by the UN
Environmental Program (UNEP) titled “Bracing for Superbugs:
Strengthening Environmental Action in the One Health Response to
Antimicrobial Resistance.”14
UNEP is one of the
four international agencies that are pushing the One Health agenda
globally and, according to this report, the fact that nations are
already addressing antibiotic resistance is not enough.
Instead,
nations must all work together using a singular, coordinated approach
that includes “environmental-related plans such as national chemical
pollution and waste management programs, national biodiversity and
climate change planning.”
Countries must also come up with
“innovative financial incentives and schemes” to pay for the proposed
action plan and “guarantee sustainable funding.” UNEP also calls for
“science-policy interfaces,” the prioritization of interventions, and
the strengthening of surveillance systems. They also stress that all
strategies employed must “utilize the One Health approach while
addressing financial/business, climate, and cultural contexts.”
Does
anyone else see how problematic that can become? To raise just one
example, overuse of antibiotics in food production is at the root of the
problem, yet any strategy to address it must take stakeholders’
financial and business concerns into account. At the end of the day, it
becomes all about protecting and promoting the interests of certain
“stakeholders,” which are primarily NGOs and private businesses. As
noted by Nass:15
“Antimicrobial resistance
is so simple. Bacteria develop mutations that allow them to evade
antibiotics, and their new genes are often contained in small plasmids
that can be excreted by the cell and shared with other bacteria ...
Until
this present moment, the FDA, CDC, and the WHO all knew that
antimicrobial resistance was due primarily to the use of antibiotics in
livestock feed, because it increased the rate of growth; 75% of
antibiotics by weight are used for this purpose globally.
And
people consume these antibiotics when they eat the meat, or the farmed
fish, or the chickens. But now we must believe that antibiotic
resistance is an environmental problem, which can only be solved by
using the ... One Health approach.”
‘Climate-Aggravated Outbreak Threats’ Being Pushed
If
climate lockdowns and the like sound unbelievable, start paying
attention to what you read in the news. For example, PR Newswire16 recently
announced a partnership between the WHO and the Rockefeller Foundation
aimed at “genomic surveillance, adoption of data tools for pathogen
detection, and assessment of climate-aggravated outbreak threats.”
More
and more, we’re seeing “pandemic threats” being tied to things like
climate change, so that the first can be used to justify drastic action
on the second. As reported by PR Newswire:17
“The
Rockefeller Foundation and the World Health Organization (WHO) have
announced a new partnership to strengthen the WHO Hub for Pandemic and
Epidemic Intelligence.
As part of the collaboration, the
Foundation is investing US $5M in partners working with WHO to cultivate
global networks for pathogen detection and strengthen pandemic
preparedness capabilities, including broadening surveillance for
diseases worsened by rising temperatures and extreme weather.”
October 2022 Pandemic Simulation
Screenshot 13-minute video
There’s
also no doubt that we’ll be faced with additional pandemics, because
the pandemic threat is what drives the push for global centralization of
power. The globalists who practiced what was to become the global COVID
response have also told us there will be more pandemics, and at this
point, it would be foolish not to believe them. So, what might the next
pandemic be, and when might it strike?
October 23, 2022, the
WHO, Johns Hopkins University and The Bill & Melinda Gates
Foundation cohosted a tabletop exercise dubbed “Catastrophic Contagion,”
involving a novel (and supposedly fictional) infection called “severe
epidemic enterovirus respiratory syndrome 2025” (SEERS-25), which
primarily affects children and teens.
Screenshot from Next Pandemic video above
These
are the same groups that ran Event 201, which turned out to be a
pandemic simulation for COVID. According to the Catastrophic Contagion
simulation, SEERS-25 — an enterovirus like the polio virus — will
originate in Brazil in 2025.
Screenshot from Next Pandemic video above
Fictional
news reports featured in the simulation reported 1 billion cases
worldwide and some 20 million deaths, including 15 million children,
plus millions more left permanently paralyzed from the infection. Based
on this exercise, we can assume (unless additional pandemic exercises
are carried out) that the next pandemic will target children and young
people.
This would be a logical progression, from a totalitarian
perspective, considering people are typically willing to do just about
anything to keep their children safe.
COVID showed them that most
people were willing to sacrifice even their most basic freedoms “to save
grandma.” So, what won’t they willingly give up if it comes down to
“saving children”? The globalists intend to take our human rights and
civil liberties away from us, and to be successful in that endeavor,
they will need all the help and cooperation they can get.
2:11 AM · May 24, 2023
Dr.
Abdullah Assiri, co-chair of the WHO’s Working Group on Amendments to
the International Health Regulations (WGIHR) recently stated18 that
the world “requires a different level of legal mandates” to address
future pandemics, and that “actions that may restrict individual
liberties” is a priority.
Who Is Making Decisions on Our Behalf?
8:01 PM May 24, 2023
Clearly,
the idea that unelected and unaccountable globalists are trying to
strip away individual freedoms and implement a totalitarian system of
global top-down control is not a loony “conspiracy theory.” It’s a plain
fact, and we, the public, have NO say in this.
In the video above, author, researcher, activist and natural health advocate James Roguski19 explains
the World Health Assembly’s (WHA) role in the WHO’s takeover. Part of
what makes it so difficult to stop this power grab is because the WHA is
the body that will vote on the IHR amendments and the pandemic treaty,
but the public is not allowed to know who, from their country, is part
of the WHA.
Roguski tried filing a Freedom of Information
Act (FOIA) request to get a list of the U.S. delegates and was told
there’s no such list. So, we can’t know who the WHA delegates are until
they’ve signed in at the meeting and cast their vote on our behalf.
Needless
to say, this means we cannot contact them beforehand to tell them how
we think they should vote on a given issue. That said, Roguski was able
to determine that Xavier Becerra, U.S. secretary of Health and Human
Services, is the U.S. lead delegate.
Past the Point of No Return, All Freedom Will Be Lost
It’s
now beyond imperative that people understand where we’re headed, and
that the COVID measures weren’t just responses to a given pandemic, but
rather were the foundation for a totalitarian one world government,
where human rights and freedoms will no longer exist.
This is
likely the biggest challenge mankind has ever faced as a collective, and
it requires strong collective resistance. In order for that resistance
to occur, however, people must understand what’s going on and how all of
these various programs, treaties, partnerships, and agendas work
together. They’re all part of the same scheme, which is to implement a
One World totalitarian technocratic government under which humans have
no intrinsic value.
Call on Congress to Withdraw US From the WHO
While
the U.S. House and Senate have introduced identical bills to thwart the
WHO’s power grab through the proposed pandemic treaty, that still might
not protect us if President Biden signs it, because the treaty is specifically written to circumvent the Senate-approval process.20
(emphasis added)
A far more effective strategy would be for Congress to withhold its
annual contributions to the WHO, and then withdraw the U.S. from the WHO
altogether. I believe it may be worth supporting all these strategies.
So, please, contact your representatives and urge them to:
Support the No WHO Pandemic Preparedness Treaty Without Senate Approval Act
Withhold funding for the WHO
Support U.S. withdrawal from the WHO
We
also need to protect our nation against the IHR amendments. To that
end, the World Council for Health has launched a global #StopTheWHO
campaign. Here’s how you can get involved:21
Speak — Raise awareness on the ground and online. Use articles, posters, videos
Act — Campaign through rallies, political mobilization, legal notices and cases and similar campaigns
Collaborate with health freedom coalitions such as the World Council for Health
Explore activist toolboxes such as: World Council for Health Stop the Who Campaign and stopthewho.com
Engage global indigenous leadership to take a united stand against the WHO’s IHR
Notify World Health Assembly country delegates to oppose the IHR amendments (if you can identify them)
Activate people’s parliaments, legislatures or referendums to oppose power grabs
Sources and References
1, 2 Global Health Now September 28, 2017
3 Stop Vax Passports Task Force webinar on One Health, 52:20
4 Odysee.com May 22, 2023, 21:15
5 Odysee.com May 22, 2023, 22:48
6 Tiffany.house.gov March 7, 2023
7 No WHO Pandemic Preparedness Treaty Without Senate Approval Act House Bill Full Text
8 Congress.gov S.4343 — No WHO Pandemic Preparedness Treaty Without Senate Approval Act
9 Congress.gov S.444 — No WHO Pandemic Preparedness Treaty Without Senate Approval Act
10 Govtrack.us S.4343 — No WHO Pandemic Preparedness Treaty Without Senate Approval Act
11, 12 The Telegraph May 25, 2023
13, 15 Meryl Nass Substack May 25, 2023
14 Bracing for Superbugs: Strengthening Environmental Action in the One Health Response to Antimicrobial Resistance
16, 17 PR Newswire May 23, 2023
18 Bernie’s Tweets May 24, 2023
19 James Roguski Substack
20 Epoch Times February 21, 2023
21 RW Malone Substack May 17, 2022