The Slippery Slope of the WHO Pandemic Treaty

by Tessa Lena Apr 14, 2022

This story is about the proverbial “slippery slope” as it pertains to the potential new World Health Organization pandemic treaty that may gradually, then suddenly pave the way for the end of national sovereignty as we know it.

Some peasant philosophy

I am using words carefully because I want to be precise. One can easily don their 2019 hat and say, “Well, why I should I care about a WHO document? It’s just some cryptic, pointless formal thing, a bureaucratic project that exists to justify their salaries,” etc. And if I could somehow erase the past two years from memory, I would agree! (In the past, many unbearably boring documents birthed by the United Nations agencies served primarily to justify their salaries.)

However, the past two years cannot be erased. Adhering to the WHO guidelines put countless innocent people on ventilators and killed them, and prevented many from receiving helpful medical attention—and that’s just the surface of the story! We are in the middle of what feels like a global color revolution, where submissiveness and not asking questions make you a good citizen, and “love of freedom” is suddenly an embarrassing and selfish ultra-right value. By the way, even the “reframing” of the previously highly marketable Western freedom didn’t happen overnight but instead, took some years and a very concerted effort! “Updates” to public perception are at the core of any major social change!

Besides, “long-range plans made in secret” (borrowing Steven Newcomb’s term for “conspiracy”) do exist. They exist because human beings with extreme ambitions exist—and they usually like to lie and scam. In fact, we can easily describe the entire known history of the past few thousand years as a story of very successful scams: scams based on sincere illusions, scams based on blatant deceit—but scams none the less, in a sense that somebody had an arbitrary ambitious idea, made it into a cause, got some funding, whipped together a bunch of willing or unwilling men with arms—and here we are. A lot of things that many generations of people have believed in with religious fervor have never been true in the physical sense—but none the less, many choices by millions of people have been made based on those beliefs. A long conversation for another time! (If you are curious, here is a pre-pandemic essay of mine about that).

And in this day and age, it may take decades to prepare various legal and perceptional frameworks for the “new normal”—and then one day, suddenly, something unexpected happens, and wow, look, amazingly, right there in the bushes, there is a white concert grand piano! It’s just sitting there for some reason, wow! Who would have thunk! And the next thing you know, the younger generation doesn’t even know the joys and the freedoms that what their parents took for granted, etc. The trajectory of deceit can be very very ordinary!

Speaking of the Bushes … the extreme American “health response” of 2020 was made possible in part thanks to the “pandemic preparedness” plans developed during Dubya, when no one was looking or thinking about it. Which is to say that a framework developed when no one was looking or thinking about it became visible years later and profoundly changed our lives, so…

And again, with Bush’s 2005 plan, one may say that there was no conspiracy, it’s just that he meant well, and one thing led to another… to which I say, same difference! Yes, the world is a very complex dance of many forces. And no, the world cannot be explained strictly as a primitive one-track conspiracy. However, everything in human interactions is driven by individual desires and choices, and it so happens that people with exuberant fortunes have more access to the tools that allow them to turn their desires into reality for all of us. So it doesn’t matter if it’s “one thing led to another” or of it’s a matter of fifteen people with access to trillions of dollars getting together and deciding to move in a particular direction. Both can be true at the same time!

A side note:

(The public commentary period for the WHO pandemic treaty has ended. If my nose is correct, the critiques will be shoved based on the fact that the people who want more power, well, want more power. They are kind of enjoying it right now. Our leaders are temporarily bulldozing straight through any objections or conventional assumptions—and doing whatever they please, including what pre-2020 would have been considered unthinkable. And if someone complains, they just say the complainer is right-wing, or selfish, or demographically inferior, and should be ashamed of himself. A lame but highly successful technique!

Another side note: if you search for the phrase “WHO pandemic treaty” on DuckDuckGo, #StopTheTreaty comes up among the top results. On Google though no such thing exists. If you actually search for the phrase “stop the treaty,” on DuckDuckGo #StoopTheTreaty is the number one result. Google, on the other hand, tells you everything you ever wanted to know about the 1919 Treaty of Versailles!)

Here’s Dr. Tess Lawrie:

As you may know, the WHO is proposing a global pandemic agreement that would give it undemocratic rights over every participating nation and its citizens. Put simply, in the event of a ‘pandemic’, the WHO’s constitution would replace every country’s constitution. Whether your country’s elected government would agree or not, the WHO could impose lockdowns, testing regimes, enforce medical interventions, dictate all public health practice, and much more.

[The links to the WHO Constitution and basic founding documents—keeping in mind that the word “health” has unfortunately been hijacked without shame or mercy, and now this word provides a cover for whatever lucrative measure, product, or policy that the bureaucrats decide to promote!]

The “swine flu” precedent

Thing is, the WHO already tried to pull off a huge vaccine-selling health crisis more than ten years ago but it didn’t quite work.. The vaccine-selling part did work very well because they managed to activate the purchasing agreements—but the “scaring the public” part kind of “flopped” that time around. All that happened was that the pandemic was solemnly declared, the agreement-participating counties purchased relatively large batches of subpar vaccines (see “narcolepsy fiasco”), and then the entire thing went away.

Here is a 2010 Forbes article that says: “From the beginning the World Health Organization’s actions have ranged from the dubious to the flagrantly incompetent.”

And here is the report by the Council of Europe’s Parliamentary Assembly, titled, “The handling of the H1N1 pandemic: more transparency needed”:

“The rapporteur considers that some of the outcomes of the pandemic, as illustrated in this report, have been dramatic: distortion of priorities of public health services all over Europe, waste of huge sums of public money, provocation of unjustified fear amongst Europeans, creation of health risks through vaccines and medications which might not have been sufficiently tested before being authorised in fast-track procedures, are all examples of these outcomes.”

Now, one can say that maybe the WHO were just incompetently doing their best to prevent a potentially serious crisis—and in the philosophical sense, that, too, is possible. But they did conveniently changed the definition of “pandemic” just before they declared a pandemic…

From the British Medical Journal:

“WHO for years had defined pandemics as outbreaks causing “enormous numbers of deaths and illness” but in early May 2009 it removed this phrase—describing a measure of severity—from the definition.” [emphasis mine]

“Key scientists advising the World Health Organization on planning for an influenza pandemic had done paid work for pharmaceutical firms that stood to gain from the guidance they were preparing. These conflicts of interest have never been publicly disclosed by WHO, and WHO has dismissed inquiries into its handling of the A/H1N1 pandemic as “conspiracy theories.”

“A joint investigation by the BMJ and the Bureau of Investigative Journalism has uncovered evidence that raises troubling questions about how WHO managed conflicts of interest among the scientists who advised its pandemic planning, and about the transparency of the science underlying its advice to governments. Was it appropriate for WHO to take advice from experts who had declarable financial and research ties with pharmaceutical companies producing antivirals and influenza vaccines?”

And here is a 2019 lecture by Marc Van Ranst, Belgian Flu Commissioner, at the ESWI/Chatham House Influenza Pandemic Preparedness Stakeholders Conference. At around 13 minutes in, he brags about how he “misused the fact that that the top, top football… soccer clubs in Belgium inappropriately and against all agreements vaccinated… they made their soccer players priority people.” The audience laughs.

I want to end the story with an interview with the inimitable Mary Otto-Chang from last year in which we talked about the infiltration of the UN, including the 2019 agreement between the UN and the WEF. Even though it’s an interview I posted before, it is well worth re-watching in the context of this new WHO pandemic treaty in progress. (Also, if you have the time, please check out the pre-pandemic documentary called, “Trust WHO.” It’s very good and completely non-sensationalist.)

In conclusion, all this is very challenging but I believe that we are living in interesting times because we are equipped with an ability to deal with these interesting times. One day, we’ll look back and we’ll be healed. One day, we’ll be healed completely. I say a prayer for this day to come as soon as possible! May it be so.