The Roman Catholic Church, with all its ramifications throughout the world, forms one vast organization under the control, and designed to serve the interests, of the papal see. Its millions of communicants, in every country on the globe, are instructed to hold themselves as bound in allegiance to the pope. Whatever their nationality or their government, they are to regard the authority of the church as above all other. Though they may take the oath pledging their loyalty to the state, yet back of this lies the vow of obedience to Rome, absolving them from every pledge inimical to her interests.
History testifies of her artful and persistent efforts to insinuate herself into the affairs of nations; and having gained a foothold, to further her own aims, even at the ruin of princes and people. GC 580.2 – GC 580.3

Tech ARP

Leave a reply

Is the Biden Administration negotiating to sign over US sovereignty to the World Health Organization (WHO)?!

Take a look at the viral claim, and find out what the facts really are!

Claim : Biden Admin Is Going To Sign Over US Sovereignty To WHO!

People are sharing an article by The Epoch Times, which claims that the Biden Administration is negotiating a deal to give WHO authority over US pandemic policies!

Here is an excerpt of the very long article, so please feel free to skip to the next section for the facts!

The Biden administration is preparing to sign up the United States to a “legally binding” accord with the World Health Organization (WHO) that would give the Geneva-based United Nations health agency the authority to dictate America’s policies during a pandemic.

Despite widespread criticism of the WHO’s response to the COVID pandemic, U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra joined with WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus in September 2022 to announce “the U.S.-WHO Strategic Dialogue.” Together, they developed a “platform to maximize the longstanding U.S.–WHO partnership, and to protect and promote the health of all people around the globe, including the American people.”

These discussions and others spawned the “zero draft” (pdf) of a pandemic treaty, published on Feb. 1, which now seeks ratification by all 194 WHO member states. A meeting of the WHO’s Intergovernmental Negotiating Body is scheduled for Feb. 27 to work out the final terms, which members will then sign.

Written under the banner of “the world together equitably,” the zero draft grants the WHO the power to declare and manage a global pandemic emergency. Once a health emergency is declared, all signatories, including the United States, would submit to the authority of the WHO regarding treatments, government regulations such as lockdowns and vaccine mandates, global supply chains, and monitoring and surveillance of populations.

Centralized Pandemic Response

“They want to see a centralized, vaccine-and-medication-based response, and a very restrictive response in terms of controlling populations,” David Bell, a public health physician and former WHO staffer specializing in epidemic policy, told The Epoch Times. “They get to decide what is a health emergency, and they are putting in place a surveillance mechanism that will ensure that there are potential emergencies to declare.”

The WHO pandemic treaty is part of a two-track effort, coinciding with an initiative by the World Health Assembly to create new global pandemic regulations that would also supersede the laws of member states. The World Health Assembly is the rule-making body of the WHO, comprised of representatives from the member states.

“Both [initiatives] are fatally dangerous,” Francis Boyle, professor of international law at the University of Illinois College of Law, told The Epoch Times. “Either one or both would set up a worldwide medical police state under the control of the WHO, and in particular WHO Director-General Tedros.

“If either one or both of these go through, Tedros or his successor will be able to issue orders that will go all the way down the pipe to your primary care physicians.”

Physician Meryl Nass told The Epoch Times: “If these rules go through as currently drafted, I, as a doctor, will be told what I am allowed to give a patient and what I am prohibited from giving a patient, whenever the WHO declares a public health emergency. So they can tell you you’re getting remdesivir, but you can’t have hydroxychloroquine or ivermectin. What they’re also saying is they believe in equity, which means everybody in the world gets vaccinated, whether or not you need it, whether or not you’re already immune.”

Regarding medical treatments, the accord would require member nations to “monitor and regulate against substandard and falsified pandemic-related products.” Based on previous WHO and Biden administration policy, this would likely include forcing populations to take newly developed vaccines, while preventing doctors from prescribing nonvaccine treatments or medicines.

Circumventing Senate, Constitution?

A key question surrounding the accord is whether the Biden administration can bind the United States to treaties and agreements without Senate consent, which is required under the Constitution. The zero draft concedes that, per international law, treaties between countries must be ratified by national legislatures, thus respecting the right of their citizens to consent.

However, the draft also includes a clause that the accord will go into effect on a “provisional” basis as soon as it’s signed by delegates to the WHO and would, therefore, be legally binding on members without being ratified by legislatures.

“Whoever drafted this clause knew as much about U.S. constitutional law and international law as I did, and deliberately drafted it to circumvent the power of the Senate to give its advice and consent to treaties, to provisionally bring it into force immediately upon signature,” Boyle said. In addition, “the Biden administration will take the position that this is an international executive agreement that the president can conclude of his own accord without approval by Congress and is binding on the United States of America, including all state and local democratically elected officials, governors, attorney generals, and health officials.”

There are several U.S. Supreme Court decisions that may support the Biden administration’s position. They include State of Missouri v. Holland, in which the Supreme Court ruled that treaties supersede state laws, while other decisions, such as United States v. Belmont, ruled that executive agreements without Senate consent can be legally binding, with the force of treaties.

There are parallels between the WHO pandemic accord and a recent Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) global tax agreement, which the Biden administration signed on to, although Republicans say has “no path forward” to legislative approval. In the OECD agreement, punitive terms are built in that allow foreign countries to punish American companies if the deal isn’t ratified by the United States.

As with the OECD tax agreement, administration officials are attempting to appeal to international organizations to impose policies that have been rejected by America’s voters. Under the U.S. Constitution, health care doesn’t fall under the authority of the federal government; it’s the domain of the states. The Biden administration found this to be an unwelcome impediment to its attempts to impose vaccine and mask mandates on Americans when courts ruled that federal agencies didn’t have the authority to do so.

“To circumvent that, they went to the WHO, for either the regulations or the treaty, to get around domestic opposition,” Boyle said.

According to the zero draft, signatories would agree to “strengthen the capacity and performance of national regulatory authorities and increase the harmonization of regulatory requirements at the international and regional level.” They will also implement a “whole-of-government and whole-of-society approach at the national level” that will include national governments, local governments, and private companies.

The zero draft stated that the new accord is necessary because of “the catastrophic failure of the international community in showing solidarity and equity in response to the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic.”

A report from the WHO’s Independent Panel for Pandemic Preparedness and Response (pdf) characterized the WHO’s performance as a “toxic cocktail” of bad decisions. Co-Chair Ellen Johnson Sirleaf told the BBC it was due to “a myriad of failures, gaps, and delays.” The solutions proposed by that report, however, didn’t suggest more local autonomy or diversified decision-making, but rather greater centralization, more power, and more money for the WHO.

Show more

Truth : Biden Admin Is NOT Going To Sign Over US Sovereignty To WHO!

This is yet another example of FAKE NEWS about the Biden Administration, and the WHO, and here are the reasons why…

Fact #1 : WHO Member States Want To Better Prepare For Future Pandemics

This claim is based on WHO member state discussions in 2022, to amend existing International Health Regulations to strengthen the world’s preparedness against future global pandemics.

The International Health Regulations (IHR) were first adopted by member states in 1969, empowering the WHO to monitor global diseases. Those regulations have since been revised over the years, including in 2005 – after the SARS outbreak.

On 1 December 2021, world leaders agreed to kickstart the process to draft and negotiate an agreement or convention to “strengthen pandemic prevention, preparedness and response“.

Fact #2 : Recommendations Came From WHO Member States

The proposed recommendations came from WHO member states, and not WHO itself. Among the more than 200 recommendations on how to better prepare for the next pandemic were:

• sharing of data and genomic sequences on emerging viruses
• a plan for equitable vaccine distribution
• a ban on wildlife markets
• incentives for reporting new viruses or variants

Fact #3 : Biden Administration Does Not Want A Binding Agreement

While the European Union proposed that the changes be adopted in the form of a new treaty, a measure backed by Britain, Indonesia and Kenya, among other countries.

Despite what people are claiming on social media, the United States has opposed a binding treaty. India and Brazil are similarly reluctant about adopting a treaty.

The EU proposed the treaty and is its biggest backer, with support from Britain, Indonesia, Kenya and others.

The United States will take part in the talks but has opposed a binding treaty. India and Brazil have also voiced reservations.

With so many member countries involved, securing agreement is likely to be tricky.

Recommended : Did Joe Biden Fire Over 200 Marines For Not Taking Vaccine?!

Fact #4 : Future WHO Agreement May Not Be Binding

The zero draft of the proposed WHO agreement on preparing for future pandemics was released on 1 February 2023, and was the focus of the article by The Epoch Times.

If you download and read the zero draft, you will realise that the WHO is still calling it a “convention, agreement, or other international instruments“, clearly showing that member countries have not decided whether they want it to be binding or otherwise.

In the third point noted on the very first page of the draft, it was even pointed out that this is just a draft that is being used for “commencing negotiations“, and that “nothing is agreed until everything is agreed“.

 The INB (Intergovernmental Negotiating Body) further agreed that the zero draft would be considered at its fourth meeting as a basis for commencing negotiations at that meeting, it being understood that the zero draft will be without prejudice to the position of any delegation and following the principle that “nothing is agreed until everything is agreed”. 

So it is ludicrous for anyone who read the first page of the zero draft to claim that the Biden Administration is planning to sign away US sovereignty to the WHO.

Fact #5 : Zero Draft Specifically Addressed Sovereignty

The zero draft of the proposed WHO agreement on preparing for future pandemics even addresses the issue of national sovereignty on Article 4 (3):

3. Sovereignty – States have, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations and the principles of international law, the sovereign right to determine and manage their approach to public health, notably pandemic prevention, preparedness, response and recovery of health systems, pursuant to their own policies and legislation, provided that activities within their jurisdiction or control do not cause damage to their peoples and other countries. Sovereignty also covers the rights of States over their biological resources.

Anyone who read the zero draft can clearly see that even the “draft” has clarified that no country is signing over its national sovereignty to the WHO.

Recommended : Did WHO Boss Dr. Tedros Refuse COVID-19 Vaccine?!

Fact #6 : WHO DG Dismissed Sovereignty Claim In May 2022

On May 17, 2022, WHO Director-General Dr. Tedros Ghebreyesus dismissed the claim that countries signing up for this new agreement would be giving up their sovereignty.

The accord process is led by Member States with their own Intergovernmental Negotiating Body (called INB), representing all regions of the world. The INB has now started a two-year process that includes global public hearings with all stakeholders. This represents the world’s opportunity to plan together, detect pathogens quicker, share data broadly and collectively respond more effectively to the next diseases X or known pathogens.

Unfortunately, there has been a small minority of groups making misleading statements and purposefully distorting facts.

I want to be crystal clear. WHO’s agenda is public, open and transparent. WHO stands strongly for individual rights. We passionately support everyone’s right to health and we will do everything we can to ensure that that right is realized.

The first ever World Health Assembly, which took place soon after the WHO Constitution entered into force in 1948, was a watershed event in global public health. And like the proposed pandemic preparedness accord, this did not mean WHO usurped nations’ sovereignty; in fact it strengthened countries’ ability to fight diseases together.

WHO is an expression of Member States’ own sovereignty and WHO is entirely what the sovereign 194 Member States want WHO to be.

Every year, these sovereign governments come together at the World Health Assembly to set the health agenda for the world. Individually we can’t beat pandemics; our best chance is together.

Fact #6 : WHO Treaty Cannot Bypass US Senate Ratification

The claim that the Biden Administration is using the WHO treaty to bypass US senate ratification is nonsense.

The US Constitution gives the Senate the sole power to approve, by a two-thirds vote or more, all international treaties (binding agreements) negotiated by the executive branch.

[The President] shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur;

In other words, the Biden Administration can negotiate any agreement it wants with other WHO member countries, but it must still seek ratification by the two-thirds of the US Senate.

Please help us fight fake news – SHARE this article, and SUPPORT our work!

Please Support My Work!

Support my work through a bank transfer /  PayPal / credit card!

Name : Adrian Wong
Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL)
Credit Card / Paypal : https://paypal.me/techarp

Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school.

He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world.