reSee.it - Tweets Saved By @TheHorizonX
reSee.it AI Summary
Dr. John Campbell interviews international lawyer Philipp Kruse, who raises concerns about new international health regulations. Kruse warns that these regulations could grant the World Health Organization (WHO) the power to suspend constitutions, human rights, and international laws. He highlights the potential for abuse, damage to health, economies, and democracies. Amendments to these regulations will automatically take effect next year, without national parliamentary votes. Kruse emphasizes the WHO's ability to define threats and impose draconian measures on nations. He also expresses alarm over the WHO's authority to determine approved medical substances without evidence of efficacy or safety. This secretive process raises fears of state-backed medication administration.
@TheHorizonX - TheHorizon
Waarschuwing voor een potentiële dystopische toekomst. Dr. John Campbell in gesprek met Philipp Kruse, internationaal advocaat, gevestigd in Zürich. Het interview begint zo: Campbell: Waarom zouden mensen naar deze video moeten kijken, waar gaat deze bezorgdheid over? Kruse: Nou om uit te diepen wat ik zei in het Europees Parlement op 13 september: Ik ben persoonlijk het meest bezorgd over de nieuwe internationale gezondheidsreglementen omdat ze een regime tot stand zullen brengen waarbij de internationale Wereldgezondheidsorganisatie (@WHO) de macht krijgt om op elk moment onze grondwetten op te schorten, onze mensenrechten en internationale wetgeving op te schorten. Op deze manier nemen ze de wereldmacht over. Misbruik als uiteindelijk gevolg, maximale schade toebrengen aan de gezondheid van mensen, maximale schade aan economieën en aan onze democratieën. Er wordt onderhandeld over wat ik zojuist noemde, namelijk de internationale gezondheidsregeling, de amendementen daarop. De stemming vindt volgend jaar mei plaats in Genève ter gelegenheid van de Wereldgezondheidsvergadering. Deze amendementen zullen automatisch van kracht worden. Er komt geen stemming in de nationale parlementen en daarom moeten we ons zorgen maken en ervoor zorgen dat deze amendementen op de internationale gezondheidsregeling uiteindelijk niet van kracht worden. Dit klinkt echt als een heimelijk proces van een internationale organisatie om veel aspecten over te nemen van wat binnenlands bestuur zou moeten zijn. De @WHO kan alles wat ze maar wil als een bedreiging definiëren en vervolgens deze draconische bevoegdheden aan individuele natiestaten opleggen, of er nu een echte bedreiging is of niet. Het belangrijkste is dat ze zullen definiëren wat voor soort medische substanties ze beschouwen als de enige die door mensen mogen worden gebruikt en hoeveel dat moet gebeuren, het percentage van de dekking van deze injecties voor de hele bevolking, zonder ons echt te vertellen wat de inhoud van de substanties is en uiteraard zonder enig bewijs van werkzaamheid en enig bewijs van veiligheid, zoals we de afgelopen drie jaar hebben gezien. Dat klinkt behoorlijk angstaanjagend, dat mensen mogelijk medicatie toegediend kunnen krijgen met de macht van de natiestaat erachter. Dit is echt een beangstigende ontwikkeling.... @fvdemocratie @BVNLNederland @2eKamertweets @PubliekeOmroep ... niet dat ik iets verwacht van de laatste 2.
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker discusses the new pandemic treaty and amendments to the international health regulations proposed by the World Health Organization (WHO). They express concern over the potential impact on countries' sovereignty and people's self-determination. The speaker highlights that these changes will affect everyone and reduce democratic participation. They mention the WHO's claim to absolute leadership in health measures and the power to impose restrictions, lockdowns, and experimental treatments. The speaker also emphasizes the WHO's control over information and the lack of mechanisms to challenge their assessments. They argue that without open debate and different opinions, there can be no science or democracy. The speaker calls for the negotiations to be stopped and urges citizens to pressure their political representatives.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: So I may now start with giving you a brief introduction of what is the plan and what can be seen today in from the documents that are on the table that are about to be negotiated under the title of new pandemic treaty and amendments to the international health regulations. We are here today because we are all concerned by the World Health Organization's strong pressure to tent, its powers, its structural, and its financial capacities with a permanent effect over the sovereignty of the countries and over the self determination of the people. It was in the wake of the COVID nineteen crisis that the WHO has initiated a reform process which will bring significant changes to all of us that will concern every human being and every of the 194 member states on this planet. This reform process was started in 2021 with 2 working streams preparing 2 separate legal instruments. Number 1, a complete new treaty, the so called new pandemic treaty.
And, number 2, significant amendments to the already existing international health regulations. These 2 legal instruments, treaty and IHR, are about to be negotiated and finalized and they are they bring material changes. The contents of these drafts are on the table. They are available. That are available for everybody.
And already in 8 months' time from now, in May 2024, the 194 member states of the WHO will have their final vote on both of these international agreements. This process takes place behind closed doors and at a tremendous speed. It is not reported nor discussed in our newspapers, in our national parliaments, in universities, nor in society. It is unacceptable. This is unacceptable because these 2 legal instruments will affect every one of us, by reducing, even diminishing our loss, our rule, our right of self determination, our right, in general, of human dignity, and it will eliminate the basic principle of democratic participation.
Also, the effects of these treaties will be felt by member states. They will lose who will lose their sovereignty and their autonomy autonomy. Therefore, every human being on this planet should understand the essence of the 2 legal instruments which come under the title of pandemic prevention, pandemic preparedness, and response. In a nutshell, the WHO claims in these 2 legal instruments, an absolute and and non questionable leadership in all health measures as soon as WHO refers itself to pandemic prevention, preparedness, and response. WHO claims to have the ultimate expertise and the ultimate power in all aspects of this wild wide field.
Just I recommend to read carefully the current existing draft of the amendments of the international health regulations, article 13 a and article forty two. It shall be granted the power of a massive self authorization whenever it claims to act under this purpose. I recommend to read article 12 that established the preconditions for public health emergency of international con concern together with annex 2 of the proposed amendments. On the basis of an extremely vague concept, one health, which basically means anything and nothing, animals health ecosystem concerns about the level of CO2 and, of course, human health can give rise to permanent measures and even to a public health emergency to a pandemic called out and declared by the WHO. O.
And thereby, number 4, WHO has the right, will have the right to not only declare recommendations made by several experts but also to impose on the people of this planet or only to a certain region. All kinds of restrictions, access restrictions, lockdowns, surveillance, and experimental treatments. So far, the list of these potential measures can be found in the International Health Regulations article 18. And there you will also find one example of the precondition of the proof of vaccination that was so far meant to be nonbinding. In the future, as the word binding is eliminated And as we have explicitly written down in articles 13 a of the proposal and 42 of the proposal, the commitment that the member states will give when they accept, these amendments, the commitment that they will have to apply the proposed measures.
This is not enough. Further, WHO will, most notably, that is reserved and assume the right to define as the sole instance of on this planet and to control all information that it claims to be related to health. And this assumes as well the right for censorship and the right to interfere in social communication. It seems to be so important to the WHO that these provisions can be found in both of the international new agreements in the international health regulations and in the new pandemic treaty. And last but not least, of a brief summary that should any time be given once we speak about these new changes, is the fact that there is no mechanism foreseen that will allow the people or the member states to challenge the assessment of WHO, whether it is the WHO's assessment about a public health emergency, or their assessment with respect to certain measures, or when it comes to the imposing imposing of a regime for what they call vaccination, as experimental as it might be.
There will be simply no stop button for none of the member states and not, of course, not for us, the citizens. So now, if we just look at it as a whole, this right of WHO to self declare to also authorize auto authorize itself to claim and public health emergency of international concern and to maintain it for as long as it wants. Number 2, to issue so called recommendations that will be legally binding and that will be subject to a system of surveillance surveillance of the people, surveillance of the member states, then the total control and monopoly on information, including the right of censorship, and then the fact that there is no mechanism of control, the control of WHO, and of correction. What do we have as a result? Well, it is very simple to say.
Without the open and the possible the open debate, without the possibility of having different opinions, different hypotheses, different methods to be discussed on the tat at the table. There will be no science. And there will be, ultimately, no democracy. And there will be no legal court proceedings and no justice. If the result is already predefined by 1 sole authority on this planet, there cannot be by definition an proper scientific process, a proper decision making process that cannot be any democracy.
Number 2, it is a basic principle not only of international law, not only of national constitutional law, that we have, as human beings the right to know what we consent to. So if we ask ourselves, have we been asked, have we been informed about this process that is about to become reality, the answer is no. And there is one important distinction to be made between these 2 legal instruments. The new pandemic treaty will be considered by WHO itself as a treaty and thereby shall be subject to a national process of debate and, ratification, but not so for the international health regulations. The international health regulations, by definition of WHO's own, writing, when you read the international health regulations, they are qualified as health regulations according to the WHO constitution article 21.
And what does that mean? As a consequence, there will be an automatic coming into force right after the vote in 2024. So far, it is still 24 month, but these 24 months have been reduced to 12 months only. So that means that at the end, after May 2025, the international health regulations will become law automatically. So we will not be asked, we have not been informed, and there will be a process of automatic enactment of the international health regulation.
This is about as severe as it can be when it comes to the violation of the principle of an informed consent. This principle does not exist only on the individual level, but it exists only also for democracies as a whole. And It is it exists under the title of self determination of the people, which is one of the founding principles of the United Nations in the United Nations Charter Article 1 of 1946. Now, this is the reason why we should all get to know not only what is in these documents, but we shall claim and clearly say that some of these, international health regulations and the changes that are modified and declared there will totally be opposed to what we consider our constitutional order as there is no public information right as there will be censorship, as there will be human rights not protected, as there will be no checks and balances, as actually it will be the WHO to determine under which legal status we will have to live. That means the power will not be anymore in the hands of the people.
And therefore, these negotiations have to be stopped immediately, and it is a matter and a duty for all citizens now to impose the pressure towards their public representatives, political representatives, to make sure that the politicians, the political representatives, understand that they go on be right, on beyond, of their, and trusted vote they can use. Now, as this is just an overview And as we are here in Europe and as within Europe, the these rules have been already pushed forward to an alarming extent, we found it important to provide you a more detailed overview on the situation here in Europe.