reSee.it - Related Video Feed

The speaker raises concerns about a new convention on pandemic prevention and preparedness that would give the World Health Organization (WHO) more power. They argue that this would require a significant financial commitment from the US without proportional voting power. The convention would also require the US to give 20% of vaccines and pandemic-related products to the WHO, transfer intellectual property rights, and give the WHO a leading role in fighting misinformation. The speaker criticizes the WHO for its failure to detect the COVID-19 pandemic and accuses the Biden administration of considering joining the convention without Senate approval. They call for the amendment to be submitted to the Senate for review.

The speaker expresses concerns about the World Health Organization (WHO) and its proposed pandemic treaty. They question the WHO's ability to learn from past mistakes and argue that giving the organization more power could lead to catastrophic errors. The speaker discusses the WHO's structure, funding, and influence, highlighting the role of external sources such as the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. They criticize the WHO's reliance on private-public partnerships and claim that member states have limited input in decision-making. The speaker also raises concerns about the WHO's ability to define information and determine what is considered settled science. They emphasize the importance of considering the potential costs to democracy and individual freedoms.

The speaker expresses concern about two legal instruments that will impact society by limiting our rights, self-determination, and democratic participation. These instruments, related to pandemic prevention and response, grant the World Health Organization (WHO) absolute leadership and authority in all health matters. The speaker urges everyone to carefully read the draft amendments of the international health regulations, particularly Article 13a and Article 42, which grant the WHO significant self-authorization power. They also highlight the vague concept of "health" in Article 12, which establishes conditions for public health emergencies of international concern.

The speaker expresses concern about the binding nature of the treaties and the extension of powers to the director general of the WHO. They highlight instances of misconduct within the WHO and criticize the compressed reporting time for public health risks. The speaker argues that these treaties would take away powers from elected representatives and create an unaccountable supranational body. They also raise concerns about the influence of pharmaceutical companies on the WHO and question the organization's handling of the COVID-19 pandemic. The speaker emphasizes the importance of individual rights and liberties and suggests that a one-size-fits-all approach may not be effective. They mention the EU's plans to establish a department of misinformation and express skepticism about a single version of the truth. The speaker concludes by calling for careful consideration and reading of the documents.

The speaker discusses the World Health Organization's proposed pandemic treaty, criticizing it as a globalist power grab that undermines national sovereignty. They highlight the failures of lockdowns and praise Florida and Sweden's approach. The government supports the treaty but claims it won't override national policy. The speaker urges people to oppose the treaty, likening it to the UK's entry into the EEC. They advocate for rejecting the treaty and withholding funding from the WHO.

The speaker discusses their experience working with the World Health Organization (WHO) and how they believe the organization is violating international health regulations. They claim that the WHO has become more powerful and that member states are acting as corporate agencies. They also suggest that governments and key positions have been blackmailed and that there is corruption within the system. The speaker criticizes the use of PCR tests, the promotion of masks, and the push for vaccines. They argue that the vaccines are untested and potentially dangerous. They believe there is a larger agenda at play involving depopulation, control through technology, and the suppression of spirituality. The speaker calls for people to wake up, take back their health, and hold those responsible accountable.

The speaker discusses the power of the World Health Organization (WHO) during a public health emergency or pandemic. They mention that the WHO can declare recommendations and impose various restrictions, such as lockdowns and surveillance. They also highlight the potential requirement for proof of vaccination. The speaker emphasizes that the WHO will have control over health-related information, including the right to censor and interfere in social communication. These provisions are present in the International Health Regulations and the proposed pandemic treaty. The summary concludes by mentioning the importance of discussing these matters.

The speaker introduces the plan and documents for negotiation, which include a new pandemic treaty and amendments to international health regulations. They express concern over the World Health Organization's push to increase its powers and control over countries and individuals. The reform process began in 2021, with two separate legal instruments being prepared: a new treaty and amendments to existing regulations. These drafts will be negotiated and finalized, with member states voting on them in May 2024. The process is happening quickly and behind closed doors, without public reporting.

The speaker raises concerns about the World Health Organization's power to declare and maintain a public health emergency, issue legally binding recommendations, control information, and lack accountability. They argue that without open debate and differing opinions, there can be no science, democracy, legal proceedings, or justice. They emphasize that if one authority has predetermined results, there can be no proper scientific or decision-making process, nor any democracy. The speaker asserts that these issues violate international law and basic principles.

The speaker discusses the global implementation of measures like mask mandates and testing requirements, following the World Health Organization's (WHO) recommendations. The WHO is set to gain more authority, with member states recognizing it as a coordinating authority. The speaker raises concerns about the WHO's power to command states to enforce lockdowns or vaccine mandates, with countries deploying their police and military against their own citizens. There are discussions about potentially removing human rights and freedoms from the regulations, while an independent advisory committee is created to protect human rights. The goal is to advance the WHO's new world order at the upcoming World Health Assembly, with finalized agreements in a year's time, unless people pressure their governments to stop the plans.

The speaker discusses new pandemic agreements that give the WHO unprecedented power to declare emergencies and mandate medical interventions globally. These agreements also allow for censorship, state-controlled economies, and limited accountability for the WHO. Fundamental rights may be compromised under this regime.

The World Health Organization (WHO) is facing criticism for seeking to extend its powers and control over countries and people's self-determination. The WHO's reform process, initiated after the COVID-19 crisis, aims to bring significant changes that will affect all member states. The organization is pushing for a pandemic treaty that would grant it authority over health decisions, including vaccines, treatments, and restrictions. Critics argue that the WHO has failed in its response to the pandemic and should not be given more power. The treaty, if approved, would be binding and could restrict individual liberties. Citizens are urged to pressure their political representatives to oppose these measures.

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.

The World Health Organization (WHO) is facing criticism for seeking to expand its powers and control over countries and people's self-determination. An independent evaluation will be conducted to improve pandemic preparedness, but the WHO's track record has raised doubts about its ability to handle such responsibilities. The WHO's proposed pandemic treaty aims to gain authority over health decisions of UN member nations, including vaccine mandates and distribution. Concerns have been raised about the lack of transparency in the decision-making process and the potential infringement on human rights. Citizens are urged to pressure their political representatives to ensure accountability and prevent the WHO from gaining unchecked power.

The speaker claims that the World Health Organization (WHO) is violating international health regulations and human rights. They believe that WHO has gained too much power and that member states are being controlled by multinational corporations. The speaker suggests that governments and key positions have been blackmailed and that there is corruption within the system. They criticize the use of PCR tests, lockdowns, and mask mandates, stating that they are not based on scientific evidence. The speaker also expresses concerns about the safety and efficacy of vaccines, suggesting that they could be harmful and part of a depopulation agenda. They call for an investigation and for people to reclaim their freedom.

The speaker discusses amendments made to Article 59 of the International Health Regulations, which shorten the time frames for future amendments. They criticize the lack of debate and media coverage surrounding these amendments, calling it undemocratic and against sovereignty. The speaker also highlights the ignorance of politicians regarding global organizations like the World Health Organization (WHO). They explain that the amendments aim to centralize control over international health policy, potentially affecting sovereignty. Several countries, including Estonia, the Philippines, Slovakia, and New Zealand, have rejected these amendments, citing concerns about sovereignty and the WHO's authority. The speaker outlines specific dangerous provisions in the amendments, such as making recommendations binding, removing consultation requirements, expanding the scope of the IHR, and increasing funding for censorship and unspecified costs.

The speakers discuss the achievements of the World Health Organization (WHO) in the past two years. They mention that the WHO is passing amendments to international health regulations, which member countries must actively opt out of to avoid accepting them. They express concern about the power given to the WHO's director general during a pandemic, as they can decide what actions to take. The speakers also mention that the definition of a pandemic has been changed, potentially leading to a situation where even a small number of cases in different countries could be classified as a pandemic. This would allow the WHO to seize governing powers of member states.

The WHO's new treaty and amendments are causing concern as they could potentially seize governing powers during a pandemic. This unelected body, funded by billionaires, could dictate when people can leave their homes, wear masks, and receive mRNA shots. It is seen as undemocratic and not in the best interest of the people. The United States government proposed changes to the treaty, but most were withdrawn due to public outrage. However, the WHO continues to pursue their agenda, finding alternative methods to achieve their goals.

The World Health Organization (WHO) is facing criticism for seeking to extend its powers and control over countries and people's self-determination. The WHO's reform process, initiated after the COVID-19 crisis, aims to bring significant changes that will affect all 194 member states. They are proposing a pandemic treaty that would give them authority over health decisions and the power to impose restrictions, lockdowns, and experimental treatments. Critics argue that the WHO has failed in the past and should not be granted more power. The treaty is set to be voted on in May 2024, and citizens are urged to pressure their political representatives to oppose it.

The speaker expresses concern about the World Health Organization (WHO) and suggests that it is a danger to humanity. They claim that the WHO wants countries to give it authority over declaring pandemics and procuring vaccines and drugs. The speaker sarcastically suggests that it would be better to sign an agreement with a Colombian drug cartel, implying that the WHO is not trustworthy. They accuse the WHO of lying during the COVID-19 pandemic and compare it to a terrorist organization. The speaker dismisses the effectiveness of vaccines and criticizes the WHO for being more dangerous than the World Economic Forum.

The WHO is creating a treaty that could bypass sovereignty during pandemics and even include climate change. This treaty would give them control over plants, animals, and humans, allowing them to declare pandemics, implement emergency measures, enforce lockdowns, and mandate vaccinations. It would also impact livestock, farming, and energy management. Many people are opposing this overreach, including those who testified at the European Parliament. Some, like Trump, want to withdraw from the WHO to avoid international court involvement. A doctor named Russell plans to follow his own medical judgment rather than the WHO's guidance.

The speaker believes that the World Health Organization (WHO) should only serve as a platform for countries to exchange ideas and information, and provide assistance when requested. They argue that the WHO should not have the power to enforce lockdowns or dictate vaccination policies, as it infringes on national sovereignty. The speaker also highlights concerns about the WHO's funding, suggesting a conflict of interest due to significant contributions from private interests, particularly those with pharmaceutical investments. They question the expertise of the WHO and criticize its handling of the COVID-19 pandemic, including its understanding of immunity, mask usage, and the impact of school closures. The speaker concludes that it is illogical to grant more power to the WHO in shaping health policies.

The World Health Organization (WHO) is facing criticism over its proposed pandemic treaty, which would grant the organization significant power over health decisions and impose restrictions on countries. The treaty would cover areas such as vaccines, medical devices, and experimental treatments. Supporters argue that it is necessary to protect the global population, while opponents fear a loss of sovereignty and individual liberties. The WHO's authority would extend to declaring recommendations and imposing restrictions, including lockdowns and surveillance. The treaty is set to be voted on by the 194 member states of the WHO in May 2024. Critics urge citizens to contact their politicians to voice their concerns and potentially stop the treaty.

The speaker criticizes the World Health Organization (WHO) for its lack of accountability and the influence of pharmaceutical companies. They argue that proposed regulations would give the WHO more power, including the ability to make binding recommendations and enforce financial contributions from countries for pandemic response. The regulations could also require the sharing of intellectual property, mandate vaccine production and international sharing, and override national safety approval processes. Another speaker highlights the agility of the UK's response to COVID-19 after leaving the European Union and suggests it as a model for the future. The speaker warns that the WHO's powers could include ordering border closures, travel restrictions, contact tracing, forced quarantining, medical examinations, proof of vaccination, and forced medication, even in potential emergencies.

The World Health Organization (WHO) is facing criticism over its proposed pandemic treaty, which would give it more power over global health decisions. The treaty would allow the WHO to impose restrictions, lockdowns, and experimental treatments without question. Some argue that this level of authority has never been seen before and raises concerns about individual liberties. Supporters argue that it is necessary to protect the world's population. The treaty is set to be voted on by the 194 member states of the WHO in May 2024. Critics are urging citizens to contact their politicians to voice their opposition and potentially stop the treaty from being ratified.