34 Comments

Thank you for calling attention to the treaty, Michael, and I am one of those alarmists warning people about it ;-)

An even greater and more pressing threat than the treaty, however, is the International Health Regulations (IHR) amendments up for vote at the May 22–28 World Health Assembly meeting. I detail the concerns in my public comment, which I published here:

• “Letter to the US HHS Office of Global Affairs” (https://margaretannaalice.substack.com/p/letter-to-the-us-hhs-office-of-global)

After the letter, I include a list of action steps people can take to voice their objections, which we need to do within the next week or so before these amendments are carte-blanched through.

Expand full comment

Thanks.

I would add that it's also setting a precedent for a one world government. We've already had a sort of power grab by globalists and authoritarians during the Covid crisis. But this treaty serves as a sort of statement that it was not a mistake, but rather that they do have the authority to do this, and in fact should have more authority from now on.

While national sovereignty is recognised, the treaty does say that if a member nation rejects the WHO's recommendations, it needs to explain itself to the other signatories. And a compliance board is established. So there are mechanisms to pressure signatories to comply. Sovereignty is recognized de jura, but de facto, it will be eroded.

These things happen in small steps.

And I suspect we shall soon see more of this in other areas. Like perhaps ways to make states more compliant with IPCC recommendations, or with IMF recommendations and so on.

Expand full comment
May 18, 2022Liked by Michael P Senger

Nice essay. I do like that it's less terrifying; however, they deserve to be vilified and disbanded. How long did it take this all knowing health body to say that Covid was airborne? Does anyone remember? I feel like it was a year.

Expand full comment

It was just over a year Bob. Early in 2020 a group of physicists and global specialists in fluids etc., contacted the WHO and said that it was airborne. They were shocked when the WHO was rude and not interested in their opinions and told them they were categorically wrong, this from people in the WHO who had no expertise in the field, and just repeated the droplets dogma. This group went to work and it took them several months to uncover the historical source of that dogma, and a year later the WHO with no fanfare quietly updated their advice. More than that this group showed that the true source of deep lung infections are the finest virus particles all of which go straight through any facemask-the only thing that will stop them is a Hazmut suit, which is why they use them in BSL4 labs, and not the facemasks the CCP told the world, via the WHO, to use. Which has been very profitable for China as it makes 25% of the world's supply. But nowhere has it ever been proven, in fact observational data shows the opposite, that facemasks reduce sickness, hospitalizations or deaths - the only issue that we should be focused on. But the WHO stays focused on 'cases' as that keeps the pandemic going.

Expand full comment

Lot of quite definition changes as well. Filthy.

Expand full comment

Thanks for letting me know. Lot of quiet updates. Yep, I'm fully aware of the mask nonsense, but thank you for taking the time to write that out.

Expand full comment

You're welcome Bob. Thanks for taking the time out to say thanks. I appreciate it. You're welcome to join my Substack page if you'd like, if you haven't already. I have some good stuff coming up soon. Regarding your comment on definition changes it's maddening - I have a list of them somewhere in my research folders. It is very, very, long.

Expand full comment

Sure, I'll sign up!

Expand full comment

Thanks I appreciate the support. Got a good article coming up - which is a repost of a great new peer reviewed paper by a distinguished neurosurgeon on the last 2 years. Well worth reading.

Expand full comment
May 23, 2022Liked by Michael P Senger

that was the most informed and least bias assessment I have read about any of this madness. Thank you Michael. the New Normal is now officially my go to news site. As if you can find "news" anywhere else these days.

Expand full comment
author

Thanks Vercingetorix!

Expand full comment
May 18, 2022Liked by Michael P Senger

The main reason I would be worried about the WHO is we subscribe to it. I am always against the US giving any power to any international organization. Of course, equity is a false concept. Equality is a much better one.

Expand full comment

Hy Michael,

thanks for that perspective. I mainly agree with it. Translated some of your thoughts to german and made an article about it. Greetings.

https://tkp.at/2022/05/18/pandemievertrag-who-zementiert-ihre-macht/

Expand full comment
author

Thank you Thomas!

Expand full comment
May 27, 2022Liked by Michael P Senger

This runs counter to all of the fear porn that has showed up all over the place. Interesting to consider!

Expand full comment
May 23, 2022Liked by Michael P Senger

Good summary.

We have nothing to fear from this treaty, unless our countries have the wrong leaders, who will insist that we must follow the WHO's advice religiously.

As most countries seem to have the wrong leaders now, and the right leaders are extremely rare, I am definitely worried.

Expand full comment

Good to know it's not binding and with a government that is awake we could walk away from the precipice. Miss you on Twitter!

Expand full comment

The fact that people trust an organisation whose second largest donor is a private philanthropist with very specific views about pandemic management - Bill Gates - to guide global pandemic responses bespeaks extraordinary naivete. I critique this naivete here: “The State is not your Daddy...” https://davidthunder.substack.com/p/the-state-isnt-your-daddy-and-big?r=wlowt&s=w&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&utm_source=direct

Expand full comment
May 18, 2022Liked by Michael P Senger

Tedros and WHO need to take a hike!

Expand full comment
May 18, 2022Liked by Michael P Senger

Thanks for that perspective. As you rightly point out given the level of corruption within the WHO and their absolute failure to deal with a respiratory virus ( for which they had a plan before throwing that out the window) any further endorsement of their actions via a TREATY is not what the world needs.

Expand full comment

Hi Michael - may I ask you what convinces you that the CCP was acting alone against the world regarding lockdowns, and Covid-19 policies? I personally strongly disagree with that. I think the CCP, the WHO, the World Economic Forum, Gates, and the entire pandemic planning and vaccine industrial complex were working together and have been for more than a decade - they planned it together and carried it out in lockstep - And they've done it by seizing the high ground everywhere through both corrupt leaders and coercing leaders on board like useful idiots. (E.g. the World Council of Churches, just as one example.) If we follow the time line of the significant events and publications leading up to lockdown - we see:

1. Event 201 - the last pandemic simulation exercise late 2019 - which was attended by the head of China's CDC....

2. Event 201 made a list of 7 recommendations to the WHO and world governments for pandemic planning-which is a carbon copy of the Covid19 policies, including censorship

3. China - the CCP followed the 7 recommendations and did the lockdowns and all of the Covid19 tyranny from Asymptomatic testing to Vaccine obsession

4. On the 3.2.20 the World Health Organization published its first pandemic preparedness plan for SARS-CoV2, which began the process of turning health and science upside down. In this document is a large section on the expected 'infodemic' - and the fact that the WHO had signed agreements with both Chinese and American big tech companies - all the majors to deal with misinformation - code for censorship. AT this point there was only about 6 deaths outside of China and the cases were falling inside China. They planned it way ahead of time.

5. February 16-24th Feb - report on the WHO-China joint mission on Covid - this document is the most revealing. Quite apart from the praise it gives China and the claim they set a new benchmark - if you read it carefully you see that every single Covid policy tyranny, with a few exceptions that came later, are in here - and the CCP is recommending them, and the WHO takes them up. This is the 'justification' for the lockdowns etc.

The intention by the CCP and the western partners were to lockdown the world.

The western leaders who can be linked to the CCP and/or the World Economic Forum, especially the Young Global Leaders, but even older leaders like Biden, who predate that program, but are well on board with the globalists of the WEF, they are almost all to a man and woman the Covid dictators.

It was an east-west, left-right Global Fascist Alliance.

And remember all of the companies, investment funds, and NGO's that make up the membership and partners of the WEF, are almost all in bed with the CCP in China.

E.g. Who owns CNN? AT&T. Where has it been for the last 40 years? Snuggling up with the CCP.

All of the woke corporations are owned significantly by the investment companies of the WEF, which in turn have a huge share of their business in China.

It is not a coincidence.

Expand full comment
author

“I think the CCP, the WHO, the World Economic Forum, Gates, and the entire pandemic planning and vaccine industrial complex were working together and have been for more than a decade.”

I don’t disagree with this. I just think all those other entities—the WHO especially but the others as well—have effectively been turned into front organizations for the goals of the CCP.

Expand full comment

Thanks for answering mate.

I certainly don't disagree with you that it is possible that the CCP is the group that is in charge. But I don't know that the Chinese would have been able to gain that much influence across our societies without the commitment of a large group that has the same intentions and goals.

I have spent a lot of time looking for signs and indications that show the Chinese are truly in charge as opposed to being an alliance.

While I am not dismissing your theory, I think that it is simply much more likely that it is an alliance - which is why I like to call it a global fascist alliance.

Their end goal is a global totalitarian state-So Biden and crew don't care if they destroy America and Europe along the way. In fact the biggest obstacles to global fascism are the western citizens as a group, particularly Americans who are heavily armed, and it speaks to why they ignore the truth of homicide statistics in the USA and are trying to take the guns despite the constitution.

I personally think that the western traitors and globalists are right now working hand in hand with the CCP and are setting the stage for a kinetic world war.

Which is how they get to the Great Reset by 2030. And in an article that came out on the WEF website just after Schwab published his book Covid19: The Great Reset, they pointed out that we will see 10 years of disruptions and conflicts - which takes us to 2030.

Not a pretty picture.

Expand full comment
May 18, 2022Liked by Michael P Senger

The changes to the IHR make clear the shift of power from nation states to director general of WHO. My red flag is that it is a nudge to world governance.

Expand full comment
May 18, 2022Liked by Michael P Senger

Excellent post..I have your book and will be blundering through it soon..

"...which was subsequently proven to have an infection fatality rate under 0.2%..."

The link goes to this quote.

"...overall infection mortality rate is approximately 0.096%..."

Is that the mean rate for the UK?

The global mean is quite different.

"..the available evidence suggests average global IFR of ~0.15% and ~1.5- 2.0 billion infections by February 2021 with substantial differences in IFR and in infection spread across continents..."

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/eci.13554

Expand full comment
author

Thanks Mike! I use that link simply because it's the official IFR used by the UK Government, and it's shockingly low. But my book contains many other IFR sources—that one from Ioannidis is excellent as well.

Expand full comment

Michael, I think you are mistaken. This is not about the new Pandemic Treaty. The real danger is the Proposal for amendments to the International Health Regulations dated 12 April 2022 document A75/18 https://apps.who.int/gb/ebwha/pdf_files/WHA75/A75_18-en.pdf Could you please as a lawyer have a look at this? This seems to give the WHO Director-General virtually dictatorial powers to call a public health emergency. Thank you.

Expand full comment