The USA is Toast on May 22nd!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h6-e3B1BIH4

>>16274502

Articles from video

American Domestic Bioterrorism Program -

Building the case to prosecute members of Congress,

presidents and HHS secretaries for treason under 18 USC 2381.

Snippet:

The basic goal of the architects, which has been achieved, was to set up legal conditions in which all

governing power in the United States could be automatically transferred from the citizens and the three

Constitutional branches into the two hands of the Health and Human Services Secretary, effective at the

moment the HHS Secretary himself declared a public health emergency, legally transforming free citizens

into enslaved subjects.

>>>That happened on Jan. 31, 2020, in effect as of Jan. 27, 2020 through the present day.

>>>In other words:

Congress and US Presidents legalized and funded the overthrow of the U.S. Constitution, the U.S.

government and the American people, through a massive domestic bioterrorism program relabeled as a

public health program, conducted by the HHS Secretary on behalf of the World Health Organization and

its financial backers.

Source: https://bailiwicknews.substack.com/p/american-domestic-bioterrorism-program?s=r

PDF download of article - Updated May 12, 2022

https://bailiwicknewsarchives.files.wordpress.com/2022/05/2022.04.28-american-domestic-bioterrorism-program.pdf

>>16274510

April 2022: Pandemic Treaty Will Hand WHO The Keys To Global Government

Suggested clauses would incentivize reporting “pandemics”, and see nations punished for “non-compliance.”

The first public hearings on the proposed “Pandemic Treaty” are closed, with the next round due to start

in mid-June. We’ve been trying to keep this issue on our front page, entirely because the mainstream is

so keen to ignore it and keep churning out partisan war porn and propaganda.

When we – and others – linked to the public submissions page, there was such a response that the WHO’s

website actually briefly crashed, or they pretended it crashed so people would stop sending them letters.

Either way, it’s a win. Hopefully one we can replicate in the summer.

Until then, the signs are that what scant press coverage there is, mostly across the metaphorical back-

pages of the internet, will be focused on making the treaty “strong enough” and ensuring national

governments can be “held accountable”.

An article in the UK’s Telegraph from April 12th headlines:

Real Risk The Pandemic Treaty Could Be ‘Too Watered Down’ To Stop New Outbreaks

It focuses on a report from the Panel for a Global Public Health Convention (GPHC),

and quotes one of the report’s authors Dame Barbara Stocking:

Our biggest fear […] is it’s too easy to think that accountability doesn’t matter. To have a treaty that

does not have compliance in it, well frankly then there’s no point in having a treaty,”

The GPHC report goes on to say that the current International Health Regulations are “too weak”, and

calls for the creation of a new “independent” international body to “assess government preparedness” and

“publicly rebuke or praise countries, depending on their compliance with a set of agreed requirements”.

Another article, published by the London School of Economics and co-written by members of the German

Alliance on Climate Change and Health (KLUG), also pushes the idea of “accountability” and “compliance”

pretty hard:

For this treaty to have teeth, the organisation that governs it needs to have the power – either

political or legal – to enforce compliance.

It also echoes the UN report from May 2021 in calling for more powers for the WHO:

In its current form, the WHO does not possess such powers […]To move on with the treaty, WHO therefore

needs to be empowered — financially, and politically.

It recommends the involvement of “non-state actors” such as the World Bank, International Monetary Fund,

World Trade Organisation and International Labour Organisation in the negotiations, and suggests the

treaty offer financial incentives for the early reporting of “health emergencies” [emphasis added]:

In case of a declared health emergency, resources need to flow to countries in which the emergency is

occurring, triggering response elements such as financing and technical support. These are especially

relevant for LMICs, and could be used to encourage and enhance the timely sharing of information by

states, reassuring them that they will not be subject to arbitrary trade and travel sanctions for

reporting, but instead be provided with the necessary financial and technical resources they require to

effectively respond to the outbreak.

It doesn’t stop there, however.

They also raise the question of countries being punished for “non-compliance”:

[The treaty should possess] An adaptable incentive regime, [including] sanctions

such as public reprimands, economic sanctions, or denial of benefits.

>>16274516

To translate these suggestions from bureaucrat into English:

If you report “disease outbreaks” in a “timely manner”, you will get “financial resources” to deal with

them. If you don’t report disease outbreaks, or don’t follow the WHO’s directions, you will lose out on

international aid and face trade embargoes and sanctions.

In combination, these proposed rules would literally incentivize reporting possible “disease outbreaks”.

Far from preventing “future pandemics”, they would actively encourage them.

National governments who refuse to play ball being punished, and those who play along getting paid off is

not new. We have already seen that with Covid.

Two African countries, Burundi/ Tanzania, had Presidents who banned the WHO from their borders, and

refused to go along with the Pandemic narrative. Both Presidents died unexpectedly within months of that

decision, only to be replaced by new Presidents who instantly reversed their predecessor’s covid

policies.

Less than a week after the death of President Pierre Nkurunziza, the IMF agreed to forgive almost 25

million dollars of Burundi’s national debt in order to help combat the Covid19 “crisis”.

Just five months after the death of President John Magufuli, the new government of Tanzania received 600

million dollars from the IMF to “address the covid19 pandemic”.

It’s pretty clear what happened here, isn’t it?

Globalists backed coups and rewarded the perpetrators with “international aid”. The proposals for the

Pandemic treaty would simply legitimise this process, moving it from covert back channels to overt

official ones.

Now, before we discuss the implications of new powers, let’s remind ourselves of the power the WHO

already possesses:

>The World Health Organization is the only institution in the world empowered to declare a “pandemic” or

>Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC). The Director-General of the WHO – an unelected

>position – is the only individual who controls that power.

We have already seen the WHO abuse these powers in order to create a fake pandemic out of thin air…

and I’m not talking about covid.

Prior to 2008, the WHO could only declare an influenza pandemic if there were “enormous numbers of

deaths and illness” AND there was a new and distinct subtype. In 2008 the WHO loosened the definition

of “influenza pandemic” to remove these two conditions.

As a 2010 letter to the British Medical Journal pointed out, these changes meant “many seasonal flu

viruses could be classified as pandemic influenza.”

If the WHO had not made those changes, the 2009 “Swine flu” outbreak could never have been called a

pandemic, and would likely have passed without notice.

Instead, dozens of countries spent millions upon millions of dollars on swine flu vaccines they did not

need and did not work, to fight a “pandemic” that resulted in fewer than 20,000 deaths. Many of those

responsible for advising the WHO to declare swine flu a public health emergency were later shown to have

financial ties to vaccine manufacturers.

Despite this historical example of blatant corruption, one proposed clause of the Pandemic Treaty would

make it even easier to declare a PHEIC. According to the May 2021 report “Covid19: Make it the Last

Pandemic” [emphasis added]:

Future declarations of a PHEIC by the WHO Director-General should be based on the precautionary principle

where warranted

Yes, the proposed treaty could allow the DG of the WHO to declare a state of global emergency to prevent

a potential pandemic, not in response to one. A kind of pandemic pre-crime.

If you combine this with the proposed “financial aid” for developing nations reporting “potential health

emergencies”, you can see what they’re building – essentially bribing third world governments to give the

WHO a pretext for declaring a state of emergency.

We already know the other key points likely to be included in a pandemic treaty. They will almost

certainly try to introduce international vaccine passports, and pour funding into big Pharma’s pockets

to produce “vaccines” ever faster and with even less safety testing.

But all of that could pale in comparison to the legal powers potentially being handed to the director-

general of the WHO (or whatever new “independent” body they may decide to create) to punish, rebuke or

reward national governments.

A “Pandemic Treaty” that overrides or overrules national or local governments would hand supranational

powers to an unelected bureaucrat or “expert”, who could exercise them entirely at his own discretion and

on completely subjective criteria.

This is the very definition of technocratic globalism.

https://off-guardian.org/2022/04/19/pandemic-treaty-will-hand-who-keys-to-global-government/