The Highwire with Del Bigtree - W.H.O. PANDEMIC TREATY THREAT LOOMS LARGER

Episode Date: November 11, 2023

An updated version of the WHO’s Pandemic Treaty reveals an extensive power grab under the banner of a ‘One Health’ approach, now adding climate change, energy, and sustainability to the agenda the unelected global agency has its sights on.Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-highwire-with-del-bigtree--3620606/support.

If you're the World Health Organization, you look at the pandemic as an opportunity. And this was just recently brought to light in a conversation, Tadros, the head of the WHO, took to Twitter and or X and said, take a listen. Last month, the UN General Assembly adopted a political declaration on pandemic prevention, preparedness and response, underscoring their commitment to meet shared threats with a shared response. The COVID-19 pandemic appended lives and livelihoods disrupting societies and economies and exposed and exacerbated political fault lines within and between nations. It eroded trust between people, governments and institutions fueled by a torrent of mis and disinformation. And it laid bare the searing inequalities of our world with the poorest

and most vulnerable communities the hardest hit. The next pandemic is not a question of if, but of when, and we cannot afford to repeat the same mistake of the past. That's why WHO's member states are negotiating a new pandemic accord and amendments to the international health regulations to strengthen the legal framework for the global response to pandemics, And we can't stop there. We must follow through with national ratification and accountable implementation.

For the sake of future generations, we must not go back to the old cycle of panic and neglect that left our world vulnerable. We are stronger together. This is exactly what I'm talking about. I mean, look what's happened. That's just this week. So look over here. look at over here, you know, look at the shiny thing. Watch what we were talking about in the news.

While, meanwhile, get their dog, take their kids, grab their locks, you know, lock them down. Let's make sure that they have no government. The WHO can move in at any moment. All that's going on, folks, while we're thinking, you know, about other things. It's all I've got to say. I mean, it's really scary what this guy's talking about. I'm going to have, I got to take a moment.

I promise my team I'd wait on this. But this is what has bothered me from the very beginning about this entire issue. From the moment COVID started, and they started. destroying our economy, taking away our right to go to work, to be able to walk out in public. They made it illegal to breathe the freaking air, forcing us to wear masks. And if we didn't, you know, we were ridiculed and shamed, weren't allowed into buildings, destroyed our children's lives, destroyed their education, all for a virus that in the end has a death rate less than 1%.

Here's the numbers, and this is worldwide. This is looking at numbers from all around the world. If you're below the age of 70, the total death rate is about 0.03%, not even a tenth of 1%. You had one tiny group of people above the age of 70 that are 2.4% and then plus that, even higher at 5.5. This is the point. Whatever that number is, is it not shocking to you?

It should be shocking to everybody. As the WHO is saying, we made mistakes. The mistake wasn't, we destroyed your world. for no reason for a nothing burger. They're not apologizing because this thing wasn't the 3% killer they said it was going to be or the 7% killers we've seen where we didn't lock down before on this planet.

No, they're not saying our bad, our misinformation, our disinformation. It's you, that you didn't comply. You didn't make it easier for us to destroy your lives and take away your livelihoods and destroy your ability to, you know, feed your families and to educate your children. And where?

Where in our government right now, Jeffrey? Where is the senator? Where are the congressman? Why is the one question never asked, Tony Foucher, anybody? I've been screaming this for years since the beginning of COVID, which is what is that bar? What is that threshold by which we warrant this level of authoritarianism to take over our lives? Is it going to be 0.3 percent? Is that it?

A third of 1 percent death rate means we suddenly are allowed to come in. WHO is going to come in and say, we're taking over your government, we're taking over your lives, we're running your hospitals, we're running your police departments, we're kicking in your doors? Is that how low it is? Or are we going to get someone to step forward and say, you know what, we did overplay our hand. There was a little bit heavy for the 0.3%. Maybe it should be at least, I don't know, what, 2%? A 3% death rate in this virus? 1%. But the fact that no one is giving us threshold is just saying any pandemic at any time allows us to do whatever we want to you. So a pandemic, by the way, is not severity.

It just determines that it crossed over some country lines. It actually made it to several different nations. So if the sniffles ends up getting from Switzerland over to America, does the WHO get to come in and say, hey, you have no constitution any longer? I mean, this is what is happening while we're all looking at the shiny bombs blowing up in places all around the world. And the narrative they want you to believe is we didn't see this coming. It caught us off guard, but we'll get it next time. you definitely saw it coming.

You were testing governments around the world were testing these viruses. They were trying to weaponize these SARS viruses. In fact, a new article just came out. Anthony Fauci run lab in Montana experimented with coronavirus strains shipped in from Wuhan a year before COVID pandemic began. This in 2018, they're working with a SARS-like virus that Wuhan Institute of Raleigh shipped over to Montana, the NIH's Rocky Mountain Laboratory. So it's they definitely saw it coming so they're working on it. In fact, most consensus now says

that they caused it because of the lab leak. So I don't I don't understand this, this anyway. So if we have W.HOs, Tadros, he's saying in that kind of plea to push forward this this pandemic treaty, a lot of people are reporting on it says, he says, we must follow through with national ratification. He says it right there because one of the conspiracy theories that people will tell you is, oh, the U.S. isn't signing over its sovereignty. It's not going to be a big deal. And the U.S. does have, it does have some protection to just being engulfed into an international treaty or a treaty from a foreign country. Right. But he's saying there, this is my goal. As long as your president of the United States does not put a bunch of tools in power like Tony Fauci that goes and goes ahead with everything the

WHO asked for and recommends to all of our governors to shut down everything that we have and know to be our lives. You know, so, you know, as long as your president doesn't put people in power to just hand it over anyway, then maybe you could stand up against something, but we couldn't. We were powerless in many ways in this situation, and they want more power. And with this pandemic treaty, we are definitely seeing it coming. So they just released, the WHO just released an updated version of this in mid-October. And this is an advanced edited version. And first of all, they're calling it a WHO pandemic agreement. Sometimes it's treaty, then it's a chord. So we have to watch the word games. But let's look, some of the wording is a little different.

And we have to continually look at these updates. So first, they're using what's called a One Health Approach. We're seeing this term One Health Approach. And it says in here, One Health Approach means an integrated unifying approach that aims to sustainably balance and optimize the health of people, animals, and ecosystems. Remember, this was about a pandemic. Now we're talking ecosystems. The approach mobilizes multiple sectors, disciplines, and communities at varying levels of society

to work together to foster well-being and tackle threats to health and ecosystems while addressing the collective need for clean water, energy, and air, safe and nutritious food, taking action on climate change and contributing to sustainable development. There's your agenda 2030 W-E-F plug-in right there. Just blown right past the whole idea of a pandemic, and let's just go talk about energy and W-E-F agenda 2030s. Then moving on, they're talking about communication and public awareness. This is a big one because remember in California, they passed a law. Doctors couldn't speak on their expertise. They could have their licenses pulled. That law was overturned. Now they're talking about doing this top-down. It says the

parties shall strengthen science, public health, and pandemic literacy in the population as well as access to information on pandemics. And you go in there, it says, and their effects and drivers, combat false misleading misinformation or disinformation, including through effective international collaboration and cooperation. So no longer is the government going to be reaching out to X or meta-tunate. I mean, look at what anyone watching this show, we know we got it right, they got it wrong. We got it right, they got it wrong. They want to figure out how to have more power to stop what we were doing, which was telling you the truth, so that their bogus science, that is now contaminating your DNA as we speak

and everyone's refusing to look at it, even though the best genome scientist in the world is saying, hello, people, look out, we have a major, major problem going on here. We may not be the same human beings we were built to be in two or three years from now. I mean, unreal. It's unreal what's happening.

Let's talk about the products, the vaccines, the PCR testing. So there's an article in there, article 13 in this treaty, in this updated treaty, global supply chain and logistics. It says the terms of WHSLC network shall include facilitating the negotiation agreement of advanced purchase commitments and procurement contracts for pandemic-pandemic related products. So that means you have no choice. If you're the WHO's member state that signs on to this, you have to have, if they decide advance purchase commitments are required, you have to do that. You have to buy these. If you're a

country that says, you know what, we're going to wait. I think we're good. Like India, they said, we're good, we're going to manufacture our own vaccine in-house. We have distribution. We have manufacturing facilities in India. We don't need Pfizer's vaccine. They'll say, too bad, you not only need to take these products that we recommend, you have to purchase them all up front, even though we don't know how this thing's going to roll out. Because we need your funding to get the science done and rush this manufacturing product out very quickly. They don't have the money. They just want the profits. They're spent all the profits they got from the last vaccine we pushed on you, but you as, you know, your taxpayers are going to pay to fund the next

crazy rushed warp speed disaster bomb. And we were told the warp speed process was, you know, this is an emergency. We have to do this. We're just going to rush things really fast. This is not normally, it takes three to five years, 10 years sometimes for medications, proper safety testing. Well, the WHO said, hey, that's pretty cool. I think we'll stick with that. So this is in the regulatory strengthening, they call it, Article 14. It says the part. shall strengthen their national and regional regulatory authorities, including through technical assistance with the aim of expediting regulatory approvals and authorizations and ensuring the quality, safety, and efficacy of pandemic-authorized products. So they want to expedite

approval. That's directly written in there. So it's Operation Warf Speed from a year on out. Yep. And so the final thing. So this is a growing living document according to the WHO. There's going to be amendments that are going to come along. You know, obviously they start out pandemic now we have you know agendas agenda climate agendas in there who knows what they'll add to that if you are signed on to this if the u.s is signed on to this let's look at this where it talks about agreeing on amendments it says the party shall make every effort to adopt any proposed amendment to the w h o pandemic agreement by consensus and if all efforts at consensus have been exhausted and no agreement has been reached the amendment shall as a last resort be adopted by three

quarters majority vote of the parties presented present and voting at the session so There you go. You don't want to do it. Three-quarters majority. Sorry. So that's how it works with the WHO. Well, as soon as this draft was released, you had a very interesting pushback on this besides from the public. You had the International Federation of Pharmaceutical Manufacturers and Associations. So they represent ARMA. And they put out this document, innovative pharmaceutical industry statement on draft WHO pandemic treaty. They say in it, it warns that the current proposed text does not preserve what went well for this pandemic and will slow down. efforts to improve equity by having a chilling effect on innovation pipeline for medical countermeasures. As it stands, the world would be better served with no agreement on the current damaging treaty

text. In short, no treaty is better than a bad treaty. Why are they saying that? Well, what are they pissed off about? I don't understand. In this treaty, they have an article that talks about transferring technology, intellectual property and data to all manufacturers throughout the world. So if you're a company and you have all those things like Pfizer and you want to sell this product, WHO is coming along and saying, nope, you actually have to make a group, you have to agree upon transferring this technology and all your intellectual property to manufacturers, especially in vulnerable countries, low-income countries so they can manufacture their vaccines on their own. So it pretty much puts, and that's what they say in here, it's going to just have a

chilling effect on the innovation pipeline because if this goes through why innovate if you just have to give that away immediately and so that's what they're saying there now from from the people standpoint there's actually and again in the u.s people are saying don't worry it's not a big deal but look i say this look how the w h o ran this recent pandemic the covid pandemic they named it they called they called it a pandemic they called that in for the world so i can't see this actually hurting them this is just give them more power, it seems, especially a lot of other countries around to this. So in the United States, you have 15 congressmen and women saying this. This is S-444.

No WHO pandemic preparedness treaty without Senate approval act. So they're making real sure that this thing is not going to go through. And that's going through the House as we speak. In the UK, we have Andrew Bridgen. He just gave an incredible speech last week in Parliament about the excess deaths from these vaccines, possibly. he put forward a referendum for parliamentary sovereignty. So the UK is saying we want to recognize our sovereignty in this whole WHO conversation. And then in Canada, there's a-

Well, certainly one man in the UK is trying to say that, right? And in this case, we have like a bill that's going through whether or not we'll get enough politicians to sign on to protect America's own decision-making or whether we're going to make international treaties and allow outside agencies run by Tadros from Ethiopia, who I understand used to be directly connected with some of the, you know, warlords there. That's who you want to be the leader of America's decision making, then you may want to reach out to your representatives right now and say stop the WHO treaty immediately.

Yeah, elected versus unelected. And so Canada has a petition. You can sign that if you're Canadian citizen. This was petition E4623. It was put out in mid-October. It closes February 2024. It has over 45,000 signatures, partly brought forward by Leslyn Lewis.

She was doing some great work over there. Remember the House of Commons in Canada? So these are kind of some of the pushback that's happening already. There's a lot of mobilization in the media, the alternative media, on social media. A lot of people are talking about this. So this is going to run really interesting how this is going to turn out. May 2024 is the final reading, the final adoption of all of these. So that's the date.

That's kind of the end date, the finish line. So we have till then to really sound the alarm about this. freight train from hell on its way. If you're watching right now and you're thinking, wait a minute, I didn't have time to write down, you know, where do I write, where do I sign in? All of this information that appears on our show is in a newsletter every single week. You'll get it on Monday.

All you have to do is give us your email right now. If you're watching the show on the highwire.com, just scroll down. It's as simple as this. Boop, boop, type your email in there. We're the only ones that will have it. We will make sure you're always informed about these things and all the documents, the links that make it easy to try and protect your yourself and your family are in your hands just in a couple of days. It's really, I think,

one of the greatest tools that all of you that are sponsoring make possible. This is how we communicate. This is how we do the right thing. This is how we protect ourselves. And this is how we get to be a part of pushing back, which is what this show is all about. I'm not, look, I'm just trying to warn you all that if we don't do what we know we are here on this earth to do, which is to push back, protect ourselves, protect our children, protect our future, you know, that's when you're going to have issues. But right now, we are in the captain's seat. The world is pushing back. These people are crazy, and a lot of people are recognizing that.