Is the WHO Pandemic Treaty a Red Herring Designed to Deceive?

by Vern Evans

This article was originally published by Ethan Huff at Natural News. 

The infamous Pandemic Treaty devised by the World Health Organization (WHO) could be a red herring, according to James Roguski.

On his Substack, Roguski warns that the world has less than two months to “flatten the WHO,” this being a play on words from the Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) “pandemic” when we were told that it would take just “two weeks to flatten the curve.”

At issue with the Pandemic Treaty is the fact that it has been revised several times, and many people who have been following along are assessing it based on inaccurate and out-of-date information.

This misinformation has become a red herring, which in logic theory means it is being used as a distraction to sidetrack the real discussion about what is actually going on.

The latest version of the 2024 amendments proposed by the WHO suggests that the current negotiations are not about the WHO attacking national sovereignty or imposing more mandates or lockdowns, nor is it really about the WHO doing much of anything.

Roguski suggests that people go and read the latest documents to see if they really say what many people say they say. In short, he argues that the Pandemic Treaty is not a WHO power grab like many people think it is.

“This agreement is being written by countries, for countries, and will be implemented by countries, in accordance with their own national laws,” Roguski writes, suggesting that individual nations rather than the WHO will be in charge of all the tyranny.

“The pandemic agreement will not give WHO any power to dictate policy to any country. In fact, it says exactly the opposite.”

(Related: If the world refuses to obey its authoritarian Pandemic Treaty, the WHO is threatening to unleash “Disease X.”)

To back his argument, Roguski quotes Article 24, paragraph 3 of the negotiation text of the Pandemic Treaty, which reads:

“Nothing in the WHO Pandemic Agreement shall be interpreted as providing the WHO Secretariat, including the WHO Director-General, any authority to direct, order, alter or otherwise prescribe the domestic laws or policies of any Party, or to mandate or otherwise impose any requirements that Parties take specific actions, such as ban or accept travelers, impose vaccination mandates or therapeutic or diagnostic measures, or implement lockdowns.”

If this is really true, then health freedom fighters are focusing their efforts on the wrong targets. The real targets appear to be local tyrants, i.e., government officials right here in the United States who plan to abuse your rights during the next fake “pandemic.”

In Roguski’s view, the Pandemic Treaty of today is much, much different than the one proposed over a year ago. This appears to be intentional in that the earlier versions may have been the red herring to throw everyone off from focusing their efforts where it matters most.

He is encouraging everyone to read the latest version of the pandemic agreement to see what they think.

“WHAT IF … the proposed ‘Pandemic Agreement’ is NOT an attack on national sovereignty?” Roguski asks. “What if, in fact, it is an expression of national sovereignty, but sovereignty is defined in the document to mean something different than you think it means?”

“WHAT IF … ‘national sovereignty’ and ‘legally binding’ international agreements don’t work the way you think they work? … WHAT IF … the WHO negotiations are NOT about your relationship with your doctor? What if your medical doctor is already a well-trained marketing representative for the Pharmaceutical Hospital Emergency Industrial Complex?”

Have a look at the latest documents and let us know what you think.

Read the full article here

Related Posts

Leave a Comment

This website uses cookies to improve your experience. We'll assume you're ok with this, but you can opt-out if you wish. Accept Read More

Privacy & Cookies Policy