Rogue-Nation Discussion Board
The WHO Lunatic Asylum - Printable Version

+- Rogue-Nation Discussion Board (https://rogue-nation.com/mybb)
+-- Forum: General and Breaking News Events (https://rogue-nation.com/mybb/forumdisplay.php?fid=43)
+--- Forum: General News and/or Events (https://rogue-nation.com/mybb/forumdisplay.php?fid=45)
+--- Thread: The WHO Lunatic Asylum (/showthread.php?tid=2780)

The WHO Lunatic Asylum - EndtheMadnessNow - 05-22-2025

The WHO Pandemic Agreement has now passed.

[Image: bIwzqaq.jpg]

There was no parliamentary vote, no public debate, and no referendum.

Outside the US there are growing concerns about sovereignty, accountability, and global governance with the foul odor of WEF shenanigans.


The WHO Pandemic Agreement was adopted on May 19, 2025, by 124 countries at the World Health Assembly in Geneva, with 0 objections and 11 abstaining, including the U.S. It aims to boost global pandemic response and equity but wasn't voted on by parliaments or public referendums, as is standard for such treaties. Critics fear it erodes sovereignty and lacks accountability, citing potential WHO overreach and human rights gaps. Supporters say it respects sovereignty, requiring country ratification, and enhances health security. The U.S. withdrawal from WHO, effective 2026, may hopefully weaken its impact. Concerns are valid, but the agreement's effects depend on implementation.

The treaty was adopted by consensus, not a formal vote, which means that governments, including the UK, virtue signaled approval without domestic scrutiny.

[Image: SnGLsFq.jpg]

The countries not part of the WHO are Liechtenstein, Vatican City, and Taiwan. Liechtenstein, a UN member, collaborates via Switzerland and opts out due to its small size. Vatican City, not a UN member, has minimal global health involvement. Taiwan's exclusion stems from political tensions with Beijing, though it participates in some WHO activities as "Chinese Taipei."

The treaty is designed to address failings exposed by how countries "handled COVID-19."

It outlines legal commitments to:

– Share pathogen samples & genetic data
– Distribute vaccines & therapeutics "equitably"
– Strengthen international surveillance
– Comply with WHO-led emergency declarations
– Develop global digital health certification systems

World Health Assembly adopts historic Pandemic Agreement

This agreement is not limited to pandemic response. It's based on the WHO’s "One Health" framework, which views human, animal, and environmental health as interconnected. (interlinked / interlocked)

[Image: aWm6RxP.jpg]
Critics (rightly) argue this broadens the WHO’s scope, allowing it to influence food systems, climate policy, agriculture, and land use under the guise of "pandemic prevention."

While the WHO cannot override national law, the treaty creates binding international obligations. Governments may use it to justify emergency laws or sweeping public health powers while shielding decisions behind the language of "international compliance" or "global coordination."

The WHO is not a democratic institution. Its Director-General, Tedros Ghebreyesus, is not elected by citizens, but appointed via a process dominated by diplomatic negotiations between member states. His past controversies, including handling of the early COVID outbreak and ties to China, have fueled considerable concerns about impartiality.


[Image: nO5zoUO.jpg]

The WHO’s top funders are not primarily governments. As of 2023, its largest contributors included:

– Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
– GAVI Alliance
– UNICEF
– The European Commission
– Germany and the US

Private foundations now shape global public health priorities without any electoral mandate.

Among the more contentious provisions of the treaty are proposals to implement a Pathogen Access and Benefit-Sharing (PABS) system. This would allow WHO to access pathogen samples from any country and redistribute pharmaceutical products under "equitable" frameworks — potentially overriding domestic vaccine supply chains.

The treaty also encourages states to adopt digital health documentation systems, which could evolve into permanent digital IDs tied to vaccination or health status. While presented as public health tools, such systems have been heavily criticised by civil liberties groups as intrusive, coercive, Orwellian and open to mission creep.

[Image: SupAgmt.jpg]

Several countries abstained or objected during the drafting phase. These include:

Poland, Israel, Italy, Russia, Slovakia, Iran, Algeria, Hungary, Czech Republic, Argentina, and Egypt.

Their stated concerns include loss of national sovereignty, lack of legal clarity, and the risk of unelected institutions imposing policy.

In the UK, there has been virtually no parliamentary debate over the treaty. No formal statement has been made by the Prime Minister or Health Secretary. Despite the agreement’s long-term implications, the UK has participated in negotiations quietly, bypassing public scrutiny.

The adoption of this treaty reflects a broader trend:

The shift from nation-state governance to transnational managerialism. Under this model, decisions affecting hundreds of millions are increasingly shaped by busybody billionaire technocrats, NGOs, foundations, and UN agencies — none of whom are directly accountable to voters.

James Burnham's 1941 "The Managerial Revolution" explains this.

[Image: 4sVu6IF.jpg]
Burnham's idea of an unaccountable managerial class has gained traction among conservative intellectuals seeking to counteract the power of this class, viewing "woke" as the justifying ideology of the new class.

This is not a conspiracy theory. It is a structural change in how global policy is made — particularly in moments of crisis...which you can trace such crisis moments all the way back to the Black Death and the ensuing global policies that were added/changed.

What COVID 911 began, the WHO treaty formalizes:

Emergency governance, centralized authority, and the use of global health as a gateway to broader control.

If democratic governments can enter binding international agreements on pandemic policy without consulting their citizens, then who governs in a crisis?

The answer, increasingly, is:

Those you cannot remove from office.

The only way to remove them is you have to kill them. Just like back in ancient times.

The WHO Pandemic Agreement is a landmark. Not just in public health, but in global governance. It centralizes authority, weakens national sovereignty, and embeds unelected influence at the heart of crisis response.

The public was never asked.

Note this agreement is just an agreed upon adoption. It will be several years before any of it is implemented. Smaller countries/small populations will feel the WHO whip first and be used as trial & error tests. But, these parasites work on generational plans, bit by bit. The US will be fully exited from the WHO cult sometime next year and at least while Trump is in Office I'm not going to worry much about it. I'll still keep my ears open in the event their policy influence starts creeping into the USA.

[Image: AGXsWAj.jpg]

RE: The WHO Lunatic Asylum - HaarFager - 05-22-2025

(05-22-2025, 05:32 AM)EndtheMadnessNow Wrote: The treaty is designed to address failings exposed by how countries "handled COVID-19."

This statement burns me up!  How we handled it!?  HOW WE HANDLED IT!?  If they hadn't released it upon us, there would have been nothing for us to handle!

I saw the title of the thread and thought maybe The Who had released a new album.  You know, Pete Townsend, et al.

RE: The WHO Lunatic Asylum - F2d5thCav - 05-22-2025

Another unelected group seizes more power.

Once again, I'm relieved that my personal end is on the horizon.  Life has been overall good and with luck I'll cross over to the other side before these freaks completely ruin everything.

MinusculeCheers

RE: The WHO Lunatic Asylum - Ninurta - 05-22-2025

Fuck 'em. Come at me with that needle, bro. See what it gets ya.

I dunno who the hell they think they're gonna manage, but they'll eventually run up against the unmanageable... and some of them have really big teeth.

If I want a manager, I'll hire a manager. Ain't NO sumbitch gonna just waltz in here and think he's got a mandate to manage without my permission and with no accountability to me.

They'll find what's left of 'em standing on a pole stuck up their ass and out of their mouth down at the mouth of the holler, stuck in the ground.

I don't play that "hang 'em from a lamp post" bullshit.

.

.

RE: The WHO Lunatic Asylum - Bally002 - 05-22-2025

(05-22-2025, 06:29 AM)HaarFager Wrote:
(05-22-2025, 05:32 AM)EndtheMadnessNow Wrote: The treaty is designed to address failings exposed by how countries "handled COVID-19."

This statement burns me up!  How we handled it!?  HOW WE HANDLED IT!?  If they hadn't released it upon us, there would have been nothing for us to handle!

I saw the title of the thread and thought maybe The Who had released a new album.  You know, Pete Townsend, et al.

WHO is all about self interest income.  To protect those who run and steer the organisation.  There is no need for WHO.  Much like at a smaller scale here in Aussie.  "Save the Koala".  Now bear with me (no pun intended).  

There are 10 to the dozen Koala saving groups here grasping at the sympathy of everyday Aussies.  "SEND MONEY!!!!!"  Koalas are edible. Just ask the aboriginal custodians of this country who killed them. Not that I'd eat them but with the Koala and other animals here. "GIVE US MONEY". These organisations call.

WHO is a scam on the same level.  Albeit may  be a poor comparison.  They are in it for the dollars and saving their employment on an international level.  Get rid of WHO and there would be a billion to save those flamin Koalas. (which really don't need saving).

Don't like WHO and/or the UN.  Just blood suckers.

My thoughts,

Bally)

RE: The WHO Lunatic Asylum - Michigan Swamp Buck - 05-22-2025

I find it telling how the "One Health" poster graphics have a tick representing zoonotic and reemerging infectious diseases. I see that as a "tell" going back to Project Paper Clip and Lyme disease. 

They are basically admitting that infectious diseases are primarily caused by laboratory manipulation for military biological warfare research. This is not a stretch of the imagination, knowing what they have and will continue to do in these bio-labs all over the world, not just in China. You are only paranoid if they aren't out to get you. Recent history proves my assertion.

RE: The WHO Lunatic Asylum - FCD - 05-22-2025

There's kind of two schools of thought at work here.

On the one hand, in a vacuum, some party will always step up to upsurp power and authority.  They will do this for simply the power, or more likely, the wealth.  It almost doesn't matter where you fit in the animal kingdom, this axiom holds true.  The message here is...it should come as no surprise that organizations such as the WHO and the UN exist.

On the other hand, in an established governmental framework, there will always be those who dissent and think they can do it better.  They will do this because they either truly believe the governing structure can be done better, or simply because the want to wrest authority away from those who have it (often for the wealth...again).  These parties will prey on the weak and the poor to gain in numbers.  Then they will set their sights on bigger prey.  The message here (once again) is...it should come as no surprise that organizations such as the WHO and the UN exist. 

So, the bottom line is...organizations like the WHO and UN are not some unique and organic concept for which there is no precedent.  They are merely manifestations of the laws of nature, and they will always exist in some fashion.  You can never really get rid of them entirely, because the minute you eliminate one, another will take its place.  So the goal is to just never allow them to upsurp your governmental framework.  To never surrender to them.  And the best defense is to use the strategy of the Asian martial arts against them.  Specifically, use their own energy and momentum to their disadvantage.  This, rather than attempting to stop them.  They will eventually wither and die on the vine.  It's when countries actually bend over and signup with these interlopers where the real problems begin.