Today's News Stories

May 24, 2022
|

I’ve been getting a lot of comments wanting to know more about a “pandemic treaty” that’s being hashed out to expand the role of the World Health Organization. This really took off after Tucker Carlson blasted it last week. There are concerns that proposed changes by the Biden Administration would give the head of the WHO sweeping powers to declare pandemics and impose rights-denying measures like lockdowns on sovereign nations without their consent or even over their objections.

This is a complicated issue, so I’m going to link to a couple of stories with more details than I can provide you here. First, Breitbart explains the objections to the proposed treaty and amendments.

https://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2022/05/20/biden-backed-w-h-o-treaty-amendment-would-yield-united-states-public-health-powers-u-n/

And this article that originally appeared in Fortune argues that those concerns are unfounded: that the WHO would only gain enhanced advisory capabilities to deal more swiftly with health emergencies, but not the power to overrule sovereign governments. They say that because “international law” isn’t really enforceable, such nations could just ignore them anyway.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/why-tucker-carlson-is-wrong-about-the-world-health-organization-and-its-pandemic-treaty/ar-AAXwyi5

This is all still in a state of flux, and no matter what the original intention, there’s a good chance that the rising scrutiny and anger will have an effect. My personal view: I certainly don’t think the WHO is deserving of being granted any kind of power over sovereign nations, elected governments or individual citizens. But on top of that, I question the wisdom of expanding their part in dealing with emergencies even in a purely advisory role.

What is there about their botched handling of the COVID-19 pandemic that has earned them the right to greater trust and responsibility? Was it their disgusting and dishonest kowtowing to the communist Chinese government? Or their dogged defense of lockdowns and school closures that have done irreparable harm while studies have since confirmed they had little to no effect on the spread of the virus? In fact, researchers have known for years that lockdowns are useless against airborne viruses. I thought the most basic rule of medicine was "First, do no harm." Here’s just one of many examples of the harm that their policies caused:

https://redstate.com/bobhoge/2022/05/22/media-shows-surprise-at-reports-covid-lockdowns-led-to-massive-learning-loss-n568385

Until the WHO cleans up its act and thoroughly reforms and de-policizes itself, it doesn’t deserve more power or even more influence not backed by power. To quote the Who that I respect a lot more, we won’t get fooled again.

Leave a Comment

Note: Fields marked with an * are required.

Your Information
Your Comment
BBML accepted!
Captcha

More Stories

Democrat ideas

Election interference

“Not This (BLEEP) Again!”

Biden to Morehouse College

Comments 11-12 of 12

  • Carol Wadley

    05/29/2022 02:05 PM

    Trump withdrew the US from the WHO for a reason. It’s corrupt. One man, one organization should never have that much authority; especially a corrupt one.

  • John roy Clark

    05/29/2022 01:18 PM

    I spent 3 combat tours in the Vietnam conflict to come home to being called baby killer and spit on and now I am so ashambed of my country that I pray to God each night to disinfect Washington DC

Message from Mike Huckabee


    Help me fight back against Big Tech censorship. If you would like to subscribe to the daily, advertisement-free version of my newsletter for $5 monthly or $36 annually, on Substack, go here.


    Biden Scandal News

    May 24, 2022
    |

    I’ve been getting a lot of comments wanting to know more about a “pandemic treaty” that’s being hashed out to expand the role of the World Health Organization. This really took off after Tucker Carlson blasted it last week. There are concerns that proposed changes by the Biden Administration would give the head of the WHO sweeping powers to declare pandemics and impose rights-denying measures like lockdowns on sovereign nations without their consent or even over their objections.

    This is a complicated issue, so I’m going to link to a couple of stories with more details than I can provide you here. First, Breitbart explains the objections to the proposed treaty and amendments.

    https://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2022/05/20/biden-backed-w-h-o-treaty-amendment-would-yield-united-states-public-health-powers-u-n/

    And this article that originally appeared in Fortune argues that those concerns are unfounded: that the WHO would only gain enhanced advisory capabilities to deal more swiftly with health emergencies, but not the power to overrule sovereign governments. They say that because “international law” isn’t really enforceable, such nations could just ignore them anyway.

    https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/why-tucker-carlson-is-wrong-about-the-world-health-organization-and-its-pandemic-treaty/ar-AAXwyi5

    This is all still in a state of flux, and no matter what the original intention, there’s a good chance that the rising scrutiny and anger will have an effect. My personal view: I certainly don’t think the WHO is deserving of being granted any kind of power over sovereign nations, elected governments or individual citizens. But on top of that, I question the wisdom of expanding their part in dealing with emergencies even in a purely advisory role.

    What is there about their botched handling of the COVID-19 pandemic that has earned them the right to greater trust and responsibility? Was it their disgusting and dishonest kowtowing to the communist Chinese government? Or their dogged defense of lockdowns and school closures that have done irreparable harm while studies have since confirmed they had little to no effect on the spread of the virus? In fact, researchers have known for years that lockdowns are useless against airborne viruses. I thought the most basic rule of medicine was "First, do no harm." Here’s just one of many examples of the harm that their policies caused:

    https://redstate.com/bobhoge/2022/05/22/media-shows-surprise-at-reports-covid-lockdowns-led-to-massive-learning-loss-n568385

    Until the WHO cleans up its act and thoroughly reforms and de-policizes itself, it doesn’t deserve more power or even more influence not backed by power. To quote the Who that I respect a lot more, we won’t get fooled again.

    Leave a Comment

    Note: Fields marked with an * are required.

    Your Information
    Your Comment
    BBML accepted!
    Captcha

    More Stories

    Democrat ideas

    Election interference

    “Not This (BLEEP) Again!”

    Biden to Morehouse College

    Comments 11-12 of 12

    • Carol Wadley

      05/29/2022 02:05 PM

      Trump withdrew the US from the WHO for a reason. It’s corrupt. One man, one organization should never have that much authority; especially a corrupt one.

    • John roy Clark

      05/29/2022 01:18 PM

      I spent 3 combat tours in the Vietnam conflict to come home to being called baby killer and spit on and now I am so ashambed of my country that I pray to God each night to disinfect Washington DC

    Trump Indictment News

    May 24, 2022
    |

    I’ve been getting a lot of comments wanting to know more about a “pandemic treaty” that’s being hashed out to expand the role of the World Health Organization. This really took off after Tucker Carlson blasted it last week. There are concerns that proposed changes by the Biden Administration would give the head of the WHO sweeping powers to declare pandemics and impose rights-denying measures like lockdowns on sovereign nations without their consent or even over their objections.

    This is a complicated issue, so I’m going to link to a couple of stories with more details than I can provide you here. First, Breitbart explains the objections to the proposed treaty and amendments.

    https://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2022/05/20/biden-backed-w-h-o-treaty-amendment-would-yield-united-states-public-health-powers-u-n/

    And this article that originally appeared in Fortune argues that those concerns are unfounded: that the WHO would only gain enhanced advisory capabilities to deal more swiftly with health emergencies, but not the power to overrule sovereign governments. They say that because “international law” isn’t really enforceable, such nations could just ignore them anyway.

    https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/why-tucker-carlson-is-wrong-about-the-world-health-organization-and-its-pandemic-treaty/ar-AAXwyi5

    This is all still in a state of flux, and no matter what the original intention, there’s a good chance that the rising scrutiny and anger will have an effect. My personal view: I certainly don’t think the WHO is deserving of being granted any kind of power over sovereign nations, elected governments or individual citizens. But on top of that, I question the wisdom of expanding their part in dealing with emergencies even in a purely advisory role.

    What is there about their botched handling of the COVID-19 pandemic that has earned them the right to greater trust and responsibility? Was it their disgusting and dishonest kowtowing to the communist Chinese government? Or their dogged defense of lockdowns and school closures that have done irreparable harm while studies have since confirmed they had little to no effect on the spread of the virus? In fact, researchers have known for years that lockdowns are useless against airborne viruses. I thought the most basic rule of medicine was "First, do no harm." Here’s just one of many examples of the harm that their policies caused:

    https://redstate.com/bobhoge/2022/05/22/media-shows-surprise-at-reports-covid-lockdowns-led-to-massive-learning-loss-n568385

    Until the WHO cleans up its act and thoroughly reforms and de-policizes itself, it doesn’t deserve more power or even more influence not backed by power. To quote the Who that I respect a lot more, we won’t get fooled again.

    Leave a Comment

    Note: Fields marked with an * are required.

    Your Information
    Your Comment
    BBML accepted!
    Captcha

    More Stories

    Democrat ideas

    Election interference

    “Not This (BLEEP) Again!”

    Biden to Morehouse College

    Comments 11-12 of 12

    • Carol Wadley

      05/29/2022 02:05 PM

      Trump withdrew the US from the WHO for a reason. It’s corrupt. One man, one organization should never have that much authority; especially a corrupt one.

    • John roy Clark

      05/29/2022 01:18 PM

      I spent 3 combat tours in the Vietnam conflict to come home to being called baby killer and spit on and now I am so ashambed of my country that I pray to God each night to disinfect Washington DC

    Election 2024 Coverage

    May 24, 2022
    |

    I’ve been getting a lot of comments wanting to know more about a “pandemic treaty” that’s being hashed out to expand the role of the World Health Organization. This really took off after Tucker Carlson blasted it last week. There are concerns that proposed changes by the Biden Administration would give the head of the WHO sweeping powers to declare pandemics and impose rights-denying measures like lockdowns on sovereign nations without their consent or even over their objections.

    This is a complicated issue, so I’m going to link to a couple of stories with more details than I can provide you here. First, Breitbart explains the objections to the proposed treaty and amendments.

    https://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2022/05/20/biden-backed-w-h-o-treaty-amendment-would-yield-united-states-public-health-powers-u-n/

    And this article that originally appeared in Fortune argues that those concerns are unfounded: that the WHO would only gain enhanced advisory capabilities to deal more swiftly with health emergencies, but not the power to overrule sovereign governments. They say that because “international law” isn’t really enforceable, such nations could just ignore them anyway.

    https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/why-tucker-carlson-is-wrong-about-the-world-health-organization-and-its-pandemic-treaty/ar-AAXwyi5

    This is all still in a state of flux, and no matter what the original intention, there’s a good chance that the rising scrutiny and anger will have an effect. My personal view: I certainly don’t think the WHO is deserving of being granted any kind of power over sovereign nations, elected governments or individual citizens. But on top of that, I question the wisdom of expanding their part in dealing with emergencies even in a purely advisory role.

    What is there about their botched handling of the COVID-19 pandemic that has earned them the right to greater trust and responsibility? Was it their disgusting and dishonest kowtowing to the communist Chinese government? Or their dogged defense of lockdowns and school closures that have done irreparable harm while studies have since confirmed they had little to no effect on the spread of the virus? In fact, researchers have known for years that lockdowns are useless against airborne viruses. I thought the most basic rule of medicine was "First, do no harm." Here’s just one of many examples of the harm that their policies caused:

    https://redstate.com/bobhoge/2022/05/22/media-shows-surprise-at-reports-covid-lockdowns-led-to-massive-learning-loss-n568385

    Until the WHO cleans up its act and thoroughly reforms and de-policizes itself, it doesn’t deserve more power or even more influence not backed by power. To quote the Who that I respect a lot more, we won’t get fooled again.

    Leave a Comment

    Note: Fields marked with an * are required.

    Your Information
    Your Comment
    BBML accepted!
    Captcha

    More Stories

    Democrat ideas

    Election interference

    “Not This (BLEEP) Again!”

    Biden to Morehouse College

    Comments 11-12 of 12

    • Carol Wadley

      05/29/2022 02:05 PM

      Trump withdrew the US from the WHO for a reason. It’s corrupt. One man, one organization should never have that much authority; especially a corrupt one.

    • John roy Clark

      05/29/2022 01:18 PM

      I spent 3 combat tours in the Vietnam conflict to come home to being called baby killer and spit on and now I am so ashambed of my country that I pray to God each night to disinfect Washington DC