Watchman: Pale Horse In Play: Mandatory Kill Shots are on the Horizon. Almost Every Government on the Planet Plans on Implementing Forced Kill Shots or Faces a Financial Burden in the Way of Fines and Taxes, Coming Fall of 2023

HNewsWire: The first round of public hearings on the proposed "Pandemic Treaty" have concluded, with the second round set to begin in mid-June.

We've been attempting to keep this problem on the front page since the mainstream media is so eager to ignore it and continue churning out partisan war porn and misinformation.

When we – and others – linked to the public submissions page, the WHO's website temporarily failed, or they faked it crashed so people would stop sending them messages.

It's a victory either way. Hopefully, we'll be able to reproduce it this summer.

Until then, all indications are that the minimal news coverage, primarily on the metaphorical back pages of the internet, will be focused on making the treaty "strong enough" and assuring national governments can be "held responsible."

The following headlines appeared in the UK's Telegraph on April 12th:

There is a real danger that a pandemic pact would be "too watered down" to prevent further outbreaks.

It focuses on a report by the Panel for a Global Public Health Convention (GPHC) and cites Dame Barbara Stocking, one of the study's authors:

Our greatest worry [...] is that it is all too simple to believe that responsibility is unimportant. To have a treaty that does not include compliance, then, there is no use in having a treaty,"

According to the GPHC report, the current International Health Regulations are "too weak," and it calls for the establishment 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-upon requirements."

Another essay, published by the London School of Economics and co-written by members of the German Alliance on Climate Change and Health (KLUG), emphasizes the need of "accountability" and "compliance":

To have teeth, the organization that regulates it must have the capacity — either political or legal – to compel compliance.

It also calls for additional authority for the WHO, echoing a UN study from May 2021:

In its present structure, the WHO lacks such authority. […] To go forward with the accord, WHO must be empowered – both financially and politically.

It advocates for the inclusion of "non-state actors" in the negotiations, such as the World Bank, International Monetary Fund, World Trade Organization, and International Labour Organization, and suggests that the treaty include financial incentives for early reporting of "health emergencies" [emphasis added]:

In the event of a proclaimed health emergency, resources must flow to the affected nations, activating response components such as financial and technical assistance. These are particularly relevant for LMICs, and could be used to encourage and improve timely information sharing by states, reassuring them that they will not face arbitrary trade and travel sanctions for reporting, but will instead be provided with the financial and technical resources needed to effectively respond to the outbreak.

But it doesn't end there. They also bring up the issue of nations being penalized for "non-compliance":

[The treaty should include] An flexible incentive scheme that may include punishments such as public reprimands, pecuniary sanctions, or benefit denial.

To translate these bureaucratic proposals into English:

You will be given "financial resources" to cope with "disease epidemics" if you report them "on time."

If you fail to disclose illness outbreaks or fail to follow WHO guidelines, you will be denied international help and risk trade embargoes and penalties.

These proposed laws, when combined, would practically reward the reporting of potential "disease epidemics." They would intentionally promote "future pandemics" rather than avoid them.

National governments that refuse to play ball are penalized, while those that do play ball are rewarded. That is something we have previously seen with Covid.

Burundi and Tanzania had presidents that barred the WHO from entering their nations and refused to accept the Pandemic story. Both Presidents died suddenly within months after that decision, only to be succeeded by other Presidents who immediately reversed their predecessors' covid policies.

Less than a week after President Pierre Nkurunziza's death, the IMF agreed to waive over $25 million of Burundi's national debt in order to assist tackle the Covid19 "problem."

Only five months after President John Magufuli's death, Tanzania's new administration got 600 million dollars from the IMF to "fight the covid19 epidemic."

Isn't it quite evident what occurred here?

Coups were sponsored by globalists, who rewarded the culprits with "international help." The Pandemic Treaty ideas would merely legitimize this process, shifting it from hidden back channels to overt official ones.

Before we get into the consequences of additional powers, let's take a look at what the WHO now has:

The World Health Organization is the only organization in the world with the authority to declare a "pandemic" or a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC).

The WHO Director-General — an unelected post – is the only person who has such authority.

We've already seen the WHO misuse these capabilities to manufacture a bogus epidemic out of thin air...and I'm not referring to covid.

Prior to 2008, the World Health Organization could only proclaim an influenza pandemic if there were "enormous numbers of fatalities and sickness" AND a new and unique sub-type. The WHO altered the definition of "pandemic influenza" in 2008 to exclude these two circumstances.

According to a letter published in the British Medical Journal in 2010, these modifications suggested that "several seasonal flu viruses may be designated as pandemic influenza."

If the WHO had not made such adjustments, the 2009 "Swine flu" epidemic would never have been classified as a pandemic and would have gone unnoticed.

Instead, dozens of nations spent billions of dollars on swine flu vaccines that were unnecessary and ineffective in fighting a "pandemic" that resulted in less than 20,000 fatalities. Many of those who advised the WHO to declare swine flu a public health emergency were subsequently shown to have financial links to vaccine producers.

Despite this historical example of apparent corruption, one proposed Pandemic Treaty language would make declaring a PHEIC more simpler. According to the paper "Covid19: Make it the Last Pandemic" published in May 2021 [emphasis added]:

Where necessary, future PHEIC statements by the WHO Director-General should be based on the precautionary principle.

Yes, the proposed treaty might empower the WHO's Director-General to proclaim a state of global emergency in order to avoid a future pandemic, rather than in reaction to one. A pandemic of pre-crime.

When you combine this with the planned "financial help" for poor countries reporting "possible health crises," you can see what they're up to – effectively paying third-world governments to provide the WHO an excuse to declare a state of emergency.

The other main topics that are likely to be included in a pandemic treaty are already known.

They will very definitely attempt to implement worldwide vaccination passports and pour money into the wallets of big Pharma to develop "vaccines" quicker and with less safety testing.

All of this, however, may pale in contrast to the legal authority that may be granted to the director-general of the WHO (or whatever new "independent" agency they decide to establish) to penalize, censure, or reward national governments.

A "Pandemic Treaty" that overrides or overrules national or local governments would delegate global powers to an unelected bureaucrat or "expert" who would be able to use them solely at his discretion and based on wholly subjective criteria.

This is the epitome of technocratic globalism.