WHO debate, UK Parliament (John Campbell)

Compilation of clips from the debate. The big issue is the erasure of National Sovereignty and human rights. The WHO treaty is essentially the frame work for a dictatorship that carries with it media control/censorship over dissenting voices.

Mr. Philip Davies.


Mr. Andrew Bridgen


Mr Bridgen makes it clear that there is no question the treaty does indeed transfer sovereignty to the WHO. Politicians and media denying this fact have it wrong or are lying. It's one of those cases that the lie only works if you are unaware of the details of the text. He also touches on the ethical matter of the jabs being experimental, and the issue of coercion. The implication should be clear. It is a crime.

Plus there is the issue of an ongoing climate emergency being used as a health threat that would trigger WHO interventions. The nature of what is being proposed is heinous. The first measures in the next 'emergency' will be draconian crackdowns on social media and alt media, and some kind of medical digital ID to control people who are under threat ... 'for your own good.' It's the control system that people like Alex Jones have been warning about for decades. It won't be very funny when this stuff rolls out, and the fault will be because the public did not stand up against it. However, the good news is that there are areas where widespread dissent will stop this in the US, perhaps in the UK and a few other places.

Sir John Redwood


This is the final clip covers the questionable decisions/actions taken during the pandemic and whether it is a good idea to have them made by a body that did not do a good job the last time around, a body that would also stifle scientific debate (dissenting voices). 6mins

[Posted at the SpookyWeather2 blog, December 20, 2023.]