Is no one worried about Boris signing over sovereignty to the WHO?

[happydappy2]

Britain will join 194 other countries in giving up sovereignty to the WHO & Bill Gates. Our elected government will no longer determine how the country deals with diseases the WHO determine to be a pandemic. One global health government-no one voted for this.

The WHO are unelected-what if we disagree with their policies? We can't vote them out...there has been so little in the press about this but the implications are huge. The WHO have dubious form for their opinion of women, ie should we be allowed to drink alcohol if we are of child bearing age.

Who is advising the WHO? Have they bought into the SOGI narrative?

[happydappy2]

Letitia look at how Action Aid & Canada/America have bought into the TWAW mantra.

That is why I asked in my OP have the `WHO bought into the SOGI narrative?
Ie sexual orientation & gender identity, being more important than biological sex.

If our government make decisions we don't like, we can meet with our MP to discuss-if WHO implements laws we don't agree with, what recourse do we have?

[happydappy2]

@LeftFootForward

OP Is this from the same people that brought us 'you will own nothing and you will be happy'? Because if it is please can you explain how everyone in the world can own nothing as I just don't get it. Surely someone, somewhere has to own something...…..

nope, nothing to do with that-you've gone off on a tangent....

[lightand]

@happydappy2

nope, nothing to do with that-you've gone off on a tangent....

But it is prob all part of the same thing.
Will post more about this later. Or others can. And these are words from UN themselves? One of their own videos.

But may be leave this point until the original op point has been debated.

[lightand]

@FourTeaFallOut

I don't think it's a conspiracy but I do think it is counter to democracy. People in authority should be accountable but also changeable. How do you hold our government to account when it can point to the WHO and shrug its shoulders? How do you change the WHO if it isn't elected?

This

[FourTeaFallOut]

You would have thought, on this board at least, having seen how Stonewall morphed from an organisation which championed gay rights into an organisation that slowly dismantled women's sex based rights, slowly and quietly, via institutional creep that you would be so keen to give the WHO a pass on account of the fact they are considered to be good and benign.

Is this what we want of our government? Personally, I'm uncomfortable with it - I want to know what opportunities there will be for the public to see what plans are put in place and see what opportunities there are to disagree with them, as a matter of principle - not because I think there are machinations afoot for some new world order - or whatever hat you'd like to put on me to make my concerns seem unreasonable, but because experience demonstrates that being a nice organisation doesn't mean that it is beyond shifting shape without scrutiny.

[LetitiaLeghorn]

@happydappy2
But this is just about coordinating a better response to a pandemic. There might be a clause about what individual countries can do to ameliorate their own situation. But I don't know because you haven't linked to any articles where the actual facts are explained. Instead you're just listening to people being outraged and they're rarely reliable reporters. Hence JHB reporting all the wrong statistics during the pandemic because she didn't understand what she was talking about but she did have a narrative to justify. 🙄

[SamphirethePogoingStickerist]

SOGI - Oh! An acronym that went unexplained.

You see OP, that's where you show you are posting in utterly bad faith! Nobody here would know that and, like me, would probably have assumed it was another WHO type organisation. There are squillions of them

But no!

SOGI - sexual orientation and gender identity
Everyone has a sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI). It's an inclusive term that applies to everyone, whether they identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, two-spirit, heterosexual or cisgender (identifying with the same gender that one was assigned at birth)

Except we don't. I don't have a gender identity. Never have had, never will do. In fact I abhor the whole idea of gender, and much of the claptrap that follows it.

So - No thank you!

[happydappy2]

Samphire Err, that's why I'm concerned-I don't buy into SOGI either

It's disconcerting how many influential organisations do though.

Why do you think I'm posting in bad faith?

[SamphirethePogoingStickerist]

Start again, maybe?Without the oddity. I mean Bill Gates? SOGI?
Unelected leaders?

It all reads very much like a conspiracy theory wrapped up in Twitter scrape.

[UnmentionedElephantDildo]

WHO implements laws we don't agree with, what recourse do we have?
Well as they won't be implementing laws, than that won't arise.

They might call on member states to ratify agreements. We'd have been part of the process for making the agreement in the first place, then it will be up to parliament to decide to ratify or not.

Are you similarly opposed to other treaty obligations such as those arising from say the Geneva Conventions, or the Human Rights convention, or the nuclear non-proliferation treaties, or those against chemical weapons, or biological and toxin weapons, or the anti-slavery conventions? Or in different forum, the Hague convention against child abduction?

It strikes me that there's been some scaremongering going on by someone somewhere who is simply ignorant about the workings of international bodies and treaties which member states decide to sign up to

[SamphirethePogoingStickerist]

That's exactly how it seems to me too! Something perfectly normal, possibly phrased in legalese, has made someone saddle up and ride their pony!

Because none of it makes any sense at all.

[FourTeaFallOut]

Because we've just spent years being told when and when we cannot leave our home and the conditions of how we can leave our home. It had a dramatic impact on our lives and had a cascade of consequences.

I'm of the opinion they were necessary incursions into our lives but I think it was important that those decisions were made by the government - who we elected and who we could change, who were and will be held accountable to agreeing and dissenting voices and who can be changed by the will of the public.

Yes, it's messier and slower than saying - these people told us to do this and we were obligated to follow instructions - but that's the cost of living in a society which at least still pretends to be democratic.

[SamphirethePogoingStickerist]

What has that got to do with developing a global strategy to cope better, on a global scale, with the next pandemic?

The insular perspective isn't going to get better communication, better responses, better management, medical and otherwise, easier production and transport of essential goods or a more joined up approach to research, development and manufacturing of novel drugs.

Or has everyone forgotten the absolute chaos and jingoistic posturing?

[FourTeaFallOut]

Oh, you are just being deliberately dense now. I'll leave you to it.

[SamphirethePogoingStickerist]

But I am not. You seem to be ignoring the reality of the WHOs reach and the whole point of a global strategy.

If you have a point then you should be able to explain.it without all the "we don't want to be told what to do" gubbins.

What, precisely, is the problem?

[FourTeaFallOut]

Are you seriously asking why making an unelected and unaccountable organisation responsible for co-ordinating a global pandemic response between countries could be undemocratic when it takes away accountability from governments to negotiate a response with its own electorate?

[FourTeaFallOut]

As I say, I'm done. It was a courtesy to answer your question even though my position is clear from my earlier posts, please don't mistake it as a desire to carry on.

[SamphirethePogoingStickerist]

Bloody Nora!

Where is it written that any control will be taken away?

And they already do coordinate a global health response every bloody year.

If you can show where in the WHO articles, intents, anywhere that says they will take control of anything I will listen. Which is what was asked for at the start of this thread!

[Charles11]

I am concerned about this.
I wouldn't want us to be told to be in lockdown or to mandate vaccines by an external body. It would be terrible if the more draconian approaches used in other countries became the acceptable approach.
Mistakes were made in England, but I'm pleased we had more relaxed measures than even Wales and Scotland, let alone some other countries. Be like China who the the WHO applauded? No thanks.
I agree that communication across borders need to be open, data sharing is essential but handing over control regarding approach sounds very worrying.

[SamphirethePogoingStickerist]

Ooh Cross posted on a daft flounce ☺️

[happydappy2]

The WHO are unelected-what if we disagree with their policies? We can't vote them out...there has been so little in the press about this but the implications are huge. The WHO have dubious form for their opinion of women, ie should we be allowed to drink alcohol if we are of child bearing age.

Who is advising the WHO? Have they bought into the SOGI narrative?

That is the question...as put in the OP.

[SamphirethePogoingStickerist]

Doing as told... Leaving you all to it!

Weird!

[Drowninginpoo]

I am very concerned - have signed the petition...

[LaethantaSaoire]

To my knowledge the Irish government have done it. Very quietly. FFS😡

Is this the same WHO whose "inspectors" on a fact finding mission to China re Covid19 and its origins were prevented from accessing certain information and laboratories?