It is Never Going to Happen Until it Does

Contrary to what “fact checkers” say, the Biden administration is about to cede US authority to the World Health Organization without public notification, any Congressional oversight, or a single vote from an American citizen.

One of the formulations of the Law of Salutary Contradiction (the LSC for short) is: “That’s not happening and it’s good that it is”. Last week I proposed another that goes like this: “Yeah, about that thing we’re not doing? We’re doing it and it is fabulous!”

There are many of these formulations.

I heard one this weekend in a discussion about abortions. Every leftist media outlet was upset about how the Congressional Republicans asked the Democrats’ abortion witnesses tough questions last week, especially questions about allowing abortion up until the baby is coming out of the birth canal, claiming that the GOP was just super disingenuous because they were asking questions about things “that would never happen” – and yet have been included in legislation the Democrats have proposed.

“Sure, our bill allows abortion up to 28 days AFTER birth, but to bring that up is just inflammatory and crazy because has never happened and never will!”

Someone should ask the question, if it is NEVER going to happen, why is it not specirically prohibited in your bill?”

That leads to another formulation of the LSC:

“Of course, it is never going to happen until it does.”

I’m not terribly worried about an abortion law that allows abortions after birth (infanticide), partial birth or late term abortions at the state (if Roe is overturned) or federal level because there is near zero public support for such laws. The people still have sovereignty to decide under our constitution.

From the dawn of time, as people sought to organize into groups and into governing structures, a basic aspect of any communal or governmental aggregation of people has been accorded the right to create and maintain a state of sovereignty – or as defined philosophically: having supreme authority within a territory.

Sovereignty is a critical concept for any self-governing people. In America, at a national level, it means no state can exercise authority over another. Mississippi cannot pass a law that binds the people of any other state and by the same token, at an international level, no entity outside the US has any authority to legally bind the people of the US to any of their laws or regulations.

Within any sovereign area, there are two types of sovereignty, “de jure”, or legal, sovereignty concerns the expressed and institutionally recognized right to exercise control over a territory. This can be defined as the laws, regulations and rights accorded the citizens by the controlling legal authority – this is the framework. Then there is “de facto” sovereignty. De facto, or sovereignty in fact, is in distinctly different from de jure sovereignty, concerned with whether control in fact exists. There are many corresponding pieces to “de facto” sovereignty – cooperation and respect of the populace; control of resources in, or moved into, an area; means of enforcement and security; and ability to carry out various functions of state all represent measures of de facto sovereignty.

Following their complete destruction of sovereignty by any definition at the US/Mexico border, the Biden administration is about to do it again by allowing an international organization, the World Health Organization, to exercise independent control WITHIN the borders of the United States.

Immediately following his inauguration in 2021, Biden sent a letter to António Guterres, UN’s secretary-general, retracting President Trump’s withdrawal from the WHO. Biden then appointed Anthony Fauci, head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease, to represent the United States on WHO’s executive committee. 

This week, May 22-28, the 75th World Health Assembly will convene in Geneva, Switzerland, with delegates from 194 nations, to vote on the Biden administration’s proposed amendments to the International Health Regulations. These “amendments” will have the effect of ceding national sovereignty and authority to the WHO.

In January, without a single notification to the public, the Biden administration sent the WHO extensive amendment change proposals that serve to strengthen the WHO’s ability to unilaterally intervene into the affairs of member nations merely suspected of having a “health emergency” of possible concern to other nations. The term “health emergency” is not specifically defined and are left to the WHO to determine (as Justice Potter Stewart said about obscenity, they may not know how to define it, but they will know it when they see it).

If approved, these changes will give the WHO the power to declare an “international health emergency,” nullifying the powers of nation states. The U.S. amendments delete a critical existing restriction in the regulations: “WHO shall consult with and attempt to obtain verification from the State Party in whose territory the event is allegedly occurring…” The deletion of this caveat would enable the Director-General of the WHO to unilaterally declare health “emergencies”.

Since it was the WHO protected the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) after the Covid-19 outbreak, it is well within the realm of possibility these new powers can and will be used to justify ostracism and economic or financial actions against the targeted nation by other nations aligned with WHO.

In addition to voting on these amendments, the WHO will also be considering a new pandemic treaty that would greatly expand the global health organization’s resources and authority, up to and including an international surveillance network, digital vaccine passports and the power to shut down anything the WHO determines is “misinformation”.

Because these amendments are simply modifications within the International Health Regulations (IHR) adopted by 194 member states of the WHO in 2005, they do not require Congressional approval.

Of course, all the “fact checkers” say Biden is not ceding any sovereignty. Lead Stories, one of the social media approved “fact checkers” says:

“No, that’s not true: Proposed U.S. amendments to WHO rules are aimed at strengthening the organization’s ability to prevent, detect and respond to public health emergencies. The amendments do not suggest that the United States, nor any country, cede its sovereignty.”

In other words, because the amendments do not specifically say “The United States cedes its authority to the WHO”, both Lead Stories and Snopes claim it isn’t happening, ignoring the fact that there is no specific provision in any of the amendments to prevent it if the ruling regime allows it.

We have seen what happens to our own country through tyrannical use of “public health” laws.

It will never happen in America – until it does.

Talk Amongst Yourselves:

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.