WHO vs First Amendment; White House to decide by May on ceding authority to global body

A war of attrition we have yet to recognize? " Weinstein delves into how the Covid pandemic led to exposing big pharma and its dependence on ill health rather than finding drugs that make us healthier.

Healthy children have little chance of benefiting from the COVID-19 vaccine while it destroys their immune systems and shortens their lives.

Instead of recommending Ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine, two old and known drugs, as remedies for COVID-19, Remdesivir, a drug known for causing high rates of kidney and liver failure, and warp-speed developed vaccines were the COVID-19 remedies/therapies of choice recommended by public health officials and agencies.

The FDA's failure to approve ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine as COVID-19 therapies allowed the agency to give emergency use authorization to Remdesivier, COVID-19 mRNA injections, and other new therapies.

First Amendment protections on the chopping block? The most important issue is what will happen to the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution should the United States sign on to the WHO's Pandemic Preparedness Plan.

A key element of this plan is at odds with the First Amendment protections, as the plan attempts to reduce resistance to future "epidemic" countermeasures.

Specifically, since not everyone was COVID-19 vaccinated, many people were able to speak out against the "vaccines", the harms of which became apparent to many.

What they want are the measures that would have allowed them to silence the podcasters, to mandate various things internationally in a way that would prevent the emergence of a control group that would allow us to see harms clearly… would you want to relive a pandemic like the COVID pandemic without the tools that allowed you to ultimately, in the end, see clearly that it didn't make sense to take another one of these shots or to have your kids take…. And something is quietly moving just out of sight in order that we will not have access to them the next time we face a serious emergency…. Tucker: So you're saying that an international health organization could just end the First Amendment in the United States?

Gene therapy technology is literally named in the the [sic] set of things that the World Health Organization is going to reserve the right to mandate, that it will be in a position to require these things of citizens, that it will be in a position to dictate our ability to travel, in other words, passports that would be predicated on one having accepted these technologies are clearly being described.

Have some of our First Amendment rights already been eroded? Has there been a dissolution of our religious freedom and freedom of speech since COVID-19 began? Countermeasures, as they were enacted in the U.S., such as houses of worship shuttered, the government allowing only a certain number of worshippers at any given time, or being told not to sing in church, along with the censorship and demonization of anyone who spoke against the narrative, certainly reek of government denial of First Amendment rights.

Can the erosion of First Amendment protections be reversed? How can U.S. citizens block politicians from ceding those protections to a global agency?

How can U.S. citizens force the executive, legislative, and judicial branches to restore the full protections guaranteed by the First Amendment?