The problem from what I understand, and I am far from being an expert on this, is that the treaty is not the problem - that is merely the distraction to take eyes off where the real action is. The amendments to the International Health Regulations submitted by Biden to the existing charter is where the action and power grab will occur. The language is going to be changed in order to give the WHO unprecedented ability. The paperwork on this was buried and is still not getting much attention. As you stated, any new treaty has to be ratified by Constitutional approved means. The same does not hold true to existing internationally approved instruments that only require approval of the governing body of the WHO/UN.
JAMES ROGUSKI WARNS OF WHO ATTEMPT TO SUBVERT NATIONAL SOVEREIGNTY
I hear the argument, but not all revisions are equal. For instance, under that scenario they could have declared themselves kings of the world a long time ago. In reality, constitution or no constitution, we (the people) either put up with it or not. At minimum this is brining attention to the issue.
I truly believe that having eyes on an issue like this lets them know we are awake and paying attention. Possibly they could just be beta testing to see how aware we really are and if we are willing to act. An advantage they would be looking for is pushing some crap like this through when no one is watching. Despite all the distractions, people all over the world are looking at this. You are right that in the end it is we the people that are going to decide whether they pull this off or not.
The problem from what I understand, and I am far from being an expert on this, is that the treaty is not the problem - that is merely the distraction to take eyes off where the real action is. The amendments to the International Health Regulations submitted by Biden to the existing charter is where the action and power grab will occur. The language is going to be changed in order to give the WHO unprecedented ability. The paperwork on this was buried and is still not getting much attention. As you stated, any new treaty has to be ratified by Constitutional approved means. The same does not hold true to existing internationally approved instruments that only require approval of the governing body of the WHO/UN. JAMES ROGUSKI WARNS OF WHO ATTEMPT TO SUBVERT NATIONAL SOVEREIGNTY
I hear the argument, but not all revisions are equal. For instance, under that scenario they could have declared themselves kings of the world a long time ago. In reality, constitution or no constitution, we (the people) either put up with it or not. At minimum this is brining attention to the issue.
I truly believe that having eyes on an issue like this lets them know we are awake and paying attention. Possibly they could just be beta testing to see how aware we really are and if we are willing to act. An advantage they would be looking for is pushing some crap like this through when no one is watching. Despite all the distractions, people all over the world are looking at this. You are right that in the end it is we the people that are going to decide whether they pull this off or not.