Administratively Biden’s WHO treaty amendment recommendations are valid. People are shocked by this and I am stymied as to why it is popping up now when this was an active issue back last May. Organizations often function on emotionalism. I often wonder if that is not a fund raising ploy. Our Sovereignty became minimized since Harry Truman. I’ll get to that later in the program and references below.
With that, the O’Biden administration submitted amendments have validity based on at least two pillars. First off, what O’Biden is doing is not a new treaty but amending the existing UN Treaty, Chapter IX. Health, which established the WHO and delineated its already over-reaching authority. Second, the new language is such that all UN member states will accept these changes with an ‘out’ the statement: “The State Party shall accept or reject such” of the various amendment points where the statement is used, which is a bunch of times. Here is the actual recommended WHO Constitution amended document.
I know, these changes in the WHO constitution are frightful, outrageous and unsettling. But so are many of the more than 500 pages of Treaties and Executive Agreements In Force.
For the most part, US Citizens have no concept of Treaties and International Executive Agreements, known as Executive Agreements that have been and are affecting our Constitutional Republic for over 100 years. On this program I take you through the titles of just Afghanistan’s treaties and agreements with US. I have not seen anything in the State Department or Federal Register that negates/dissolves these treaties and agreements. Therefore, regarding Afghanistan, in the principles of International Law, we are on the hook to honor them… Ugg.