Article Summary
Mark Butler, Australia’s new Health Minister, is ready to follow the World Health Organization’s (WHO) guidelines on pandemic management, raising concerns about potential infringements on civil liberties. The WHO’s Pandemic Treaty requires nations to be “Pandemic Ready,” and Australia has already passed legislation to accommodate biosecurity enforcement. This legislation provides immunity for the Australian Defence Force and other military forces for acts that would otherwise incur criminal and civil liability. The WHO’s CEO, Tedros, has a history of supporting policies that raise ethical concerns, further fueling skepticism and mistrust among Australians.
What This Means for You
- Be aware of the potential for stricter enforcement of biosecurity measures, which may affect personal freedoms and privacy.
- Stay informed about the progress of the WHO’s Pandemic Treaty and its implications for Australia and other nations.
- Advocate for transparent and accountable governance, ensuring that policies are in place to protect civil liberties while managing public health crises.
- Support efforts to hold international organizations, such as the WHO, accountable for their actions and policies.
Australia now ready for Mark Butler and WHO’s next plandemic
Comment by Lyndesy Symonds
Boy is it a good thing the UNI Party and One Nation got that Defence Legislation Amendment in place in 2020. They would have seen this one coming.
Enforcement of the WHO CEO Tedros (former Ethiopian Terrorist) Pandemic Treaty requires the nation that signed up for it (and boy did we ever) to Pandemic Ready – with all the necessary legislation in place.
Thus was the Enhancement of Defence Force Response to Emergencies Bill 2020 (the Bill) to amend the Defence Act 1903 (Defence Act) and the Defence Reserve Service (Protection) Act 2001 (DRSP Act) an essential preparation for biosecurity enforcement.
And hauling people off to camps, forced injections with the latest bioweapon or genetic modification from Big Pharmakeia, lockdown, sudden 15 minute city, ‘no jab-no food’, debanking etc is going to require a lot of enforcement. It is going to require crimes against humanity and (of course) civil right.
So the Act helpfully provides indemnity for all acts which would otherwise incur criminal and civil liability for the ADF and any military forces that are tasked on Australian soil [against Australians]. It clearly envisions WHO enforcement of the Pandemic Treaty which operations must have this total immunity in accordance with the International Health Regulations Treaty.
“Peace and Safety” do I hear everyone say?
https://australianemergencylaw.com/2020/12/15/federal-parliament-passes-the-defence-legislation-amendment-enhancement-of-defence-force-response-to-emergencies-bill-2020/
People Also Ask About
- What is the WHO’s Pandemic Treaty, and what does it mean for Australia?
- Has Australia passed legislation for biosecurity enforcement? If so, what are the implications for civil liberties?
- What role does the Australian Defence Force play in enforcing biosecurity measures?
- Who is Tedros, and why is his past a cause for concern in the context of the WHO’s Pandemic Treaty?
Expert Opinion
The WHO’s Pandemic Treaty, and its associated enforcement measures, raise critical questions about accountability, civil liberties, and public trust. As Australia prepares to enforce these guidelines, it is essential to ensure that international organizations are held accountable for their actions and that policies are in place to protect citizens’ rights and well-being.
Key Terms
- WHO
- Pandemic Treaty
- Biosecurity Enforcement
- Civil Liberties
ORIGINAL SOURCE:
Source link
