Amendments To International Health Regulations 2024 - Scamming Their Way Into The NWO.

a reply to: BidenOperator

The implementation of these regulations shall be with full respect for the dignity, human rights, and fundamental freedoms of persons BASED ON THE PRINCIPLES OF EQUITY, INCLUSIVITY, COHERENCE, AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH THEIR COMMON BUT DIFFERENTIATED RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE STATES PARTIES, TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION THEIR SOCIAL & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

Okay, so we really have to take this apart, dissembling the sophistry to attain a meaning that is clear, that cannot be argued with, which we can utilise to send to our elected officials to demonstrate the dangers of what's unfolding in these IHR amendments. NB - I am the person (TimeOfTrouble1771) who wrote the OP for this thread when my regular account (FlyInTheOintent) was down due to the bizarre hacking that occured on ATS not too long ago.

So, to begin with, the bold text is what the original regulations stated. Some machine-minded men with machine hearts have decided to utterly remove the whole dignity, rights & freedoms section. That tells us enough already about the sort of people & the sort of actions we're dealing with here. But it gets worse, as noted by BidenOperator. We then have a word salad of the whole equity, inclusion, coherence nonsense, which basically stands for perversions of ordinary freedom & dignity, etc.

The part that gets really dangerous is that last half of the last sentence: "...IN ACCORDANCE WITH THEIR COMMON BUT DIFFERENTIATED RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE STATES PARTIES, TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION THEIR SOCIAL & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT."

Basically I think this could be interpreted in two different ways, and I think it's deliberate. The first interpretation is that the member states who agree to the amendments will accept & delegate to the proper authorities within their realm of operation the responsibilities that will come through the adoption of the amendments when they are necessarily put into practice during a health crisis. The economic & social development would mean in this first interpretation that the states would receive help & assistance to enact the regulations which would vary based on their evolution as a nation state. If they are third world they receive additional funding & support.

However, the second way this last part could be interpreted is if it is applied to individual persons within the member states. In that interpretation varying degrees of control would be exerted over those individuals, and their restrictions would be harsher & more strict if the nation state is under-developed & therefore more likely to be amenable to disorder during the application of the regulations within the nation state. Thus they would receive additional support to control their citizens more fiercely.

It's possible that I'm wrong - but I think the text has been selected precisely because it can be interpreted at least two ways, and indeed any number of strictures could be applied 'depending on their social & economic development'. It follows straight on from the removal of text which would have highlighted rights, dignity & freedom, so it seems likely that the added text implies harsh measures which DO NOT take into account the rights, dignity or freedoms of the people.

Bastards.