Please note: The Pandemic Agreement has been called various names over the years. It has also been referred to as the Pandemic Treaty, Pandemic Accord and WHO Convention Agreement + (“WHO CA+”).
To ensure the Pandemic Agreement was adopted by the easiest possible route, WHO had determined that a vote need not take place, and instead it would be adopted by “consensus.”
Surprised that a “democratic institution” did not want to have a vote, Slovakia requested that a vote on the draft Pandemic Agreement take place, which Tedros the Terrorist attempted to stop hours before the vote was scheduled.
The vote was conducted by “a show of hands,” by “representatives” holding up their name plates, and then people counting the number of name plates raised. Which way countries voted was not recorded. It all sounds a bit dubious and fraught with error, with no way of checking whether an error, inadvertently or deliberately, has been made. A “show of hands” might be a good way to gauge how many bags of sweets to buy for a school outing, it certainly isn’t the way to vote on a global agreement.
To watch a video of the vote, go to WHO’s 78th World Health Assembly webpage, HERE, and select the ‘Committee A’ tab shown under the current video. Then from the list of ‘Committee A’ videos, select ‘WHA78 – Committee A, Second Committee A Meeting, 19/05/2025 – 18:50-21:40’. The “show of hands” voting begins at timestamp 02:47:20. The results were (see timestamp 03:08:08):
- Number of members entitled to vote, 181
- Number of members absent, 46
- Number of abstentions, 11
- Number of members present and voting, 124
- Number of votes in favour, 124
- Number of votes against, 0
- Number of votes required for the majority of two-thirds of members present and voting, 83
Yes, the Chair read out that the number of members present and voting was the same as the number of votes in favour; 124. In other words, the Chair claimed that all countries that had representatives present at the meeting voted in favour of the Pandemic Agreement. When no name plates were raised during the time allotted for votes against the Agreement, the so-called country representatives gave themselves a standing ovation.
However, the total number of countries present and voting according to the Chair does not add up. Countries that abstained were present, such as Slovakia, which means that the Chair made a “mistake” in claiming that 124 members were present and voting or made a “mistake” in saying that 124 voted in favour of the Pandemic Agreement. Either there were 135 members present and voting (in which case two-thirds majority was 90, not 83 as claimed) or not all the 124 countries present voted in favour of the Agreement (11 abstained). As the votes were not recorded and the only evidence that exists is a video showing a partial picture of the room, what the Chair said and what the vote counters claimed can’t be checked. How convenient for anyone who wishes to manipulate the results of a vote.
Putting aside the dubious voting methods, the absence of the United States, which has begun the process of withdrawing from the WHO, casts doubt on the Pandemic Agreement’s effectiveness, according to Reuters. Nonetheless, its advocates were hailing it as “a good starting point” and a “foundation to build on.”
As we mentioned in an article on Friday, the Pandemic Agreement will not go into effect until an annexe on the sharing of pathogenic information is agreed.
Dr. Meryl Nass was asked what the adoption of the Agreement means; she responded by referring to four previous articles she had published, read HERE.
In a Twitter (now X) thread posted yesterday, independent journalist Lewis Brackpool summarised what has happened and where it is heading. We have reproduced Brackpool’s thread below.
MORE AT LINK: https://expose-news.com/2025/05/21/whos-pandemic-agreement-is-adopted/
