55 Comments

我不会遵守

Expand full comment

Hell no I will NEVER COMPLY!!

THE WHO CAN GO STRAIGHT TO HELL WHERE THEY CAME FROM!

Expand full comment

I will not comply!

Expand full comment

Stop the treaty…. Reject the WHO…

Expand full comment

Isn't "seeking an agreement regarding “equitable access” to pharmaceutical poisons and injectable bioweapons" just a variation of "Foreign Aid? Don't countries go into debt for that and become beholden to the IMF?

Expand full comment

Under Article 24, quarantine is "a simple 3-step process: WHO recommends a boat be quarantined, the country concerned adopts the recommendation, and whammo you’re not getting off that boat, the Captain has locked the doors. And this can be despite no-one on board being sick, and the boat not being contaminated - just on the basis of people on board not having their vaccine passports up to date. (Under the existing IHR, “quarantine” means “the restriction of activities and/or separation from others of suspect persons who are not ill or of suspect baggage, containers, conveyances orgoods in such a manner as to prevent the possible spread of infection or contamination” (emphasis added))" -https://libbyklein.substack.com/p/update-on-binding-recommendations

Expand full comment

About the FOUR FALSE PREMISES, the injections saving lives, this investigation is interesting: There is NO EVIDENCE that vaccines save millions of lives, a statement made by the WHO. In 2019 the number of lives vaccines saved was claimed by the WHO to be 2-3 billion. This jumped up willy nilly to 4-5 million on the 27th of April 2021. "Millions of lives saved" is just a marketing statement by an “authority head”. Learn more about "authority head" terms of conditioning here https://totalityofevidence.com/vaccines-save-millions-of-lives/

Expand full comment

Art. 1 Sec. 8 lists the LEGISLATIVE POWERS of the Congress who is the only branch of the government that can make law. In addition read Sec. 9 and Sec. 10. And then go to Art. VI Clause 2. If a treaty or executive agreement violates the Constitution then it is null and void. The federal government has no authority over health policy. The have no authority to hand over health policy to an unelected foreign agency.

Expand full comment

Thank you for all you are doing

Expand full comment

James.....Question......in your graphic you say the WHO is not going to take away our sovereignty but then when you list what they want to set up that surely is an attack on our sovereignty. I understand your point about this not being about stopping the next pandemic but making money but can't it be both.......a scheme to make money while stealing our sovereignty at the same time. I have a problem resolving this issue in my mind. I believe it is both.

Expand full comment

Instead of a treaty to share access to deadly pathogens , we should have international treaties FORBIDDING the collection, dissemination, and experimental manipulation of them

Expand full comment
author

Exactly

Expand full comment

TO James Roguski DEAR Chief Wolf

Thank you for contacting me regarding H.R. 79, the WHO Withdrawal Act. I appreciate hearing from you.

The COVID-19 pandemic has proven that the World Health Organization (WHO) is a corrupt globalist organization that has been plagued with fraud, waste, and abuse. The WHO Has also continually bent under pressure of the Chinese Communist Party throughout the health crisis, putting lives around the world at risk for the sake of Chinese political propaganda. The thought of ceding U.S. sovereignty to it, or any other international body, is unacceptable. H.R. 79 would require the President to immediately withdraw the United States from the WHO and prohibit any federal funds to be provided for U.S. participation in the WHO.

As a strong supporter of America First policies, you can rest assured knowing I will never allow any international agreements to usurp the United State Constitution or U.S. sovereignty.

H.R. 79 has been referred to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs. While I am not a member of this committee, you can be assured that I will remember your thoughts should I have the opportunity to consider this or relevant legislation in the future. I will also share your thoughts with my House colleagues. I am certain they will benefit from your views.

As a resident of Florida's Twelfth District, your comments and opinions are an important source of information to help me carry out my duties as your federal representative. In that regard, please do not hesitate to contact me in the future on any issue important to you. Also, if you would like to be informed more frequently about my work in Congress and in Florida's Twelfth Congressional District, please click here to sign up for my weekly newsletter. You can also visit my website at bilirakis.house.gov to sign up for regular email or to send me a message.

Again, thank you for sharing your thoughts with me.

Sincerely yours,

Gus M. Bilirakis

Member of Congress

Expand full comment

Signs and Tee-Shirts are good communication skills. Take your pick of the agendas to fight! We have to get out of the WEF. FYI...Biden announced that gasoline cars will be eliminated. All in the scam of 'Climate Change.'

Expand full comment

Dear James, I have contact my MP for the county where I live in Wales in the UK about the treaty amendments. I did not get a very positive reply when asking her to attend. She said she was busy and that Andrew Bridgen who was hosting it told untruths etc etc and that she has told her constituents to ignore him. So I don't know what else can do now.

Expand full comment

PURE EVIL NEVER SLEEPS, IF THE PEOPLE DON'T START WAKING UP THE HUMAN RACE ARE DOOMED! 100%

Expand full comment

Due to some of the comments, I re-listened twice to what the representative from Chad said.

Perhaps my antennae are short-circuiting and my interpretation is scrambled.

Was the Chad rep. on board the WHO ship, off board, both on and off?

Seemingly all interpretations are possible.

He was definitely for increasing life saving capabilities in real life situations, not theoretical ones.

He appears to just want a realistic appreciation, that the provision of effective health care is far more demanding in some places than in others.

He appears to think, that full cooperation with the WHO is essential.

He appears to be unaware, that the WHO may not be fully committed to heath and life.

What exactly did the Chad rep. mean to convey?

Expand full comment

I think that this is all about "consensus" - one way or another.

There is no real negotiating, about real positive health outcomes, going on.

The train is headed for WHOville regardless.

The only negotiating revolves around, how to keep everyone onboard, one way or another.

When the train arrives at WHOville then everything will be sorted.

For better or for worse.

Expand full comment