WHO treaty- James Corbett and Dr Nass- Childrens Health Defense

[Amanda]

https://corbettreport.substack.com/p/who-sneak-attack-on-chd-tv

VIDEO COURTESY CHD.TV (https://live.childrenshealthdefense.org/chd-tv/shows/good-morning-chd/who-sneak-attack-with-james-corbett/) / RUMBLE (https://rumble.com/v25hk0o-who-sneak-attack-with-james-corbett.html)

via CHD.TV (https://live.childrenshealthdefense.org/chd-tv/shows/good-morning-chd/who-sneak-attack-with-james-corbett/): "This is the big one. They're going for broke... I think we may only have potentially until May before one or both of these documents gets voted on" — Meryl Nass, M.D. and James Corbett continue their discussion on the WHO’s proposed International Health Regulation Amendments + potentially legally-binding ‘Zero Draft Treaty’ currently being drawn up in secret meetings behind closed doors. As the WHO touts the solution to worldly problems as possible through their ‘One Health’ approach — one wonders if a world in which humans, animals, agriculture, and weather are dominated by state depicted notions of the highest attainable standard of ‘health’ may secretly be a trojan horse to dominate as much of the sovereign world as possible — usurping power from individual countries and thrusting it into the hands of a mad-with-power agency which seeks to control Earth’s resources, ecosystems, food, animals, and plants.

****
somebody needs to hunt down these global demons

[Amanda]

Fight the WHO Now! (proposed Pandemic Treaty-- must be stopped, WHO is attempting a global coup)

Dr Mark Trozzi


January 15, 2023



https://rumble.com/v25omh7-100-reasons-to-exitthewho.html


The WHO is the globalists’ conduit to impose their wicked agendas upon us (https://drtrozzi.org/2022/07/16/fahrie-hassan-who-conflicts-of-interest/). They are moving fast and in secrecy to enslave the entire population of the world. We must be vigilant and actively fight them now.

I am confident that the greatest and most imminent threat to our future is the World Health Organization. If you think the last three years have been abusive, you must see what they are planning next. Please study this video by James Roguski, that condenses hundreds of hours of his research into one hour of our viewing. We must not neglect our duty to stop the W.H.O. It is an urgent matter for our survival. The WHO is the conduit through which the globalists manipulate the entire world.
This is an information dense video. Please take the time to study it. There are powerful easy actions to take below. The controllers of the WHO are very serious and organized to kill most of us and enslave the rest of us. Please join the fight with everything you have.

100 Reason to Stop the Treaty; Stop the Amendments: and Exit the W.H.O. -James Roguski


The corresponding article: https://jamesroguski.substack.com/p/100-reasons


Canada Exit the WHO | Powerful Action Made Very Easy:

Click here (https://drtrozzi.org/2022/10/09/canada-exit-the-who-powerful-action-made-very-easy)


World Council for Health Call to Action: NOW is the Time to Unite Against the WHO


worldcouncilforhealth.orgThe World Council for Health (WCH) continues to oppose the World Health Organization (WHO)’s attempted power grab in the form of both a proposed pandemic treaty (https://worldcouncilforhealth.org/news/pandemic-treaty/) as well as amendments (https://worldcouncilforhealth.org/news/statements/secret-ihr-meetings/) to the International Health Regulations (IHR).
The WHO is an unelected, majority private-funded body seeking powers that would override national constitutions and violate fundamental human rights. A mysterious body beholden to corporate interests must not be given additional power. In fact, it should have vastly less power than it does right now if any at all.
The proposed amendments (https://apps.who.int/gb/wgihr/pdf_files/wgihr1/WGIHR_Compilation-en.pdf) would further solidify the WHO as a global authority by making their proclamations legally binding rather than simply being recommendations. Granted, many countries already appear to respond as though the WHO’s proclamations are legally binding, but room exists to act as a sovereign nation in the best interest of the people. In effect, the proposed amendments would make acting in the best interest of a country’s people an offense, would usher in global digital health certificates, and increase the earning potential of the WHO, its partners, and the medical industrial complex, among many other things.
What’s more, these negotiations are happening behind closed doors outside of view, and without input from the public. The sixth meeting is happening this week (9-13 January). To attend, an application (https://indico.un.org/event/1003643/registrations/9574/) must be completed that includes the submission of a photo and numerous personal details including a passport number.
The 76th World Health Assembly is scheduled for the end of May of this year. The amendments to the IRH must be submitted to the WHO at least 4 months in advance in order for the proposed amendments to be considered during the next assembly. As such, the IHRRC intends to submit the proposed amendments by 15 January.
The outcome of these meetings affects each and every one of us. It is unacceptable that they are happening behind closed doors and without public participation. Action must be taken to both expose and stop these attempts. We must also remember that a better way is possible and is within reach.
It is also important to note that the WHO views (https://twitter.com/WHO/status/1602991915808456705) opposition to the Covid-19 injections—what they call “anti-vaccine activism”—as a “major killing force globally” more dangerous than “gun violence, global terrorism, nuclear proliferation, or cyberattacks.”
If you feel moved to take action, below you will find the email addresses belonging to each member of the International Health Regulations Review Committee (IHRRC):
• AbdelfattahM@who.int
• AginamO@who.int
• AlnsourM@who.int
• AmothP@who.int
• BurciG@who.int
• CamachoJ@who.int
• ForsythA@who.int
• GostinL@who.int
• HabibiR@who.int
• HaringhuizenG@who.int
• JokhdarH@who.int
• LiuY@who.int
• SafdarR@who.int
• SahukhanA@who.int
• SamarasekeraD@who.int
• SmolenskiyV@who.int
• SreedharanS@who.int
• WenhamC@who.int


We encourage everyone to email the above members of the IHRRC informing them of your thoughts on amendments to the IHR and the process, and to request to view the proposed amendments.
To learn more about why the treaty and amendments must be stopped, visit James Roguski’s website (https://jamesroguski.substack.com/p/100-reasons).


Further Recommended Material:


They’re not done shooting, they’re just reloading their guns (https://drtrozzi.org/2022/10/15/theyre-not-done-shooting-theyre-just-reloading-their-guns/)
Fahrie Hassan: WHO Conflicts of Interest. Capturing Global Health by Subversion (https://drtrozzi.org/2022/07/16/fahrie-hassan-who-conflicts-of-interest/)


More from James Roguski:


SECRET NEGOTIATIONS: https://jamesroguski.substack.com/p/secret-negotiations
HELP SPREAD THE WORD: https://jamesroguski.substack.com/p/help-spread-the-word

[Amanda]

Catherine Austin Fitts: A Coup is Being Prepared by Using the WHO

https://www.bitchute.com/video/K20QWZ4ClRqF/

[monty]

Ñ

Catherine Austin Fitts: A Coup is Being Prepared by Using the WHO

https://www.bitchute.com/video/K20QWZ4ClRqF/

One of Nevada’s Congressional Representatives wrote me this letter:


https://d15k2d11r6t6rl.cloudfront.net/public/users/Integrators/BeeProAgency/612235_594069/unnamed%20%281%29.png

January 14, 2023

Dear Mr.

Thank you for contacting me regarding proposed amendments to the International Health Regulations (IHR) of the World Health Organization (WHO). I appreciate the opportunity to respond.


By way of background, these amendments were originally developed under the Trump Administration. Under the current IHRs, during the early days of the COVID-19 outbreak in Wuhan province, the Chinese Communist Party was able to dictate what information was released to the World Health Organization. We cannot allow rogue regimes and authoritarian leaders to hide critical health data, particularly where a lack of such data would threaten the lives of Americans, as well as U.S. national security and the U.S. economy.


These amendments would not, in any way, change or supersede U.S. law and the sovereign right for the United States to legislate, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations and the principles of international law, and to implement legislation in pursuance of their health regulations. If adopted, it would allow the WHO, with the recommendation of the emergency committee (of which at least one member must be from the state in question), to declare a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC) without the agreement of the member state in question where the outbreak is occurring. This does not mean that the WHO will be able to implement any actions within a non-consenting state. Rather, that the WHO can declare a PHIEC and share information with other states without the approval of the state in which the incident is happening. The amendments increase transparency and multinational engagement of WHO member states and are an important step in rectifying the disastrous mistakes made during the early days of COVID-19.


I will continue to closely monitor this situation as the WHO considers these amendments and will advocate for continued information sharing that does not infringe on our rights as a sovereign nation.


You might be interested to know that H.R. 419, the No Taxpayer Funding for the World Health Organization Act, was introduced by Representative Chip Roy (R-TX) on January 21, 2021. This legislation would prohibit any monetary contributions from the United States to the WHO. H.R. 419 had been referred to the House Foreign Affairs Committee for further consideration, where it expired upon the completion of the 117th Congress. Should this or similar legislation be reintroduced and come to the House floor, please know that I will keep your thoughts in mind.


To stay up-to-date on legislation being considered on the House floor, please visit Majority Leader Steve Scalise’s website to find the weekly schedule (https://www.majorityleader.gov/schedule/weekly-schedule.htm). The schedule is updated at the beginning of each week the House of Representatives is in session in Washington, D.C. Additionally, you may watch the House floor proceedings on the livestream, here (https://www.house.gov/watch-houselive).


I appreciate you taking the time to inform me of your opinions and hope you will continue to contact me in the future. In closing, please know I consider it a privilege to serve and represent you and your family in Congress.



Sincerely,

https://email-signatures.s3-us-gov-west-1.amazonaws.com/amodei+sig.png

Mark E. Amodei
Member of Congress






Comment: Dr. Edwin Vieira has stated that the States are bound by unconstitutional treaties due to the Sixth Amendment and the USA being a memeber of the United Nations therby the treaty has the effect of federal law on the several States. I don’t remember his exact reasoning but it nulifies Mark Amodei’s remarks.

[Amanda]

Ñ

One of Nevada’s Congressional Representatives wrote me this letter:


https://d15k2d11r6t6rl.cloudfront.net/public/users/Integrators/BeeProAgency/612235_594069/unnamed%20%281%29.png

January 14, 2023

Dear Mr.

Thank you for contacting me regarding proposed amendments to the International Health Regulations (IHR) of the World Health Organization (WHO). I appreciate the opportunity to respond.


By way of background, these amendments were originally developed under the Trump Administration. Under the current IHRs, during the early days of the COVID-19 outbreak in Wuhan province, the Chinese Communist Party was able to dictate what information was released to the World Health Organization. We cannot allow rogue regimes and authoritarian leaders to hide critical health data, particularly where a lack of such data would threaten the lives of Americans, as well as U.S. national security and the U.S. economy.


These amendments would not, in any way, change or supersede U.S. law and the sovereign right for the United States to legislate, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations and the principles of international law, and to implement legislation in pursuance of their health regulations. If adopted, it would allow the WHO, with the recommendation of the emergency committee (of which at least one member must be from the state in question), to declare a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC) without the agreement of the member state in question where the outbreak is occurring. This does not mean that the WHO will be able to implement any actions within a non-consenting state. Rather, that the WHO can declare a PHIEC and share information with other states without the approval of the state in which the incident is happening. The amendments increase transparency and multinational engagement of WHO member states and are an important step in rectifying the disastrous mistakes made during the early days of COVID-19.


I will continue to closely monitor this situation as the WHO considers these amendments and will advocate for continued information sharing that does not infringe on our rights as a sovereign nation.


You might be interested to know that H.R. 419, the No Taxpayer Funding for the World Health Organization Act, was introduced by Representative Chip Roy (R-TX) on January 21, 2021. This legislation would prohibit any monetary contributions from the United States to the WHO. H.R. 419 had been referred to the House Foreign Affairs Committee for further consideration, where it expired upon the completion of the 117th Congress. Should this or similar legislation be reintroduced and come to the House floor, please know that I will keep your thoughts in mind.


To stay up-to-date on legislation being considered on the House floor, please visit Majority Leader Steve Scalise’s website to find the weekly schedule (https://www.majorityleader.gov/schedule/weekly-schedule.htm). The schedule is updated at the beginning of each week the House of Representatives is in session in Washington, D.C. Additionally, you may watch the House floor proceedings on the livestream, here (https://www.house.gov/watch-houselive).


I appreciate you taking the time to inform me of your opinions and hope you will continue to contact me in the future. In closing, please know I consider it a privilege to serve and represent you and your family in Congress.



Sincerely,

https://email-signatures.s3-us-gov-west-1.amazonaws.com/amodei+sig.png

Mark E. Amodei
Member of Congress



Comment: Dr. Edwin Vieira has stated that the States are bound by unconstitutional treaties due to the Sixth Amendment and the USA being a memeber of the United Nations therby the treaty has the effect of federal law on the several States. I don’t remember his exact reasoning but it nulifies Mark Amodei’s remarks.

Well, thanks for taking the time to write your Congressman about all of this---I should probably do the same, but never seem to get around to doing it (I hate writing letters).

Also, good info from Dr. Edwin Viera.

Yes, we need to get out of the UN and out of the WHO, but not sure how to do that. Trump tried to make it look like he was doing that, by taking money out of WHO, but then gave that money to Bill Gates' GAVI, which is the same thing.

Not sure what the path forward is, but in that Catherine Austin Fitts interview, she seemed to think there was still hope and that there were positive things going on behind the scenes.

[monty]

Here is an exerpt from a 600+ page report https://harvardlawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/vazquez.pdf (http://<span style=&quot;font-family: Helvetica&quot;>https://harvardlawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/vazquez.pdf</span>)

Treaties as Law of the Land: The Supremacy Clause and the Judicial Enforcement of Treaties

Article (https://harvardlawreview.org/category/articles/) by Carlos Manuel Vázquez (https://harvardlawreview.org/authors/carlos-manuel-vazquez/)
DEC 1, 2008
122 Harv. L. Rev. 599



PDF (https://harvardlawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/vazquez.pdf)


Courts in recent years have perceived threshold obstacles to the enforcement of treaties deriving from their nature as contracts between nations that generally depend for their efficacy on the interest and honor of the parties, rather than on domestic adjudication. This approach to treaty enforcement is in tension with the Constitution’s declaration that treaties are part of the law of the land and its instruction to judges to give them effect. The Founders understood that treaties depended on interest and honor on the international plane, but they made treaties enforceable in our courts anyway in order to avoid the international friction that could be expected to result from treaty violations and to capture the benefits of a reputation for treaty compliance. The Supremacy Clause gives treaties a domestic judicial sanction that they would otherwise lack. It makes treaties enforceable in the courts in the same circumstances as the other two categories of norms specified in the clause – federal statutes and the Constitution itself.
RELATED



Law (Makers) of the Land: The Doctrine of Treaty Non-Self-Execution (https://harvardlawreview.org/2009/04/law-makers-of-the-land-the-doctrine-of-treaty-non-self-execution/) by David H. Moore (https://harvardlawreview.org/authors/david-h-moore/)

The sole exception to this rule is for treaties that are non-self-executing in the sense contemplated by the Court in Foster v. Neilson. The concept of a non-self-executing treaty fits uneasily with the Supremacy Clause, as reflected in the common but untenable view that non-self-executing treaties lack the force of domestic law. According to Foster, a non-self-executing treaty is not enforceable in the courts because it is addressed to the political branches. But determining which treaties are so addressed has been challenging. Treaties generally leave the question of domestic implementation to the domestic laws of the states-parties, and our domestic law (the Supremacy Clause) directs judges to give them effect. the author argues that the Supremacy Clause establishes a default rule that treaties are directly enforceable in the courts like other laws, rebuttable only by a clear statement that the obligations imposed by the treaty are subject to legislative implementation.

If the stipulation had to appear in the text of the treaty, the clear statement rule would present problems for U.S. treatymakers seeking to control the domestic consequences of multilateral treaties. To address this problem, the treatymakers have developed a new form of clear statement, the “declaration”� of non-self-execution. However, scholars have questioned the compatibility of such declarations with the Supremacy Clause. The author concludes that the treatymakers have the power to limit the domestic effects of treaties through declarations of non-self-execution. On the other hand, if the Constitution were understood to establish a default rule of non-self-execution, declarations of self-execution would stand on more tenuous ground. Thus, a default rule of self-execution is not only more consistent with the constitutional text and structure and with Supreme Court precedent, it is also normatively attractive because it leaves the treatymakers with the power to control the domestic consequences of the treaties they conclude.


Tags:



Contract Law (https://harvardlawreview.org/topics/contract-law/)
International Law (https://harvardlawreview.org/topics/international-law/)
Legal History (https://harvardlawreview.org/topics/legal-history/)





PDF (https://harvardlawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/vazquez.pdf)
Westlaw (https://a.next.westlaw.com/Document/I0b5b74f6c71011dd93e8a76b30106ace/View/FullText.html?transitionType=UniqueDocItem&contextData=(sc.UserEnteredCitation))

DEC ’08 VOL122 NO. 2 (https://harvardlawreview.org/issues/volume-122-issue-2/)

[Amanda]

Here's the latest from Peter Koenig---I've been following him since the beginning of operation covid hoax---he's the one who was right away warning about Agenda ID2020 and digital money (enslaving us).

Anyway, in the article below, the first video (rumble) posted with him and a couple of interviewers gets into the WHO Pandemic treaty at 25 min in, talks about how it is a global takeover, if they pass this in May 2023, then it would be implemented in 2024. Says WHO Pandemic treaty will strip you of your most basic rights and freedoms. Will be presented at next World Health Assembly in May, discussed behind closed doors, two days for people/countries to make comments. If this goes through, he's talked with several lawyers, including Reiner Fuellmich, they see no way out---totally illegal, but world is no longer legal. Financial system has overruled natural laws.

Also,

Puppet Masters (https://www.sott.net/category/16)

https://www.sott.net/images/icons/cult.png

The WEF, WHO and NATO - Are they running a death cult? (https://www.globalresearch.ca/wef-who-they-running-death-cult/5804177)


Peter Koenig---- (says the hardest disease to overcome is cognitive dissonance--inability to admit you are wrong)
Global Research

(https://www.globalresearch.ca/wef-who-they-running-death-cult/5804177)https://www.sott.net/article/476363-The-WEF-WHO-and-NATO-Are-they-running-a-death-cult


(https://www.sott.net/article/476363-The-WEF-WHO-and-NATO-Are-they-running-a-death-cult)

*****

also, fwiw, I sometimes have Newsmax on in the evening (in the background) and they seem to be doing a good job covering WEF/Davos plans to enslave humanity---so kind of seems like things have moved forward in that some news shows are openly talking about the plot against us and using those terms "enslavement" and "global takeover" (of course, I'm sure the CNN and MSNBC viewers have never heard of this)

[monty]

Buy local, use cash and stay out of their system as much as possible