A Discussion With Bruce Pardy
Vigilance and action on a local level are needed regardless of whether or not the WHO adopts amendments to the International Health Regulations and a new "Pandemic Agreement."
Bruce Pardy has written some very important articles and I recently had the opportunity to have an in depth conversation with him.
This information is EXTREMELY important.
Please watch the video below…
If you live in Canada, sign the Canadian Petition and spread the word:
If you live somewhere other than Canada, copy the Canadian Petition and adapt it for your country and contact me for assistance.
Proposal for negotiating text of the WHO Pandemic Agreement:
https://apps.who.int/gb/inb/pdf_files/inb7/A_INB7_3-en.pdf
Proposed amendments to the International Health Regulations
https://apps.who.int/gb/wgihr/pdf_files/wgihr2/A_WGIHR2_6-en.pdf
Bruce Pardy’s articles…
https://brownstone.org/articles/the-whos-managerial-gambit/
https://brownstone.org/articles/the-who-and-phony-international-law/
Contact Bruce Pardy…
https://law.queensu.ca/directory/bruce-pardy
https://FreeNorthDeclaration.ca
Canada’s Approach to the Treaty-Making Process
https://lop.parl.ca/sites/PublicWebsite/default/en_CA/ResearchPublications/200845E
LEARN MORE…
Informed-Dissent.com
StopTheGlobalAgenda.com
ThePeoplesDeclaration.com
ExitTheWHO.org
ExitTheWHO.com
RejectTheAmendments.com
StopTheAmendments.com
StopTheWHO.com
ScrewTheWHO.com
PreventGenocide2030.org
CanadianPetition.com
MaskCharade.com
Under Development…
DemandHealthFreedom.com
DemandHealthFreedom.org
HealthFreedomBillOfRights.com
James Roguski
The old system is crumbling, and we must build its replacement quickly.
If you are fed up with the government, hospital, medical, pharmaceutical, media, industrial complex and would like to help build a holistic alternative to the WHO, then feel free to contact me directly anytime.
JamesRoguski.substack.com/about
JamesRoguski.substack.com/archive
310-619-3055
All content is free to all readers.
All support is deeply appreciated.
To James Roguski: Thank you for this enlightening interview. From what I understand, our federal government in Canada will behave as though the treaty is legally binding, in the same way a contract is legally binding because you have the ability to take another to court & to force the obligations of the contract. However, this is not the case when it comes to the world health organization and agreements. These agreements/treaties or whatever are not legally binding in the same way a domestic contract is legally binding because there is no recourse if a country does not comply. Therefore, the federal government will be taking advantage of all the people who are in the dark regarding this whole matter. I get that. What I can't figure out is WHY does the government want to impose drastic restrictions, such as lockdowns, social distancing, etc. when they are not effective and do more harm than good? Would love to hear your thoughts on this. Thank you very much.
I live in Australia.
According to what was said in this interview about the IHR and Pandemic Treaty/Accord, if passed, they are not necessarily binding on nations according to international law. This does not appear to be the case in Australia.
Libby Klein in her substack entitled ‘What decision making role will the Australian Parliament have in relation to the proposed IHR amendments’ (https://open.substack.com/pub/libbyklein/p/what-decision-making-role-will-the?r=tcjjj&utm_medium=ios&utm_campaign=post) has suggested that the Australian Parliament will not be asked to pass any necessary implementing legislation to follow the WHO’s recommendations; they will be obliged to follow them.
This is because “sections 477 and 478 of the Biosecurity Act 2015 already give the government power to make public health orders in order to implement World Health Organisation recommendations, even if this is not required for public safety of Australians.” So there’s no legislation that needs passing in order for us to implement this power transfer into Australian law.
‘The government’s Explanatory Memorandum for the Bill which became the Biosecurity Act 2015 clearly states the intention was to enable Australia to comply with our international legal obligations including the International Health Regulations:
“Meeting Australia's international obligations
The Bill allows for the management of biosecurity risks in a manner that is consistent with
Australia's international obligations. This includes obligations under the World Trade Organization Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures 1994 (SPS Agreement), the World Health Organization
International Health Regulations 2005(International Health Regulations), and the Convention on
Biological Diversity 1992 (Biodiversity Convention)”.
‘Now that “recommendations” are to become binding, Australia finds itself in the bizarre position of its parliament having to pass legislation in order to avoid becoming indentured to the WHO. This is a magic trick! It’s not just that no legislation needs to be passed by the Australian parliament, for Australia to become legally bound to follow the WHO’s binding public health recommendations during a pandemic. On the contrary, Australia’s parliament would need to proactively amend the Biosecurity Act to remove the power to follow the WHO’s recommendations. (Or take the simpler approach of just rejecting the IHR amendments in the first place to avoid the problem.)’