The David Knight Show - INTERVIEW James Roguski — UPDATE on WHO Rules/Treaty Current Status

Episode Date: April 10, 2024

James Roguski, JamesRoguski.substack.com, ExitTheWHO.org (Global), ExitTheWho.com (USA)The WHO Pandemic Treaty & IHR are constantly changing with infighting between different groups. What are the goals of different groups?What are the competing interests?What is the current status?How can we block it?Find out more about the show and where you can watch it at TheDavidKnightShow.comIf you would like to support the show and our family please consider subscribing monthly here: SubscribeStar https://www.subscribestar.com/the-david-knight-showOr you can send a donation throughMail: David Knight POB 994 Kodak, TN 37764Zelle: @[e-mail] App at: $davidknightshowBTC to: bc1qkuec29hkuye4xse9unh7nptvu3y9qmv24vanh7Money is only what YOU hold: Go to DavidKnight.gold for great deals on physical gold/silverFor 10% off Gerald Celente's prescient Trends Journal, go to TrendsJournal.com and enter the code KNIGHTBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-david-knight-show--2653468/support.

All right, welcome back. And joining us now is James Roguski. You can find him on Substack at James Roguski. That's R-O-G-U-S-K-I, jamesroguski.substack.com. And I wanted to get him on. As I said earlier in the program, nobody has – he was the first person really to alert everybody to what was going on with the who the so-called pandemic treaty and then uh the second document that

they're using to kind of muddy the water uh which appears to be the more dangerous document the international health regulations so i wanted to get an update from james about what is going on with this as well as people pushing back with it, because they keep doing the same things. It's very similar what they do with these different tactics. And so here we've got another, yet another so-called document, global document that they're going to claim gives them some kind of a legal mandate to control us. So joining us now is James Roguski. Thank you for joining us, James.

Good to have you back on. David, thanks for having me. You know, I think you were the very first person to give me an opportunity to have a, you know, a platform to share this with probably about two years ago now. Yeah. And, um, you know, I actually want to start off by, um, talking about the image behind you with all the trees, because I think I can give an analogy to what is really going on. So let me see if I can paint a mental picture. Will we be able to see the forest for the trees? Exactly, that's the other one.

If you could imagine walking down the little lane there in sort of a wooded area with your dog, and your dog breaks off leash and sees a squirrel and goes and chases a squirrel up one of those trees. And you notice that the squirrel went up to the top and was going across the tree tops, and was way on the other side of the woods and your dog is still barking up the tree that he saw. Okay, this is what we're dealing with right now okay um a slightly different analogy if you can imagine being in a contract

negotiations and you're you're looking for a job and you put your demands down you know somebody wants to hire you and you want a certain wage and you want vacation and you want healthcare, you want benefits. And, and, you know, you throw in there a couple of things like, well, I want to use the company Maserati and the company yacht. And, you know, I want to have, you know, 20 personal assistants and all these many other things. Negotiations often start out with some crazy demands that, you know, if nobody's paying attention and you sign off on it and it's given, wow, that was great. I never expected to get those crazy, crazy things. But then, you know, at the end, when it's push comes to shove and you got to make a decision and sign the contract, you go, well, okay, I'll do without the Maserati, but I want all these

other basic things. This is what's going on. I don't know if people watched the TV show from a decade or so ago. I didn't really watch it, but I know about it. It was called Punk'd, right? Everybody's getting punk'd. Oh, look over here. Look over here. There's a squirrel. Look at these horrible, horrible things. But what's really going on in the background nobody's paying attention to so you know there's a lot of decoys being pushed around a lot of things a lot of things that were in the documents when we first talked two years ago there are a lot of things that were in the documents a year ago four months four weeks ago, I published a leaked version of the negotiating text of the amendments. I thought I found the holy grail. I was actually looking for a new version of the other document,

the quote-unquote treaty, and one of the local Geneva civil society organizations, nonprofit, whatever, you know, one of the insiders who has a seat at the table made the mistake of publishing something that they weren't really supposed to publish. I was, you know, blessed by the heavens to stumble upon it. I republished it and they quickly took theirs down because somebody must have said, hey, you let it out. What are you doing? And David, I might as well have dropped it into a black hole. People still want to look at the old documents. They're still barking up the wrong tree, chasing the old squirrel who's long gone. And last week, I published, I should say, I republished, because of all places, Politico was the first one to leak it, a leaked version of the other document, the amendment. And we can talk about both of these things. I'd like to get

into just a little bit of a detail about the secrecy behind them. When I published the secret version, or I should say again, republished the secret version of the new proposed treaty, it was almost a year to the day that I published an article about someone that most people probably don't even know, Ambassador Pamela Hamamoto. She went to the same school in Hawaii as Obama, so make of that what you wish. But she was nominated over a year ago in October of 2022, I think it was, to be the lead negotiator for this pandemic treaty. And over a year ago, the Chinese delegate stood up in their April meeting in 2023 and said, we want, meaning China, we want these negotiations to be secret in the sense that we don't want to publish the terms that each nation wants to put into the agreement. And who stood up to second the motion other than Ambassador Pamela Hamamoto from the United States saying, yeah, yeah, yeah, let's keep this all under wraps and keep it secret.

Well, the documents that leaked out that I republished have the edits of this nation said that they want to change this, and that nation says that they want to change the other thing. So, you know, the secret is out. And there's a very good reason why they don't want anyone to know what each nation is saying. Because despite what everyone is saying, you know, in the alternative media about the old squirrel that ran up the tree and is long gone with the documents from well over a year ago, the nations are having a really difficult time. So the last meeting that was supposed to be for the amendments was in December. When they set up their original schedule, they were going to be done the first week of December. They were going to hand over their

package of amendments to the International Health Regulations Review Committee. And it was supposed to be submitted before January 27th of this year, 2024. Well, in October, I reported that their co-chair said, we're not going to make our deadline. They know that they were not able to reach agreement. Invite 194 delegates from nations around the world over to your house for a pizza party and see how long it takes to figure out what they want on their pizza. And let me ask you that. You saw some of the edits and it said some of, you know, this is what one nation wants, this is what another one wants. What are the

points of disagreement that they can't come to consensus on? Well, we'll talk about the two separate documents because there's two separate things going on in there. And in the amendments, they were supposed to be done by December, were supposed to be public four months in advance of the May meeting. And so what end up popping up in there that is not in the original documents is they want to strengthen the ability of nations to quarantine foreign travelers who are traveling internationally. Now, we could go way down the rabbit hole, but just imagine the irony and the hypocrisy of having an open southern border. And you're negotiating to, this is often confused, so I'm going to take my time and try to be very precise. This is not the WHO saying that the nations have to do this, that, or the other. This is a gentleman's agreement amongst 196 nations in the IHR, where they are essentially

saying, well, we know that we can't force our people to do jabs or you know drugs or you know quarantine or all those sort of things but we have all of the right in the world to do it to all of the members of the other 195 nations we can abuse foreigners who want to come into the country if you're familiar with the story with novak djojkovic the tennis player yeah his name is Novak, but he's living up to it because he wouldn't get the vaccine. And so he wasn't allowed in to play. I think it was the US Open and other countries. I think Australia wouldn't let him in, not just because he wasn't jabbed, but because he wasn't a citizen. His rights are not protected by our Bill of Rights.

And so there's a lot of talk going around right now. People are trying to get states to pass resolutions or laws saying, oh, the WHO doesn't have jurisdiction in Louisiana, right? There's a Senate Bill 133. Well, no shit, Sherlock, right? Of course, the WHO doesn't have jurisdiction in any state in the union. That isn't the issue. There's no state law that is going to protect you when if you were from Louisiana, you go on a Caribbean cruise, and you want to disembark in the Bahamas and the Bahamas say, well, you know, we're going to institute our quarantine on your ship because, you know, somebody didn't pass a rapid antigen test and there might be some scary disease on board. Everyone is barking up, you know, the tree on the left and they're sneaking in stuff that nobody's paying any attention to and there's a certain symmetry to that to what happened with us between the federal government and the states in 2020 and you go back and you look at after the anthrax

attack a week after 9-11 which is two months after their dark winter simulation but then they put out two months later after the anthrax attack, they put out some model state health legislation. And they said, here's what, if we declare there's a pandemic, here's what we would like for you to put into law so that you can implement this at the state level. And so after all this stuff runs, you know, we hear from people trying to make excuses for Trump or trying to make excuses for Fauci or Fauci making excuses for himself.

I didn't order anybody to do anything. I don't have that power. I made recommendations. And, of course, we've got fiat currency to back up our fiat orders and flood them with cash, declare an emergency, flood them with cash, and let the rest of the stuff happen. It's going to be, as you pointed out, it's going to be a very subtle way that they get exactly what they want uh whether they do it with the international stuff one thing that concerns me is you're pointing out the the hypocrisy the absurdity of having a wide open uh southern border and it's got a lot of different issues with that uh but one of the problems is a lot

of people who oppose that are coming after it from the disease standpoint and saying oh you know we've got all these people coming in with measles and all the rest of the stuff. We've got to lock that down and we have to have stricter controls. And that kind of thing can backfire just like, you know, oh, well, we've got all these people coming in that are illegal aliens. So all of you need to get an I.D. all of you need to get some kind of a vaccine I.D. or permit or something like that, because we've got people coming in from the border. So they can use things like that to push their agenda. And we've got to be careful that we don't become suckers for that, and that we take a look at what the longer-term agenda is, I think. What do you think?

Dave, I'm going to have to charge you rent for taking up residence inside my head. Take the words right out of my mouth. That's exactly the point. What happened with the decoy, with the original documents, were language that was convoluted because it came primarily from Bangladesh and India. India, I can still remember, I was sitting right where I'm sitting right now when I read the document for the first time, and India had proposed a change to Article 3. They proposed crossing out language that is currently in the international health regulations. They would cross out the words that said the regulations have to be implemented with full respect for the dignity, human rights, and fundamental freedoms of people.

They would cross that out. Well, I remember my jaw hanging open going, oh, well, that's crazy. And I pushed my jaw back up and it came right back down. And I'm like, okay, this is insane. There's no way in oh wait a minute that's a decoy yeah that's them saying oh look over here and so you got to dig in deeper it's like well what are we not looking at and so i've spoken to people in india and at some point they said oh that was just a misunderstanding. We've retracted that.

Okay. Now, Bangladesh and the African nations, the reason for these negotiations, they called for them on December 1st, 2021. It's not the WHO said, we want to take over the world. It's the relatively poor nations we're dealing with something that you know you have to erase the blackboard of your mind and forget everything you've talked about and everything you know because that's going to get in the way you've got to let yourself be stupid for a moment and here's what is actually going on. In the end of 2021, after 2020 and COVID, and then a year of everybody getting jabbed, like that was going to save the world. The relatively poor nations, think about, you know, South Africa and Botswana, they identified Omicron, and they handed over the genetic sequences, just like the WHIV-1 was handed over.

Think about that genetic sequence and how many hundreds of billions of dollars that data file was worth. It's the new gold rush. They turned that into Pfizer, Moderna, AstraZeneca, everybody else, billions of dollars. So when South Africa and Botswana handed over Omicron's sequence, believe about vaccines or rather viruses and terrain theory, whatever you want, it is undeniable that there was a digital file that was said to be this new variant. Well, they were not happy because they were greeted with travel restrictions, hurt their economy. And then they watched Pfizer and Moderna turn that into a couple of more billion dollars by putting it into the booster. It says in the treaty principles that sovereignty includes sovereign control over biological resources.

In the amendments, they said, you're not getting any more sequences unless we share in the benefits. They want to create what they call a pathogen access benefit sharing system. We'll give you our biological weapons data. You could go turn it into drugs and jams, but you're going to have to share the profits with us. So this is, you know, the treaty is a corrupt business deal. I've dubbed it the new OPEC. I'm sure you're familiar, the oil producing and exporting countries. The new OPEC is the Organization of Pandemic Emergency Corporations. What they want with the treaty is $30 billion a year coming from nations in the global North because they're the

ones with the money or they're the ones who know how to print money or digitally create money they want to put that into a fund that would be governed by either the who or most likely the conference of the parties which is should be reminiscent of you know the framework convention for climate change you you sign on to a framework empty convention and then you have a bunch of unelected bureaucrats have a party once a year get together and decide the fate of the world and since you signed on to the blank agreement whatever they decide you know somehow finds its way into your local laws they want to distribute up to 30 billion dollars a year to go looking for pathogens you know they they refer to them as pathogens with pandemic potential whenever i hear that i hear pathogens

with pandemic profiteering potential yeah so they they set up they want to set up a WHO-coordinated laboratory network so that you have a Wuhan Institute of Virology on every street corner, bring in your pathogens that you find in your septic system or your sewage treatment, wastewater. The CDC is monitoring wastewater around the country. Just go look it up, wastewater surveillance, CDC. All around the world just go look it up you know wastewater surveillance cdc um all around the world they're doing that they're they're taking black water out of the bathrooms in airplanes when international flights come in looking for pathogens

they might want they might want to check your your chicken coop or your pigsty or your you know dog or cat stool sample when you go to the veterinarian's office, because you typically find pathogens in excrement. They might need to go to the local bat cave and get some guano to bring into the lab so that they can find a sequence that could be turned into money, make some products. And then in the amendments, currently people maybe are aware that the Director General can declare what's called a public health emergency of international concern, PHEIC, or fake. You can't pick this stuff up. You can declare a fake. That's in the international Health Regulations from 2005.

Well, what they're adding with this latest leaked version of the amendments is an early action alert, which has fewer requirements than the zero requirements to declare a fake, just if he wants to. So I call that a pre-fake. And then he can also declare a post-fake, which is called a pandemic emergency. compliant local officials who will attempt to coerce and overstep their authority and do some kind of, you know, fear mongering and say, oh, we found this pathogen. Oh, one bird died in a flock of a million and we cranked up the PCR test to a hundred and, you know, they had bird flu. We got to kill all your birds or we got to jab all your people or we got to, you know, they had bird flu, we got to kill all your birds, or we got to jab all your people, or we got to, you know, put you in quarantine, or whatever it might be. If you keep falling for the hypnosis psychological operation from the World Hypnosis Organization, the WHO, they're going to keep doing it because it's really, really profitable. And the treaty is essentially a trade deal it is constitutional now this hurts people's

heads i know article one section three i'm sorry article one section eight clause three it's the commerce clause the federal government was given the enumerated authority by the original states to regulate international commerce with foreign nations. So if we want to give billions of dollars to the WHO to redistribute to oligarchs in the third world who are going to be building laboratories and testing equipment and MRNA manufacturing facilities so that they can get in on the deal to scare people and make products to jam the black and brown people that the big pharma missed the first time around.

Is that how you would prevent the next pandemic? Or is that how you would set up you know a racketeering organization you know a crime syndicate to profiteer from the next scary thing well do you recall i'm sure you you probably do event 201 oh yeah yeah okay the same group that did event 201 in october of 2019. In October of 2022, same group put on catastrophic contagion. And what they were simulating in their tabletop exercise was an outbreak of an enterovirus that hits children in, of all places, eastern Venezuela. I don't know if you've reported on it, but you might want to pay attention to east, East, Eastern Venezuela, which is the country of Guyana. That Venezuela has been rumbling that they claim to have annexed two-thirds of Guyana.

I wonder why. For the oil, yeah. Could it be that in the Caribbean off the coast, there's all kinds of oil. Well, interestingly enough, the planned, or I should say the simulated outbreak scheduled for 2025 is in Eastern Venezuela, catastrophic contagion. So I noticed, and this is back in October of 2022, that they neglected to reserve the domain name, catastrophic contagion.com. So I'm the proud owner of catastrophic contagion.com. If anybody wants to know what they're planning for 2025, go, go check it out. And so I think it's amazing, you know, that they're still doing these germ games

because they got away with it. You know, the first one, two months before-11, and they've done one every year, and they're still doing it after this COVID routine, still doing their annual germ games, and it's usual suspects. It's usually Johns Hopkins and people from the CIA, people from DARPA, BARDA, all these different people there. They're all there, still doing the same germ game. And so they know where and when and what is going to happen.

And so the idea is they want to have the WHO be in charge of the global distribution and logistics network. at the World Government Summit and proudly said that they have a 20,000 square meter distribution hub in Dubai. That's about four football fields. So if you were the godfather of pandemic prevention preparedness and response, and you had four football fields in each of your six regions that you had to fill up with pandemic related products. Who do you think is going to get those contracts, Dave? Oh, yeah. You think they're going out to bid or do you think your cronies who are sitting around the table trying to get a piece of the pie?

Why do you think all of the small nations want this agreement to go through? It's because they want a piece of a multi-billion dollar pie. Now I want to ask you a rhetorical question. It's a trick question and I don't want to mess with your head. I'll give you the right answer from my opinion. The right answer is none of the above, right? Would you rather have the WHO set up a search and exploration mission with billions of dollars looking for pathogens with pandemic potential to bring into the WHO coordinated laboratory network so they can run

it through the pathogen access and benefit sharing system. So whoever found the pathogen gets some of the profits when they ease the regulatory restrictions and all these drugs and jabs get put into play real quick. And then they could distribute all of the products and have their leader be the one who could declare a pre-fake, a fake, or a post-fake? Or option B, would you rather have the United States Defense Department pledge $5 billion over the next five years in the December 2022 National Defense Authorization Act to do pretty much the same thing. And in 2023, they doled out about $340 million to 37 countries around the nation to start building, you know, the bio labs in there were 12. Oh, imagine that 12

Caribbean countries were first on the list. Maybe that's connected to catastrophic contagion, and others in Africa, South America, and so forth. Would you prefer to have the WHO in charge of the research, development, distribution, and proliferation of biological weapons, or do you think that we should keep that as part of the United States Defense Department. Yeah, exactly. Yeah, you're right. None of the above. It is very dangerous. And, you know, let me, before we run out of time, we talk about these treaties, and this

is one of the reasons why it's been so concerning to me. You know, we go back and we look at the Paris Climate Accord, for example, on the climate side. When they put this thing together, all these different nations get together at their conference, you know, the cop, whatever the number was. And John Kerry comes back and says, yeah, Obama and I self-ratified that, you know. Well, that's not what the Constitution says. So all the people who think that, well, we got to have something ratified here, that's not the way they're going to use it. They have these agreements. They say, well, we've agreed to this,

whether or not, whether or not they have followed any legal procedure, they will still use it. That's the key thing. And so regardless of, you know, once there's an agreement and that's, I guess the key thing is,

well, not these countries can come to an agreement, but once they do come to an agreement, then what the United states government will do is say well that's it we're part of that treaty and nobody in the senate ever no republican not mitch mcconnell not ran paul nobody ever came back and said you know we never had a vote on the paris climate accord uh that was supposedly ratified by john kerry by himself secretary of state but that's not how this works. Nobody ever called their bluff.

And they're not going to call the bluff on anything that's coming out of this World Health Organization negotiation either, are they? I completely agree with you. But it's actually even worse than that. You can imagine. So let me try to explain. I know we've got maybe 10 minutes. When we first met, when you first had me on two years ago,

what I was talking about then, what had happened, what I had uncovered was after the nations on December 1st, 2021, said that they wanted the WHO to oversee negotiations for equitable access to pandemic related products okay we don't want to give you our our pathogens anymore that's a sovereign resource you guys aren't paying us for all the money you're making after the nations said that and and they said that they wanted to have you know manufacturing be distributed all around the world. The Biden administration, a month and a half later in January of 2022,

submitted amendments to the international health regulations, putting stricter requirements on nations. And the problem that they have and they still have is there's very strict, you know, four nations shall do this and shall do that and shall do the other thing. All of the comments or suggested edits from the United States and the EU are like, well, you guys have to do what we want you to do. But, you know, the shalls, right, it's a shall game. When you see the word shall in the document, it means you must, unless there's a qualifier. And so for all of the requirements on big pharma, it's like you

shall consider making your contracts transparent. You shall share intellectual property if you kind of want to, right? You got to look at the qualifiers. But what happened in 2022 is the Biden administration was planning ahead, got to give them a little credit. They were planning ahead saying, well, any amendments in the future, rather than going into effect in 24 months, they wanted to shorten it down to six. And if you look at the calendar, if the assembly ends on June 1st, six months from June 1st is still in the Biden administration. If it was 24 months or whatever, that would go into whoever's going to be the next president. And so they were trying to speed this process up so that they could ram through something in the future.

Well, the poor nations looked at that and they said, no, not doing it, not going to have it, mostly about the requirements. And then what happened is in violation of Article 55, which it should be called the anti-Nancy Pelosi rule, because they say that any amendments have to have four months advance notice so the deadline you know you can't just real you know roll the bill in thousand page you know obamacare and and nancy famously said oh just vote for it you can read it later yeah yeah you got 48 hours to decide what you want with this thing. Right. So in the middle of the 2022 assembly, the United States, the United Kingdom, European union, handful of other countries illegitimately submitted new

amendments to be considered. And four days later, the world health organization published a document that said they had adopted these amendments. Well, little problem. They didn't bother to vote. They just said they were adopted. Now, I know we have election integrity issues in the United States. They at least pretend to have them. We're at that point now yeah it says it says in the document

that it's certified by their legal counsel and then down on the bottom it said it happened in their eighth plenary session well you could go watch the eighth session and they never even talked about it so 18 months to the day after that in on november 28, 2023, we did get a dozen members of the European Parliament to write a letter to Tedros and say, you know, we see these amendments and, you know, we got a deadline to reject them, but there's no proof that you ever voted. These are all null and void. Rob Roos, who's the member of the European Parliament, and Philippe Crusoe, who's a lawyer in Switzerland, I'm talking to him all the time, they flew to the United States

and presented this to Senator Ron Johnson at his last meeting that he had about a month or so ago. And it was a collective, eh, whatever. And so the issue here is it's a it's a boys club meaning the members of each nation the delegates they decide what the rules are amongst themselves it's not the who saying you have to do this and so if all of the nations agree to have stricter quarantine requirements on foreign travelers who are coming in legitimately, and they say, well, we'll abuse your people, and you abuse ours. That way, we can still be within our constitution, but we get planet lockdown whenever we want it because people are going to be afraid to travel they don't want to sit in quarantine and get forced jab yeah so this game

is far more sophisticated everybody wants a simple answer well it's very similar what you're talking about is very similar to what they already do with their intelligence agencies the five eyes for example you know the five english-speaking countries the us uk canada australia new zealand they will say well you know we can't legitimately spy on our own people but you can and then you can give us that information and so it's the same thing as if they were you know they they they uh is like you point out it's like a club a cartel a mafia you know they come up with these little workarounds that are just semantics really yep yep and and so um there's a lot of panic and fear-mongering and there's i i heard a little bit before we started this interview and if if what is going on in the world is you know analogous to a

thousand piece jigsaw puzzle and maybe the treaty and the amendments and who are like one or two pieces in that puzzle okay people are rightfully talking about central bank digital currency and digital id and geo engineering and the pact for the future and the sustainable development goals and all these many many many things but then they're saying all of that is in the treaty it's like well you know the treaty is a piece of the puzzle and it is connected to all of those things but you do yourself a disservice by quoting you know horrible things about some other aspect of what these demons are doing. And when people go to look in the treaty, you're not going to find anything in the treaty that is an attack on national sovereignty. That's a lovely red herring. It's not an attack on national sovereignty.

It's actually strengthening national sovereignty so that nations can abuse individuals. Yeah. And very similar to what we saw, again, between the feds and the states that actually strengthen. Here's some legislation, strengthen your authority, because at some point in the future, we're going to tell you there's a pandemic and we'll give you some money if you do this stuff. But you're going to be the ones who get to do this. It's going to be your state and local public health officials that are going to be able to do this. We'll help you with that.

But yeah, it's very interesting how they have set this thing up. They will keep these entities that are around now that everybody likes so much. We've got our flags and we've got our national anthems and we've got our official state bird or whatever and they'll keep these different artifacts around so people have this sense of continuity and yet the reality is is that it's control from top to bottom uh and and they're all kind of kind of on this but we won't see like a global government that is set up over here it'll just be this global governance network of people who are kind of, you

know, working behind the scenes to make sure they're all on the same page, I think. To summarize it in a sentence, the local tyrants who abused you over the last four and a half years didn't need any amendments to the international health regulations, and they didn't need any stinking pandemic treaty to overstep their authority and trick you and coerce you and hypnotize you and and and just you know abuse you so those local issues are not going to be solved by a little one paragraph state resolution or state law that says oh the who doesn't have any jurisdiction here i want to give a shout out to katherine watt if you haven't met her we should introduce you

katherine writes bailiwicknews.substack.com b-a-i-l-i-w-i-c-k news um you know like a bailiwick like in england like the trees behind you um She's put forth a sample state legislation to repeal all these crazy laws and actually address, you know, why is it that the laws have been corrupted to take away liability from companies that produce products that are harmful and all of the emergency rules, you know, give dictatorial powers. So if you want to work on a state-by-state basis, by all means, give me a phone call. 310-619-3055.

It's not easy. It's not, oh, they can't touch us. They're not the ones who abused you the first time. It's your local officials and your local laws. In the amendments, they want to strengthen international travel restriction quarantines and make the process of quarantining people and have a pre-fake to add to the fake and a post-fake. But the treaty is just a bunch of mob bosses trying to set up a cartel to go looking for pathogens with pandemic profiteering potential so they can scare the bejeebers out of you again and again and again and because there's going to be so much money they'll they'll financially incentivize it again you know that's the other part of it people don't realize that

and you're right you got to go back and remove remove a lot of this legislation that was put in. A lot of it was put in at the end of 2001 in response to the anthrax thing. That's the stuff that's got to be pulled out. I keep telling everybody their motto for the longest time has been think globally, act locally. So we've got to cut off those hooks that they've got into us at the local level. You're exactly right. That's how it'll happen. That's where the rubber meets the road. And that's really where the work needs to be done. And we need to root that out because they'll do it again as long as they've got their hooks in us. And it'll be financially driven with the money that

is there. That's one of the things, the key things that they're working on right now with the who is is that money aspect now you've also got exit the who.org and uh there is a i said i'm going to charge you rent you're inside my head those are the next words out of my mouth good um exit the who.org is an activist toolbox okay um i've connected to people in dozens of countries around the world obviously including the united states if you go to exit the who.com that's dedicated specifically to the united states um andy biggs representative andy biggs from arizona um well over a year ago put forth hr 79 which is the with um who act, very simple page and a half, stop giving him money, tell him we're leaving and get out of here. When a relationship has gone so bad, you know, sometimes you just need to get divorced. And so we need to exit the who,

you know, I think we need to go further and abolish the who, but if you go to exitthewho.org, exitthewho.com, and my favorite, if you want to take action, record a little video of your opinion about this, put it out on the internet. I've collected several hundred videos along those lines, and they can all be found on screwthewho.com. So have a little fun with it. You know, if you don't, if, if you don't speak up, you're not doing your job. Absolutely. Absolutely.

Exit the who.com for the USA information, exit the who.org for world information, uh, screw the who. Uh, and, uh, also you can find, uh,

James Roguski at a sub stack and his last name is R-O-G-U-S-K-I. Thank you so much, James, for the hard work that you do. You've been on this like a bulldog for a long time. Thank you very much. Everyone have a great day. Thank you. Thank you. Let me tell you, the David Knight Show, you can listen to with your ears.

You can even watch it by using your eyes. In fact, if you can hear me, that means you're listening to the David Knight Show right now. Yeah.

Good job. And you want to know something else? You can find all the links to everywhere to watch or listen to the show at thedavidknightshow.com

That's a website.