Will Dove  00:00 It's only been a month since my last interview with James Roguski, who is undoubtedly the world's top researcher keeping tabs on the World Health Organization. In our last interview, titled WHO Proposed Amendments Null and Void, James revealed how the World Health Organization is violating their own rules in the push to enact the over 300 amendments to the International Health Regulations. For those who recall that interview, the WHO did indeed miss the January 27th deadline to submit the full list of amendments to voting members and are in contravention of their own Article 55. But that's only the first crack in their rapidly crumbling facade. As you are watching this, the Intergovernmental Negotiating Body of the WHO is in closed door meetings in Geneva, to discuss the Proposal for Negotiating Text of the WHO Pandemic Agreement, a legal document submitted by some 70 member countries, not to ensure better health care for their citizens. But because those governments want a bigger piece of the Big Pharma pie. And when they don't get it, and it looks very much like they won't, they'll have no reason to continue to act as distributors for Big Pharma. And that is hardly the WHO's only problem. In this interim update while we wait for the outcome of the World Health Organization's 77th annual general meeting in April, James exposes the infighting which is threatening to reveal to the world that the WHO is nothing more than the international marketing arm for Big Pharma, part of a global crime syndicate that hides their racketeering behind the thin and very unconvincing veil of protecting people's health, while earning billions selling drugs that don't work, to people who don't need them. James, it's a pleasure to have you back on the show.   James Roguski  02:21 Thanks for having me, I really appreciate the opportunity to share some info with you and your audience.   Will Dove  02:25 I really appreciate that you reached out to me last week, to let me know that you had an update and what the WHO is up to. You are undoubtedly the number one person in the world, keeping an eye on what these people are doing. So let's get right into that. But just before we do, I think we need to do a little update on what we spoke about back in January, where we were talking about the International Health Regulations and the deadline for those being negotiated beginning May 27th, which under Article 55, of the WHO charter whatever, says they have to give four months notice to all participants of what these amendments to the IHR would be, which would have been by January 27th. And I believe you said they missed it. So they're now in intervention of their own article.   James Roguski  03:14 Yeah, they knew they were going to miss it. They told us they were going to miss it, they missed it. They're still going full steam ahead as if the rules don't matter. And we the people need to spread the word about that, you know, hashtag enforced Article 55. You can get all the information, just you know, take a look at all of that, that's been published already. They really don't seem to care because there isn't really a court system to control them. You can't you know, pull them in the small claims court and go, hey, you know, what is it that you're doing here? And so it's very, very clear, they just steamrolled right past January 27th. They had meetings early in February, they're having meetings again in March and April. We shall see if they are able to reach an agreement. But whatever they may be doing, they should be shooting for 2025 because they missed the deadline. And see that causes many, many issues because they did present the originally proposed amendments, all the way back that were submitted in September of 2022. They kept them sacred for a couple of months, but then they made it public in December. So what everyone may be talking about, if they're talking about amendments to the International Health Regulations may have changed. There's been a year's worth of negotiations. One would have to think that you know, some things have changed. The main thing that they're talking about is the sticking point, you know, how do they distribute all this money and all the products and all that sort of stuff? But we're gonna put those amendments to the International Health Regulations aside, it's obviously a very important issue. But the news that I, you know, reached out to you about has to do with the separate track of negotiations for a new agreement. Many people, it's got so many names, it's had like six or seven or eight different versions, every time they come out, it's got a different name. Most people call it the Pandemic Treaty. So I put all this information together on stopthetreaty.org. If you go to stopthetreaty.com, you'll go to a good place. That's not the place I'm talking about, you can certainly look at what they're doing. But if you go to stopthetreaty.org, we can almost summarize our interview today, by just a couple of sentences, go there, and read the damn document. Okay, what we're doing right now is talking and we're going to try to simplify it for everybody. But if you tell somebody that you heard me say something, that's the definition of hearsay. And then you tell somebody who tells somebody who tells somebody by the time it comes back around, it's totally mangled. Go there, read the documents and see for yourself the corruption that these negotiating agreements could put into legally binding international law. And so love to dive into the details on that page, there's a little flyer, and there's the top 12 reasons that hopefully will just summarize for people to give you an idea of what's really going on here. So number one, it's been called, you know, they had a working draft, a conceptual zero draft, zero draft, a bureau's text, a compilation text, the latest version in October, and they're kind of still calling it this now, is the Proposal for Negotiating Text of the WHO Pandemic Agreement. They originally called it the WHO CA+, I refer to that as the WHO CA+, because I think they're smoking something if they think they're gonna, you know, slip this past us. It's really a framework invention. Now, that's what they said out of the gate, when they came out with their first reports years ago, they recommended that all of the nations agree to a framework convention for pandemic prevention, preparedness and response. Well, a couple of years ago, I realized that the WHO had previously done a framework convention for tobacco control, go look it up. And that's about 20 years ago, it's the only other agreement that they've come to under Article 19 of their constitution. Well, a couple of years ago, I downloaded that document, and I compared it to what they were negotiating. And it was as if they just, you know, copied, cut and pasted the framework of it, and put in words about pandemics rather than tobacco. The text and the font, I mean, they just, they're doing a framework convention, it's very, very clear. Now, simple thing to refer to, is the framework convention for climate change. Most people are unaware that over 30 years ago in 1992, through the United Nations, pretty much every nation on the planet signed on to that, you know, our US Congress gave two thirds consent, and signed on to a framework. Now, the danger with that is they create a Conference of the Parties, which is number two on the list here. A whole new bureaucracy of unelected people that go to this yearly conference, thus, whatever nations are party to the framework, they have a Conference of the Parties (COP), and last December they had Conference of the Parties 28 (COP 28). 80,000 people I'm told went to that meeting, to decide you're in my future in regards to climate change. Well, if you love how that's working out, then maybe you're in support of having a framework convention for pandemic prevention, preparedness and response. Me personally, I don't think so. I don't think it's a good idea to set up another bureaucracy, throw billions of dollars at them because they said they wanted $30 billion a year and an emergency fund of 100 billion. What are they going to do with that money? Where's the accountability? What are they diverting that money from? Where's it coming from? Who's paying for it and to whom is it going to be given? You're not going to find those details. You're not going to find an audit trail, you're not going to find, you know, criteria for getting contracts. One of the things that Tedros said in a recent speech was that the WHO has at least one facility in Dubai, that's 20,000 square meters. Do the math and figure out, you know, how to compare that to something you can comprehend, and then try to figure out how much fun it would be for you and your friends, to pass out all the contracts to fill that large of a distribution center with pandemic related products. The organized crime syndicate that they're trying to craft into international law is absolutely astronomical. You know, he would decide, the WHO would decide what to stockpile for a future pandemic? Wow, that's a good business model. And that's exactly what this is.   Will Dove  11:06 Yes. I'd like to, I'm probably going to, this is probably going to be painful for you, James. But I'm going to try to summarize for our viewers very, very simply, what this negotiating text is. It is essentially the agreement between the participating countries that lays out who, what are the responsibilities of the parties? What do they get? And who's going to pay for it? Now, I know that's a very simplified way of expressing it, because there's an, it is a huge document, I looked at it, and it goes on and on and on and on. But I think at its core that, is that a fairly decent description of what it is.   James Roguski  11:40 That's pretty much describing almost any business deal going. Yeah.   Will Dove  11:43 Exactly. It's just a business deal. It's always, it's a contract between the countries that are participating.   James Roguski  11:49 Exactly, exactly.   Will Dove  11:50 And so now that we've established that, let's get to the major problem that they're looking at right now and that's the African nations. And I'm gonna let you explain that, because it's honestly when I read it on your substack, I thought, well, this is beautiful. They can be shooting themselves, they can they can torpedo the entire thing, just with this one problem. If they don't handle it right.   James Roguski  12:14 Well, it is the problem. And it was pretty much the next thing on the list that I was going to talk about, which is called a Pathogen Access and Benefit Sharing System. Now, my take on this is that is suspiciously close to the proliferation of biological weapons.   Will Dove  12:36 Thank you for saying that, I was going to bring that up, because that's exactly what it sounds like to me. Why do we need an agreement for them to be sharing pathogens?   James Roguski  12:43 And the genetic sequences and building laboratories. They want to have a WHO coordinated laboratory network, so you can't just bring the pathogens to any laboratory, you gotta bring it to the official labs. In summary, you have to go back to what happened with Omicron. Now, whatever you want to believe about genomic sequencing, and the existence of this data, the other pathogenic variant. The story that came out of South Africa and Botswana, who said they had identified a genomic sequence that didn't exist, it was totally different than everything else. Well, you gotta realize that in this document, it says that pathogens and that information is sovereign property of the nation that finds it. Now there's a precedent for that. It's the Convention on Biological Diversity. I'm familiar with this, because it used to manage a couple of Mom and Pop urban nutrition stores. And what happened in the herbal world, was pharmaceutical companies would swoop in, learn from the indigenous culture about plants and herbs and minerals and things. And take that information, take the chemicals from the plants, tweak it a little bit so they could patent it and make millions of dollars. Well, the Convention for Biological Diversity is supposed to make it be that well, if you come and you take that information, it's valuable, you got to share the profits. Now they call that Access and Benefit Sharing. Well, if you just add pathogen to the Access and Benefit Sharing, the concept is, what happened with South Africa and Botswana is they identified this new variant, they did what they felt they were obligated to do, both in the International Health Regulations and just as a good member of the international community. They shared that information freely with the world, put it into a database and everybody knew about it. But Pfizer and Moderna turned it into the boosters and made a couple of more billion dollars. And so they're going hey, wait a minute, we want a piece of that action. We gave you the raw material that Pfizer and Moderna use to put some mRNA in a jab and all kinds of other stuff, whatever. Where's our piece of the deal? And so when all of this shook out, and the African nations rejected the first pass of what happened in 2022, because ultimately some things did get pretend voted on, that's a whole another story. We can talk about that some other time. The reason why they rejected it was not the reason why most people thought. The reason why the African nations pushed back in 2022, was there wasn't anything in it for them. It was just more requirements, to do more surveillance and more reporting and more, you know, compliance, but nothing coming back in their direction. And so what people I think, have been missing about these negotiations, is the reason why these negotiations are happening is because a group of approximately 70 nations, the African nations, the WHO region of Africa is 47 nations, and a group called The Group for Equity. It's about 29 nations, there's a little bit of overlap, it's approximately 70 nations. They call for these negotiations, because they wanted equitable distribution and access to pandemic related products. Because after they gave up the genetic information, they couldn't afford and get contracts for the jabs that were made from the raw materials that they provided. Now, in this case, the raw materials is intellectual property. And the latest version of this document says, oh, no, you can't claim intellectual property, if you're giving the genetic information. So it's actually gone backwards from what they are hoping. They want intellectual property from the pharmaceutical companies and manufacturing know how and investment capital. They wouldn't be able to build out the Pharmaceutical Hospital Emergency Industrial Complex in their nations, so that if they find a pathogen, they can make the products to jab people with and turn the profit on it. And so once people realize what this is, you know, and Article 24 in here talks about having a science committee to oversee gain of function, research, and go wait a second, what we need is an agreement to outlaw gain of function research. So right there, it's only a couple of paragraphs, but right there, it's probably one of the best examples of, you guys are trying to create this market sector. You're trying to build it out, you want to go looking for pathogens, because you've realized that that genetic sequence of something that's very, very scary. May or may not be pathogenic may or may not really be deadly. But if it's played up properly, it can be turned into billions of dollars, because when people are afraid, their government steps in and throws money at the industry that walks in claiming to have the solution. Well, you know, that's the classic Galen Dialectic, create a problem, show up with the solution, but they've added the touch of, well, everybody's afraid, and so you got to throw money at us because we have the solution. Now, I have every face in the world, that your viewers can read these documents and see through what's really going on here. And understand that this is an attempt to put into internationally binding agreements and organized crime syndicate. Who's going to be writing all the contracts? Who's going to be distributing all the money? Well, that would be the governing body of the Pandemic Agreement. Well, who the heck are they? You're not going to get to vote on them. How well can, oh, wait a minute, you know, who's involved in all of these meetings? They have a list of 400 relevant stakeholders, organizations, foundations, companies, all that sort of thing. You know, this is just the, I don't know if this is gonna resonate with you, but you know, this is the group that George Carlin talks about, you know, it's he, I think he was wrong. He says, it's a big club and you ain't in it. No, it's a little club. And none of us are in it. And so, they're cutting a deal and the problem is, you've got a bunch of little one of the crime bosses, arguing with some really, really big worldwide criminal cartels and all the pharmaceutical companies and so forth, they want in on the action. And so they're having difficulties reaching an agreement. That's why they missed their deadline with the amendments. That's why they're looking for extra negotiating time with the treaty. Because the dynamic of this is that the African nations and the group for equity are the ones who demanded that an agreement be reached. They want something that the big guys are not willing to give them. And, you know, luckily, greed on one side is battling greed on the other, we need to shine light on it, and get people to understand that this is not about your health. This is about redistributing wealth. Now, they were able to jab maybe 75% of the Global North, but the Global South didn't comply quite so much. And so they see a business opportunity, they see a market sector, that, you know, if they find some Ebola, or some Zika, or whatever it may be. If they can scare people by finding some new scary pathogen, and bring it into the laboratories and control the business deal as to who gets what and how much. And then they show up with another mRNA jab and another mRNA jab, they won't get everybody. But if they get the government contracts, they don't care. If the government contracts are not under the watchful eye of any kind of, you know, audit trail. If it's the governing body of the pandemic agreement, and they meet on a yearly basis, and nobody knows who the heck they are, boy, that's why, you know, I kind of clued into just in November of 2022, when the Indonesian health minister was talking to the B20, all the business leaders. He knew that the United States was setting up the World Bank Pandemic Fund. And it's a smaller version of what the WHO is trying to do. I actually think they have FundNV, because they saw what the United States is doing and they want to do it in a bigger worldwide way. The Defense Department through the National Defense Authorization Act, which was passed in December of 2022, has allocated, pledged $5 billion over five years to build out such an infrastructure to go looking for pathogens and laboratories, and workers and all that kind of stuff. They dished out 300 and some million dollars in 2023 and they're going through the next round now, Caribbean nations, African nations, so forth. The Indonesian health minister in November before that bill was passed, he knew about it. Now, he's not a doctor. He's a former banker. And so his advice to the business leaders at the B20 was they've got this multibillion dollar fund to build out this market sector. This is a great business opportunity, go invest. And so if you're invested in testing equipment, and laboratory machinery, and anything that could loosely be called pandemic related products, you're looking at a growth industry. And that's why they say with such confidence, the next pandemic is not a question of if, it's a question of when. Because they need it to happen. Because that's their profit center. And so as long as it is profitable. Right, they're already calling it disease X, so they brought a label for it. We don't know what it is, but we know what's out there. And it's gonna be nasty when it happens, you know. We're going to go, we're going to go find it, we're gonna make a lot of money off of it.   Will Dove  23:58 Right. So I want to back up and cover it in more details, several things that you've talked about the last few minutes. Let's go back to these African nations, the equity nations that are part of that. So I suppose it's 70 somewhat and you bet you gave a fantastic description of this, James. What we'll gauge here is the little mobsters fighting with the big mobster to get their slice of the pie. When, if and when Big Pharma can access that huge southern hemisphere market. And they want to make sure they get their cut. And right now, they're not getting what they want. And that the thing I don't think that we mentioned, is that they have 194 member countries to pass this negotiating text that they're working on. They have to have two-thirds vote in favor of and with those 70, if they do not vote in favor, if they vote against it, because they're not getting what they want, they're not getting their slice of the pie, they're going to be about seven or eight votes short. Which will crash the whole thing, the whole party for them right there, at least for another year. I'm not sure if it'll work it out.   James Roguski  25:06 Yeah, I want to tweak that a little bit. As you're mostly right, but there's a little tiny tweak there. The 70 or so are trying to get what they want, they have to get to 130, which is two-thirds of 194. So they're very far away from getting their piece of the pie. But if they failed to get their piece of the pie, that means that the big crime bosses are still holding all the cards. So, the dynamics here, and the soap opera nature of what's going on, is not simple. Whichever side you're on, it's evil on one side and evil on the other. The over arching issue is that it's all controlled by what I call the Pharmaceutical Hospital Emergency Industrial Complex. Whether they have a pandemic agreement or not, is just deciding which crime bosses are in on the game. It's the game that needs to have it just shoved off the table and that's Big Pharma. If you talk to the vast majority of members of Congress, Senate or the House, see if you can find one that hasn't taken donations from Big Pharma. See if you can find some that are pushing back against Big Pharma and the jab and so forth. Almost everyone is in alignment with the pharmaceutical model. What we're dealing with here is an internal squabble that, quite frankly, hopefully, is tearing the WHO apart, because WHO is the marketing arm of Big Pharma. And, you know, they've been marketing Big Pharma to the Global South for decades. And the Global South hasn't been manufacturing those products primarily. They are trying to invest so that the manufacturing base of inflicting the harm on their own people is built out in their own nations. Not because they want to oversee it and do a better job, they want in on the deal. It's going to happen either way. It's either going to be you know, the United States and United Kingdom, European Union, Germany, all that sort of stuff, manufacturing poisons, to swallow or jab into somebody's arm and profiting from this. Nobody in these negotiations is saying, hey, wait a minute,we didn't get as many jabs and we're doing a lot better because of that. Why are we arguing for more investment in biological weapons and toxic substances and treatments that don't stop infection or transmission? No, no, no, no, no. That would assume that their concern really is about health. It's a business deal. It's a trade dispute. It's because it's happening in the World Health Organization, people have, until now, I really think now, people will see that this is very similar to something that happened a decade ago. Now you and I mentioned this a little bit before we were started record, about 10 years ago or so, secret negotiations were going on for what was known as the Trans Pacific Partnership. If anybody's familiar with that, they instantly know what I'm talking about. If you've never heard of that, go look it up. If you think of the Pacific Ocean, and all of the nations that are around the Pacific Ocean, they were crafting a partnership and a trade deal, think NAFTA but for the Pacific, and the Obama administration signed us into it. And then we the people learned what that was. And it was kept very, very secret. It gave a lot of authority to corporations where you know, people would be at their slaves to corporate whim. And so they had that so secret that when they were talking about maybe trying to get the Senate to confirm it, or give their consent, Senators and Congress people were not allowed to get a copy of it. They had to go into a secure facility, a skiff and they couldn't take pictures, they couldn't take notes, they had to read and remember whatever they read, and so it leaked out eventually. And we the people basically said no. Now I joked with you earlier, we had a little chuckle, you know, hey, World Health Organization isn't the N or the O or the combination, what part of no, do you not understand? We are not going to allow a fascist takeover of the commerce of the pharmaceutical industry around the world to be put into control of the governing body of the framework convention for pandemic preparedness, prevention and response. Who are these people going to be? And who's going to get the contracts? And why are they distributing poisonous drugs and biological weapons? The answer's no. And I have every faith in the world because we've already done it. We did it with the TPP. People said, wait a minute, what's going on here? Let me learn about this. They learned about it, and an uproar ensued. And it was toxic. The topic, you know, no political person could stand in defense of the TPP. Just go look at what Hillary Clinton had to say about it, she was one of the crafters of it, that ought to tell you all you need to know. And it was dead in the water, there was no way the Senate was ever going to pass it. And when Trump came into office, he put their last nail in the coffin, and he unsigned it. But it was people power, who took the time to read whatever they could learn about it, because they did a really good job of keeping that secret. And we the people just made it clear that we were not having it. And I have every confidence that your viewership can go to stopthetreaty.org, read the current version of what we're talking about here. Don't take my word for it. Go read the document in its current state, as they are negotiating it. There's a couple of articles that they have not released yet. And I wrote a whole ridiculously monstrous article about the Pathogen Access and Benefit Sharing System. My apologies for people who really want to get down into the weeds with it. It's a mind bender. But you've already nailed it. And we talked about it. Pathogen Access and Benefit Sharing. Here, here's something that might be dangerous. What's it worth to you?   Will Dove  32:22 Yes. And it's very important that it's these African nations that are doing this, because prior to, you know, the last say, 50 years when we've had medicines, and we've had sanitation, it was joked that Africa was where white people went to get deadly diseases. And often did. People would go there, then explorers will there and they get some disease and they die. Because they didn't have it. So, this is a goldmine, potential goldmine, for Big Pharma, who knows what they could find in Africa. So the African nations want their cut. And thank you for correcting my earlier mistake, they did not have that quite correct. So, what we've got is these approximately 70 nations that have put together this negotiating text, because there's things they want, they want their share, as you said, we've got the little, you know, the little gangsters going to the big gangsters, saying, hey, we want a bigger cut. But as you pointed out, there's nowhere near the 130 that they would need to vote in favor of that. So here's the fallout, if this negotiating text gets killed, when it comes to the vote, is that now we've got these African nations with no incentive to cooperate, when Big Pharma comes along, wanting to access that huge market. Because they will say, well, what's in it for us? Well, nothing.   James Roguski  32:52 Exactly.   Will Dove  32:52 So why would we push this on our people? We're not getting any.   James Roguski  33:49 Many people who see the dollar signs have been builting out manufacturing capacity in Africa. My understanding is there are plenty of mRNA manufacturing facilities ready to crank out all the jabs that they need. I watched a video today about the toxins in the plastics that they're making millions and billions of syringes from, you know, I mean, when you look at the logistics of it, and you look at the WHO having a 20,000 square metre distribution point in Dubai, how many syringes do you need, and you know, how much material and how many contracts have to be given out to even consider, you know, jabbing Africa. There's over a billion people there. And so, they're rolling out, I had a friend who went to the hospital for a kidney stone, and they wanted to do an RSV swab. It's like, why? Well, that's part of the genetic surveillance. That's the One Health Surveillance that when they say surveillance, they don't mean cameras and audio equipment or GPS on your phone. Surveillance means looking for pathogens everywhere possible. Not just up your nose or some other orifice or at your veterinarian's office when you bring your companion animal, or if you have a farm with chicken, or goats, or pigs, or cows or whatever, you know, wherever there's excrement, there's potentially pathogens. And so they're even testing the black water that they take out of the bathrooms on airline flights to see if something flew in. And you know, what might they be able to find in the septic system, the wastewater treatment plants, you know, the Blackwater Hospitals. Sure, go out to the local batcave or the zoo, or whatever other fungus or tick-borne, mosquito-borne ailment that you might be able to find. That's kind of like prospecting for gold. It's kind of like drilling for oil. Let's go see what kind of pathogens we can find. And if we bring them into this system, it's kind of, it's not exactly like this, but it's kind of like setting up a commodities exchange, right? We've got all these wonderful genetic sequences. And if somebody can make a product that can be turned into a jab or a drug and get the funding to pay for it, let's share the profits because we brought the pathogen. And so, if what had happened in 2021 was different in the sense that the jabs made everybody all better. Okay. You could understand it, you know, the wealthy nations like Canada were hogging up all the jabs, they bought 40. That 40 million people but they bought 400 million jabs. Well, that's 10 per person, and other nations didn't get any. If it was the case that the products were lifesaving, if it was vitamin D, and vitamin C, and zinc, and other nutrients, and good clean water, and food, and you know, other things that people could use that would actually help their health, you could understand why they are arguing for equitable access to products that save lives. But the products don't save lives. The products don't stop infection, don't stop transmission, actually create customers because they damage people's immune systems. They have adverse events. And when people get adverse events from the pandemic related products, what did they do? They go crying to Big Pharma for more poison. That is the problem. When people realize that Big Pharma's business model is to test you until they can trick you into poisoning you. And if they can't do that, they trick you into being afraid of something that you don't have, you've got an asymptomatic diagnosis, take this injectable poison to protect you from the thing that you might have in the future. And until people wake up to that fake, the Pharmaceutical Hospital Emergency Industrial Complex, the WHO, through the International Health Regulations can declare a fake Public Health Emergency of International Concern. I woke up one morning a year and a half or so ago. And it was just ringing in my head, oh no, no, no, that's a small fake. The big fake is Big Pharma. And until people reject what they're selling, and it's a profitable, we're going to be dealing with pandemic profiteering. And that's what they're trying to build out by an order of magnitude over what they did over the past four to five years. And I have every faith in the world that the people watching this video can comprehend what we're talking about. But don't do it on hearsay, read the damn documents. You can do it. It'll take a little bit, it'll knock you out and put you to sleep. I gotta warn you, it's going to be likely if you're, if you have a tendency, it's going to give you diabetes, because it is so sweet. The propaganda, the, just the BS, of you know, transparency and equity and sovereignty and you know, happy happy joy joy kumbaya, right in chapter one. You got to watch for some of the definitions of terms. When you hit chapter two. It'll put your right to sleep. It's all of these 12 things that they're doing. But if you read it and you understand that it's a business deal, and they're building out their market sector, it all falls into place. They want to laboratory network, they want billions of dollars with the bureaucracy to hand out all the contracts, they want to supply chain and logistics network, they want to oversee gain of function, they want to speed up regulatory approval, you know, they don't want anybody to be liable for the harms. If you understand it as a business deal, as a trade dispute, then it all makes sense. But you really got to look at chapter three, because that's where they set up, essentially, the framework convention for pandemic prevention, preparedness and response. They call it the governing body of the pandemic agreement. They want to meet year, after year, after year. So they can decide, you know, who's been a good company, and gets the contracts going forward? And so, look at it for what it is, and what I encourage people to do, because everybody says, oh, you know, what do we do? How do we stop this? In today's world, anybody can print out any piece of the current version of this document, they distributed it in multiple PDFs, because they've had working groups separately working on it. So, it's not one document, it's a bunch of small documents. Take any one of those documents, print out, look at it, highlight something that you think is important, and then just hold it up to the camera, and say, this is what I read in your document WHO, and here's what you, say what you think about it. They can't call that misinformation. Throw their documents back at them, and now maybe you'd like it, maybe you're in line for a contract. Maybe you're in that business, and you think it's wonderful. So go ahead and say so. That's, you know, that's your freedom. But if there's anything in there that you have a question about, there's a video from almost a year ago, and I'm working on this in a big way. And I encourage everybody to help out. Tedros Ghebreyesus at one point said, hey, if you have any questions reach out, we'll be happy to answer them for you. So I encourage everybody to ask the hardest questions you possibly can, base them in fact, get a segment of these documents, a sentence, a paragraph, you know, an article, whatever it might be, and ask Tedros to answer your questions, because you have a right to ask them. And they're not going to have any public townhall, right? Put it out there on the internet. That's the town hall of you know, our world today. And see if anybody can answer your questions. And so I give everybody my phone number. It's 310-619-3055. I want everyone to be as clear on the facts in the documents as possible. If you have a question, I'll be happy to do everything I can to keep it all clear. But I can't answer for them why they're doing this. Other than what it certainly looks like, is they want to be in control of manufacturing, and logistics and distribution on an industry that has proven to be unbelievably profitable, under the guise of saving you from the thing that, quite frankly, they caused. And so, if you think that given every nation on the planet a Wuhan Institute of Virology, and billions of dollars to go out into the batcaves, or in the beaver dam, you know, in Canada or the kangaroo thing down in Australia, to find some crazy pathogen somewhere, to bring it into the lab and cook it up into something that's really, really scary. That's what they're essentially trying to do, rather than spending money on all of the people who've been harmed, there's no money for them. And how about, you know, heart disease and stroke and cancer and the diabetes that their propaganda is going to cause for you? Leukemia, malaria, tuberculosis, not to mention adverse events and sudden death, what's going on with the pandemic of excess deaths from the treatments that they cause? I've been in this industry so long. You go back  to 1998 and in the Journal of the American Medical Association, unbelievably, it got published, that at that time in the United States, 100,000 people, I think it was 106,000 people a year died, not because of overdose, not because of a mistake, but because of properly prescribed pharmaceutical drugs. They're more deadly than the military-industrial complex, and they're about five times the size. If you look at how many people have died, due to medical intervention treatment, it makes war look comparatively safe. If you look on the list of you know, how many people die for whatever it is they die on a yearly basis, while war is horrific, it gets a lot of press. But many more people are killed by the people that you go to to care for your health. You know, it's a killing field, it's a slaughter that we're going under, under the guise of oh, you know, you have to do this because it's safe and effective. Well, anybody who uses the term safe and effective is lying. Because what they're supposed to say is, well, here's the risks, because we studied it for quite some time, and we know what the risks are. And here's maybe the benefits, well, the benefits are almost always, it'll get rid of your symptoms and hide the problem. That's not actually a benefit. That doesn't cure the problem. It hides the symptoms of the problem, and replaces them with side effects to really confuse the issue. And so, what I encourage everyone to do is go to stopthetreaty.org and read the document. Call me if you have any questions, but then be the media. You have most likely a phone or a camera or a computer or you know somebody who does. Do a little TikTok video, Telegram, Twitter, Instagram, wherever, whatever social media platform, probably going to bounce you off of it, they'll probably knock you down. But make it a point to take a piece of their document and give your opinion about that factual information. And I have every sites in the world that these agreements are going to go the same direction that the Trans-Pacific Partnership did a decade ago, right into the garbage bin.   Will Dove  47:13 Right. Now, James, before we close out, I'd like to talk about something you mentioned a while back, because you know, we're discussing this very old but criminal organization, and it's how they're trying to fund it. And you made reference about half an hour ago to the $30 billion that they want. I think that broke down to they were looking for something like four or 5 billion a year.   James Roguski  47:32 Oh, no, no, no, no, but well, I'll keep going and I'll clarify that.   Will Dove  47:37 Yeah, please let me finish because I might get a few things wrong here. Because I'm trying to stitch things together. You've obviously, you've spent all your time on this and I cover multiple things. I'm trying to put all this together in a very short period of time. But they've got the Indonesia health minister saying 1.4 billion, there's a chart on your substack contributing countries come to about 1.4 billion. But when by the way, folks, Canada, was the sixth largest contributor $37 million. Only the European Union, the United States, Japan, Germany, and Italy contributed more than we did. You probably know that. Where your tax dollars are going. So but what it appears to me is, as always seems to be the case with Big Pharma. They're not just out after this huge market, this giant profit. They're trying to get other people, the participating countries to pay for it.   James Roguski  48:32 Oh, you've hit the nail on the head. Absolutely. They want money from, they literally use these terms. Okay, not in the treaty or framework convention but in I believe annex one of the amendments, the proposed amendments. They want developed nations to build state of the art infrastructure in developing nations. So that money from Canada goes into what they call a Financial Intermediary Fund, the World Bank's pandemic fund, and then gets distributed to other nations. So, on that article that you're talking about, there were 37 nations all told, who were recipients of essentially grants, and then they have other companion money that gets added on to it. And so the discrepancy in the numbers is because there's multiple funds going on and multiple requests. And so with the Defense Department's funding through the National Defense Authorization Act in 2022, United States pledged $5 billion over five years to that fund. And then they distributed to all these many different nations to build laboratories and testing and all that sort of thing. They were shooting for other nations to donate a whole lot more, but they didn't reach their goal, they were shooting for $10 or $11 billion per year. And they've gotten it up now to about 2 billion. The WHO, when they started these negotiations, they said very clearly, that what is needed is $30 billion a year, all told, and a big fund for crisis of $100 billion. And so essentially, what it comes down to is I think they have fundNV, they're looking at what the United States Defense Department is doing. And they realized that if they brought the whole world in and got everybody to fund it, and they could run the operation, you know, they're not necessarily looking for peanuts, from Bill and Melinda Gates. They don't want billions they want 10s and hundreds of billions of dollars. Now, I think they're having trouble finding that money, because they haven't really been talking about the details. They want to push that off to the future. They'll meet next year and the year after year, after year, after year, but the African nations are saying no, no, no, no, we want that money in the contract. It's like saying, yeah, you know, we'll pay you, we'll figure out how much we're gonna pay later, you're obligated to send us all of your genetic sequence information. And you know, we'll get around of paying you at some point. They're not having it, they want a piece of the pie. And obviously, it's a big pie that Big Pharma doesn't want to let go of. But you know, the bigger picture is that none of this is addressing what happened over the last 45 years. Okay? Ventilators and Midazolam, Run Death is Near, Paxlovid, Molnupiravir, and all of them any jabs did not save lives, they destroyed people's health. And if you don't know that, then this might make sense to you. Okay? If you think that the problem was not enough ventilators, not enough midazolam, not enough run death is near, not enough jabs. And that everybody should get more though, then you are part of the problem, because you're drinking their Kool Aid. And if you go to the doctor and you fill your prescriptions, 1-234-567-8910 however many of it is you're taking, believing that swallowing poison is the path to health, then you are part of the problem. This is not about pandemic treaty. This is not about amendments to the International Health Regulations. This is about the granddaddy beast of them all, pharmakeia. And until you see that pharmakeia is deception that's of biblical proportions, I kid you not until you see through that deception, they're gonna keep coming for you.   Will Dove  52:58 Yes, and I don't think we need to worry about any of our viewers who have gotten to this point in the interview, who don't understand, you know, what remdesivir and midazolam had done, ventilators, all of that. I have to say, James, if it wasn't for the fact that they are murdering people in the 10s of millions, maiming people in the hundreds of millions. It would almost be comical to watch what's going on there right now. Because we've got, we've already seen in just this one interview, we've talked about where we've got the 70 Plus nations that say we want our piece of the pie, and they're not going to get it and when they don't get it, they're going to stop promoting these poisons for the guys that are making all the money because now they have no incentive to do so. And then you've got you know, the big crime bosses that are so diluted. That they think that they can get the countries, the governments that have given them indemnity, to pass out their poisons, to fund all of this for them to the $30 billion dollars, and what have they gotten, 1.4. It's exactly like a crime syndicate. It's falling apart at the seams because everybody wants their share. And Big Pharma doesn't want to share.   James Roguski  54:31 I can put it no better. Absolutely. Absolutely. Their House of Cards, you know, the Tower of Babel has gotten to be so high that it's you pull out a card here, you pull out a card here and the whole thing is getting ready to crumble. The sooner you wake up to the reality of their lives and shine light on it, the faster it's going to come falling down. And so I'm optimistic that people will take action. The action to take is to comprehend the details, understand what these documents are actually doing. I've tried to give you a guide to it. But don't take my word for it. Go read the documents, take a little piece out of it that gets under your skin. And put it out there, be the media, talk about it, do graphics, do images, do videos, do audios, you know, do posters, do signs, protests, whatever it may be. But get the facts straight. Read their documents take a piece of what they are saying they want and shove it right back in their face and say no. Which party? No. Are you having a difficult time understanding? We're not falling for this. Your crime syndicate is not going to be put together in an internationally binding, you know, agreement. We're not having it. In any politician who does not also speak out against us needs to get the full brunt of you know, your opinion about why are they even in office? If they're for that, oh, wait a minute, and United States? I wonder how many congressmen and senators are not receiving campaign contributions from Big Pharma? Oh, that's a little problem. Are they going to buy? Are they going, are they going to bite the hands that feed them? There's probably a few, there's probably a few that are not. But few and very far between. And this is how we expose. Who's really on the side of the people and health? And who's on the side of lining their pockets with more money made by the deaths and destruction of pharmakeia.   Will Dove  56:49 Yes. But I think as a final piece of hope for people, you should briefly explain what's happened recently in Idaho?   James Roguski  56:58 Well, we don't know what's happening. They're having a discussion. You know, they're talking about passing a legislation. It's not the perfect legislation. But you know what, thank you very much for the reminder, because even though I know you're based in Canada, one of the pieces of the puzzle that I left out of the discussion is a little thing called the constitution here in the United States. And I would encourage everybody who's got their little pocket constitution to get it out and go to Article 1 Section 8 Clause 3. This is what people need to understand. The federal government of the United States was given the enumerated power by the original colonies and everything who came after that, to regulate international commerce. So the problem is, this is within the purview of the federal government, to regulate the logistics and the distribution and the money outside the United States. That's how our federal system is structured. We're not talking about, you know, inter-, inside the state, right? So, what Idaho is putting forth is, you know, the CDC, the federal government, and the WHO, they can't tell us what to do here in Idaho. And that's a given. They're just putting it into legislation and say, and, yeah, whatever you guys say, we're not paying any attention. The problem with what is going on here, is they're trying to work it so that money from the Global Norths gets put into a big fund. And the transfer of wealth goes outside the Global North into Big Pharma's pockets in low and middle income nations. And so again, this is not what people think it is. Idaho is doing something good to protect the people in Idaho say, we're not going to listen to anything you guys say you're full of it. But that's not going to stop the international game. You got to fight this on all levels. And understand that the big boys are playing with big money. And, you know, they don't play fair. It's a brutal vicious industry. And, you know, a lot of African leaders have lost their lives because they pushed back. And so the moment they're pushing pretty hard. They're getting a lot of pushback there isn't, you know, agreement. We don't want there to be agreement where either side wins because the problem is bigger. It's not Global North Pharma versus Global South Pharma, still Pharma. We have to wake everybody up to the entire lie. The drugs harm people, the jabs harm people. And, you know, there's not going to be any winner in these negotiations. If they agree to it, it just distributes the wealth differently. If they don't agree to it, it just distributes the wealth differently. And so what we need to understand is whenever you go to the pharmacy, and have your government pay, or have your insurance company pay for the poisons that you're voluntarily taking, you're part of the problem. That is the problem. And so, enough people say, wait a minute, is this stuff actually making me any healthier? Is it preventing me from getting or transmitting a contagion? Wait a minute, what the heck is going on here? When that awakening starts, their industry, when people say, you know what, I'm going to do something else for my health. And do it wisely, you know, this is not medical advice. There's so much wisdom and knowledge out there, you have to figure it out for yourself with the help of people who've gone down that path before. But when everybody turns their back to pharmakeia, you know, the devil loses and goodness wins. And that's what this battle is.   Will Dove  1:01:11 And I do agree about people having to just say no to all this. But I want you to talk about Idaho, because there is a misconception in Canada, that our system is substantially different from the American one where people probably understand that in the US, the states have a great deal of autonomy, to make their own rules, despite what the federal government there may say. And there's a misconception that Canada is substantially different. Well, folks, it is not. I know a number of constitutional lawyers, I've talked to them about this. It is true that the federal government in Canada does have the legal right to implement legislation, which applies unilaterally to all Canadians. But if the province does not have a say, in the writing of that legislation, they are not required to enforce it. And so if we're going to push back against corrupt governments who are cooperating with this criminal syndicate, we can do that at a state and province level. Talk to your MLA, let them know you're not interested in having the WHO dictate our health to us, here in our province. And there's absolutely nothing stopping your premier, your legislature from doing exactly what Idaho did and saying, we're not participating. They don't get to make the rules here.   James Roguski  1:02:36 Now, it's a starting point. And I encourage everybody you know, if you have questions about any and all of this, give me a phone call 310-619-3055. But if you just sit there and don't do anything, then you're going to get what that kind of inaction brings. The easiest thing to do as a starting point is take this video, share it with everybody you possibly can, use the #stopthetreaty, go to stopthetreaty.org. But read the damn document so that you know what is actually going on. Watch out for the diabetes from chapter one, it's sickeningly sweet. Make sure you read chapter three, which is how they would like to set up this whole bureaucracy and start asking questions and demand that your politicians take the stand. And take a stand yourself. I'm about to publish an article where there's hundreds of people who have recorded videos in the past about their opinions. You've got a video camera, you've got a phone, you've got a website or you know somebody who does, put your opinion out into the world and flood the zone, if you will, with whatever your opinion is of this. Doesn't have to be in alignment with mine. That's what this beauty of all this is about. People will see things in here that I've missed. People will disagree with anything I may have to say. Silence is consent. So don't be silent.   Will Dove  1:04:07 James, thank you again for your time today for being a watchdog for the WHO. And if we don't talk before then I am absolutely certain we'll be talking sometime in early May, after the 77th Annual General Meeting. We'll see the follow up from that. So thank you again, James.   James Roguski  1:04:23 Thanks for having me. I appreciate it.