Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: grey_whiskers

https://t.me/KanekoaTheGreat/4446

URGENT: Stop Global Governance—The Vote to Give Total Power to the WHO Takes Place In 2 Weeks

Michele Bachmann: “This authority that they would be given would impact 99.4% of all the people in the world... The WHO would have decision-making authority to intervene into the United States’ government policy and any nation of the world without our permission. For instance, the lockdowns where you see 26 million people today locked down in Shanghai, China... the WHO would have the authority to be able to impose that here in the United States for whatever pretext they want. They don’t have to show data; they could do this. What this does, bottom line, is it creates a platform for global governance, global governance through the WHO.”

@VigilantFox | Rumble | Full Video


1,208 posted on 05/11/2022 7:25:22 AM PDT by bitt ( <img src=' 'width=50%> )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1162 | View Replies ]


To: bitt

WE THE PEOPLE are the authority, Ms. Bachman.


1,222 posted on 05/11/2022 8:26:18 AM PDT by AFB-XYZ (Stand up, or bend over)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1208 | View Replies ]

To: bitt
Michele Bachmann: “This authority that they would be given would impact 99.4% of all the people in the world... The WHO would have decision-making authority to intervene into the United States’ government policy and any nation of the world without our permission.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

my understanding is quid pro joe has already proposed the amendments that would allow this transfer of US sovereignty.

all the WHO has do do is vote to accept his amendments

iow: our senate has nothing to say to stop this from going into effect

1,239 posted on 05/11/2022 10:13:00 AM PDT by thinden (buckle up)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1208 | View Replies ]

To: bitt

In reid v. covert (1957), ..... a treaty may not contravene individual liberty specifically protected by the Bill of Rights.

However, the President normally does not commit the interpretation of treaties to third-party dispute resolution, such as arbitration or adjudication by the International Court of Justice, without Senate or congressional acquiescence or approval. Moreover, if the President changes an earlier, commonly held interpretation, Congress may use its legislative and appropriations powers to force the President to reconsider. The reinterpretation controversy involving the 1972 U.S.-U.S.S.R. Treaty on the Limitation of Anti-Ballistic Missile Systems (hereinafter called the “ABM Treaty”) is a good example of this phenomenon.

.....Congress used its legislative and appropriations powers to force the executive branch to limit development and testing of ABM systems to activities permitted under the original interpretation.

..... the President may not reinterpret fundamental treaty provisions in major respects, even with the agreement of a treaty partner, without seeking Senate or congressional approval. Such a change would probably be classified as a “major amendment” to the treaty and, as such, would require that consent. It would also seem that other reinterpretations could be made by the President with Senate or congressional acquiescence. If Congress disagrees with a presidential interpretation, it may reflect its nonacquiescence through its legislative or appropriations power.

Sources:

Bestor, Arthur 1989 “Advice” from the Very Beginning, “Consent” When the End Is Achieved. American Journal of International Law 83:718–727.

Congressional Research Service 1984 Treaties and Other International Agreements: The Role of the United States Senate. S-Print 98–205, 98th Congress, Second Session.


1,242 posted on 05/11/2022 10:31:02 AM PDT by Sobieski at Kahlenberg Mtn. (All along the watchtower fortune favors the bold.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1208 | View Replies ]

To: bitt

URGENT: Stop Global Governance—The Vote to Give Total Power to the WHO Takes Place In 2 Weeks

Michele Bachmann: “This authority that they would be given would impact 99.4% of all the people in the world... The WHO would have decision-making authority to intervene into the United States’ government policy and any nation of the world without our permission. For instance, the lockdowns where you see 26 million people today locked down in Shanghai, China... the WHO would have the authority to be able to impose that here in the United States for whatever pretext they want. They don’t have to show data; they could do this. What this does, bottom line, is it creates a platform for global governance, global governance through the WHO.”

@VigilantFox | Rumble | Full Video

—-

Don’t fear the WHO they do not have and will never have, authority over the USA, We The People own this country..it can not be given away.

This is pure fear-mongering


1,340 posted on 05/11/2022 4:34:38 PM PDT by KittenClaws ("There is no 1502 Johnson" ~ Joan Hamilton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1208 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson