Connect with us

Great Reset

All 49 GOP senators call on Biden admin to withdraw support for WHO pandemic treaty

Published

1 year ago

5 minute read

From LifeSiteNews

By Stephen Kokx

U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson warned that two international agreements are being considered at this month’s World Health Assembly that surrender U.S. sovereignty to the World Health Organization

Sen. Ron Johnson of Wisconsin has rallied every Republican in the U.S. Senate to sign an open letter warning the Biden administration to not support pandemic-related measures being considered at the World Health Assembly (WHA) later this month.

“Some of the over 300 proposals for amendments made by member states would substantially increase the (World Health Organization’s) health emergency powers and constitute intolerable infringements upon U.S. sovereignty,” they wrote.

The WHA is the decision-making body of the World Health Organization (WHO). Its annual meeting sets policies for its 194 member nations. This year’s gathering, the 77th such undertaking, will be held from May 27 to June 1 in Geneva, Switzerland.

Johnson and all 48 of his colleagues informed the Biden administration that they consider the WHO’s widely criticized Pandemic Agreement a formal treaty that requires 2/3rd approval from the Senate per Article II Section 2 of the Constitution.

“Instead of addressing the WHO’s well-documented shortcomings, the treaty focuses on mandated resource and technology transfers, shredding intellectual property rights, infringing free speech, and supercharging the WHO,” they maintained. “The WHO’s most recent publicly available draft of its new pandemic response treaty is dead on arrival.”

A growing number of public figures as well as U.S. states and elected officials have raised the alarm about the Pandemic Agreement in recent months.

During an appearance on Tucker Carlson’s podcast in January, liberal intellectual Bret Weinstein argued that the WHO is gearing up for a “re-run” of COVID-19 in order to set up a “totalitarian planet.” He noted that the agreement is being modified so the WHO will have even more power to crack down on voices that dissent from Big Pharma’s narrative.

On Thursday, April 18, a group of GOP lawmakers and conservative activists similarly warned about the agreement at a press conference on Capitol Hill organized by the Sovereignty Coalition.

 

Johnson has been one of the most consistent voices in the Senate to expose the dangers of the COVID shot as well as the collusion taking place between the mainstream media and the medical industry. In February, he organized a roundtable discussion titled “Federal Health Agencies and the COVID Cartel: What Are They Hiding?” Dr. Robert Malone, vaccine expert Del Bigtree, GOP Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor-Greene, and many others attended.

Johnson and his GOP colleagues further drew the Biden administration’s attention to the WHO’s poor track record.

“The WHO’s failure during the COVID-19 pandemic was as total as it was predictable and did lasting harm to our country,” they wrote. “The United States cannot afford to ignore this latest WHO inability to perform its most basic function and must insist on comprehensive WHO reforms before even considering amendments to the International Health Regulations (IHR) or any new pandemic-related treaty that would increase WHO authority. We are deeply concerned that your administration continues to support these initiatives and strongly urge you to change course.”

They concluded that “in light of the high stakes for our country and our constitutional duty, we call upon you to (1) withdraw your administration’s support for the current IHR amendments and pandemic treaty negotiations, (2) shift your administration’s focus to comprehensive WHO reforms that address its persistent failures without expanding its authority, and (3) should you ignore these calls, submit any pandemic related agreement to the Senate for its advice and consent.”

Related Topics:

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

More from this author
Economy / 5 hours ago

The proof is in. Housing is more unaffordable than ever

armed forces / 7 hours ago

Top Trump Military Official Takes Aim At Absurd Bloat In Navy

Censorship Industrial Complex / 7 hours ago

In Britain the “Thought Crime” Is Real

Censorship Industrial Complex

In Britain the “Thought Crime” Is Real

Published on May 17, 2025

By

If you’re tired of censorship and surveillance, subscribe to Reclaim The Net.

By Cam Wakefield

A pensioner faced a raid not for plotting mayhem, but for posting a sarcastic tweet fewer than 30 people saw

It takes a very special kind of madness to send six baton-wielding, pepper-spray-toting police officers to arrest a 71-year-old man in his slippers. But here we are: welcome to Britain 2025, where tweeting the wrong opinion is treated with the same urgency as a hostage situation in Croydon.

Julian Foulkes, once a proud servant of law and order, now finds himself on the receiving end of what can only be described as a full-scale, Kafkaesque raid. His crime? Not drug-dealing, not fraud, not even refusing to pay the TV license. No, Julian questioned a pro-Palestinian demonstrator on X. Because apparently, free speech is now a limited-time offer.

The Curious Case of the Grocery List

The story began in Gillingham when Kent Police decided to deploy what must be half their annual budget to storm the Foulkes residence. Six officers with batons barged into the home of a pensioner who’s spent a decade in service to the very same force now treating him like the Unabomber.

And what high-level contraband did they uncover in this den of danger? Books. Literature. And not just any literature; “very Brexity things,” according to bodycam footage obtained by The Telegraph. One can only imagine the horror. Perhaps a Nigel Farage biography lying next to a battered copy of The Spectator. It’s practically a manifesto.

But wait, it gets better. A shopping list, penned by Julian’s wife (a hairdresser, no less), featured such ominous items as bleach, aluminum foil, and gloves. For those keeping score at home, that’s also the standard toolkit of anyone doing household chores or dyeing hair. But to Kent’s finest, it must have looked like the recipe for domestic terrorism. You half expect them to have called in MI5 to decipher the coded significance of “toilet paper x2.”

Now, this could all be darkly amusing if it weren’t also painfully cruel. While Kent’s squad of crime-fighting intellects were turning over Julian’s life like a garage sale, they rummaged through deeply personal mementos from his daughter’s funeral. Francesca, tragically killed by a drunk driver in Ibiza 15 years ago, had her memory poked through as if it were a bag of potato chips.

An officer was heard stating: “Ah. That’s sad,” before carrying on like she was flicking through junk mail.

After the shakedown came the cell. Eight hours locked up like a mob boss, while the state decided whether tweeting concern about a reported rise in antisemitism qualified as incitement or merely the audacity of having an opinion. It’s hard to say what’s more insulting; the arrest or the mind-numbing absurdity of it all.

A Nation Eating Its Own

Now, let’s not kid ourselves. This isn’t just a Kent problem. This is a snapshot of a country in full bureaucratic freefall. We’ve reached a point where police forces, rather than chasing burglars or catching knife-wielding lunatics, are now busy raiding the homes of retirees over innocuous social media posts.

Julian Foulkes is not a revolutionary. He’s not leading rallies, he’s not printing manifestos in his shed, and he’s certainly not strapping himself to the gates of Parliament. He’s a retired cop who owns a few books, uses X to vent the occasional opinion, and wants to visit his daughter in Australia without being flagged at passport control like he’s smuggling plutonium.

But after hours of interrogation for what the police grandly labeled malicious communication, Foulkes accepted a caution. Not because he believed he’d done anything wrong, he hadn’t, but because the alternative might have been even more grotesque. A criminal conviction. Which, for a man with family overseas, could turn his trips to Heathrow into a permanent no-fly zone.

“My life wouldn’t be worth living if I couldn’t see her. At the time, I believed a caution wouldn’t affect travel, but a conviction definitely would,” he said about being able to visit his daughter.

“That’s about the level of extremist I am… a few Douglas Murray books and some on Brexit.”

He reads. Possibly even thinks. The horror.

The Apology That Barely Was

Kent Police did what all institutions do when caught with their pants around their ankles. They mumbled something vaguely resembling an apology. They admitted the caution had been a mistake and removed it from his record.

And while that’s nice, it rather misses the point. Because they’d already sent a message, loud and clear: Think the wrong thing, tweet the wrong joke, and we might just pay you a visit. It’s the sort of behavior you’d expect in some authoritarian state where elections are won with 98 percent of the vote and the only available television channel is state news. Not the Home Counties.

Foulkes, for his part, hasn’t gone quietly.

“I saw Starmer in the White House telling Trump we’ve had [free speech] in the UK for a very long time, and I thought, ‘Yeah, right.’ We can see what’s really going on.”

He’s not wrong. For a nation so smug about its democratic values, Britain seems increasingly allergic to people expressing them.

He goes further, pulling no punches about the direction his former profession has taken.

“I’d never experienced anything like this” during his time on the force, he said, before diagnosing the whole debacle as a symptom of the “woke mind virus” infecting everything, including the police.

The Tweet That Triggered the Avalanche

The whole affair kicked off in the aftermath of the October 7 Hamas attack on Israel, a day of bloodshed that left 1,200 dead and more than 250 taken hostage. The shockwaves weren’t limited to the Middle East. They rattled through Europe, igniting a fresh wave of pro-Palestinian marches across the continent.

Foulkes, like many watching the news, saw a video of a mob in Dagestan storming an airport reportedly to find Jewish arrivals.

So, when he saw a post from an account called Mr Ethical; who, with all the irony the internet can muster, threatened legal action if branded an antisemite, Foulkes couldn’t help himself. He replied:

“One step away from storming Heathrow looking for Jewish arrivals….”

A social media post exchange where Mr Ethical responds to Suella Braverman saying if called an antisemite he will sue, followed by Julian Foulkes commenting about storming Heathrow looking for Jewish arrivals.

That was it. One tweet. One line. No threats. No calls to violence.

Foulkes maintains he’d never interacted with the account before. There was no feud, no history. His post had fewer than 30 views.

And yet, within days, he had six police officers treating his home like a crime scene.

What does this tell us? That we’ve entered an era where satire is indistinguishable from evidence. Where sarcasm is treated like sedition. And where a retired constable who’s paid his dues can still find himself pulled into the maw of state-sanctioned nonsense for a tweet.

So yes, the caution’s gone, wiped clean like it never happened. But the message is still smoldering in the ashtray: think twice before you speak, and maybe don’t speak at all if your bookshelf includes anything more provocative than a Gordon Ramsay cookbook. Because in modern Britain, it’s not always the rapists and murderers who get doorstepped, it’s pensioners with opinions. And if that’s where we’ve landed, then the only thing truly extreme is how far the country’s gone off the rails.

If you’re tired of censorship and surveillance, subscribe to Reclaim The Net.

Continue Reading

Business

The net zero industry is collapsing worldwide. Hopefully it will be abandoned for good

Published on May 16, 2025

By

From LifeSiteNews

By Vijay Jayaraj

Perhaps the fundamental failure of Net Zero was political. Permission was never sought from taxpayers who would pay the costs and suffer the consequences of an always ill-fated enterprise.

The grand vision of “Net Zero” initiatives – by which emissions of carbon dioxide magically balance with expensive and futile capture and storage systems – have long been sold as the redemption arc for humanity’s profligate modern ways. Yet, like a poorly scripted dystopian thriller, the holes in this plot are glaring.

Net Zero was always a fragile concept. It rested on shaky and illogical assumptions: that wind turbines, solar panels and “green” hydrogen could reliably replace fossil fuels, that governments could redesign economies without unintended consequences, that voters would accept higher costs for daily necessities, and that developing countries would sacrifice growth for climate targets they had no hand in creating.

None of those fantasies held. Countries did not decarbonize nearly at the speed promised, even though climate bureaucracies clung to the illusion. Long-range targets, five-year reviews, and international pledges lacked common sense and defied physical and economic realities. The result? An unaccountable machine pushing impractical policies that most people never voted for and are now beginning to reject.

If Net Zero were a serious endeavor, its architects would confront the undeniable: China and India are more than delaying their decarbonization timelines – they’re burying them. Why has this been ignored?

China and India – responsible for more than 40% of global CO2 emissions in the last two decades – are accelerating fossil fuel use, not phasing it out. In Southeast Asia, coal, oil and natural gas continue to dominate. Vietnam, Indonesia and the Philippines are building new electric generating power plants using those fuels. These countries understand that economic growth comes first.

Africa, too, is pushing back. Leaders in Nigeria, Ghana, and Senegal have criticized Western attempts to block fossil fuel financing. African nations are investing in exploitation of oil and gas reserves.

If Asia represents the global rejection of Net Zero, Germany and the U.K. are poster children of the West’s self-inflicted wounds. Both nations, once hailed as Net Zero pioneers, are grappling with the harsh realities of their green ambitions. The transition to “renewables” has been plagued by economic pain, energy insecurity, and political backlash, exposing the folly of policies divorced from facts. When the war in Ukraine cut off energy supplies, Germany panicked. Suddenly, coal plants were back online. The Green Dream died a quiet death.

READ: Top Canadian bank ditches UN-backed ‘net zero’ climate goals it helped create

The retreat of Net Zero interrupts the flow of trillions of dollars into an agenda with questionable motives and false promises. Climate finance had developed the fever of a gold rush. Banks, asset managers, and consulting firms hurried to brand themselves as “green.” ESG (Environmental, Social, Governance) investing promised to reward “climate-friendly” firms and punish alleged polluters.

The fallout was massive market distortions. Companies shifted resources to meet ESG checklists at the expense of fiduciary obligations. Now the tide is turning. The Net Zero Banking Alliance comprising top firms globally has been abandoned by America’s leading institutions. Similarly, a Net Zero investors alliance collapsed after BlackRock’s exit.

Perhaps the fundamental failure of Net Zero was political. Permission was never sought from taxpayers and consumers who would pay the costs and suffer the consequences of an always ill-fated enterprise. Climate goals were set behind closed doors. Policies were imposed from above. Higher utility bills, job losses and diminished economic opportunity became the burdens of ordinary families. All while elites flew private jets to international summits and lectured about the need to sacrifice.

A certain lesson in the slow passing of Net Zero is this: Energy policy must serve people, not ideology. That truth was always obvious and remains so.

Yet, some political leaders, legacy media and industry “yes-men” continue to blather on about a “green” utopia. How long the delusion persists remains to be seen.

Vijay Jayaraj is a Science and Research Associate at the CO2 Coalition, Fairfax, Virginia. He holds an M.S. in environmental sciences from the University of East Anglia and a postgraduate degree in energy management from Robert Gordon University, both in the U.K., and a bachelor’s in engineering from Anna University, India.

Reprinted with permission from American Thinker. 

Continue Reading

Trending

X