International Criminal Court and International Court of Justice
Correspondence with readers
Email from a reader:
I was wondering if you had any thoughts about the Trump EO regarding the International Criminal Court.
Feb. 6, 2025 - Trump Executive Order, Imposing Sanctions on the International Criminal Court.
...there is a lot of bluster in the middle section regarding 'Israel.' What struck me is that it really is not about Israel because both the US and Israel ignore the ICC anyway, and the US is sufficiently powerful to do whatever it wants.
Reading between the lines, I wonder if this could be about covid war crimes, particularly your work re: 1949 [Fourth] Geneva Convention, Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, [including Common] Article 3 [defining and prohibiting murder, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture, codified in US domestic law at 18 USC 2441…].
My reply:
I looked it over, and two thoughts came to mind.
One is that there's a New Zealand group with Maori members that filed a complaint to ICC about Covid issues, attaching American Domestic Bioterrorism Program information and an affidavit by Francis A. Boyle, as to Covid vaccines as bioweapons. (Boyle died on Jan. 30, 2025.)
The New Zealand petitioners apparently filed a Complaint of Genocide at the International Criminal Court in November 2024, and filed a notice to the New Zealand Attorney General on Feb. 5, 2025.
When asked by organizers if I would do an affidavit or endorsement for the New Zealand ICC complaint, I declined to do that,1 but confirmed that all of the information I've compiled is publicly available and can be used by anyone to support their cases.
2025.02.05 Notice to NZ AG Attachment 1, 2024.05.27 Affidavit Francis Boyle re biological weapons
2025.02.05 Notice to NZ AG, Attachment 3, 2023.01 K. Watt Legal Memo Statutes ADBP
Quoting from the Feb. 5, 2025 document:
...I write to formally notify you; Judith Collins, doing business as New Zealand Attorney-General, with recipients to bear witness, that a Complaint of Genocide has been filed with the International Criminal Court in response to evidence of biological weapons been used on the New Zealand population, under fraudulent declarations of a natural occurring virus...
Pursuant to New Zealand’s obligations under the Rome Statute of the ICC, the Genocide Convention (1948), and customary international law, particularly under Article 6 of the Genocide Convention, to prevent and punish genocide, and Article 3 of the convention that states complicity in genocide is also punishable, and Article 25 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, states that aiding and abetting or otherwise assisting in crimes against humanity would be punishable, we request that under New Zealand’s obligations to International Law, you use your authority to refer this matter to the International Court of Justice for determination of state responsibility, and that the ICJ consider the need to support or establish an ad hoc tribunal....
That it is evidenced, individuals and NGO’S have fraudulently used emergency declarations to enable military action against the global population for reasons of financial and political gain and resource protectionism,
That the mandated experimental gene therapy C19 drugs have been declared a biological weapon by expert affidavit...
My other thought is that there's another international court, called the International Court of Justice, to which US is a signatory.
It was set up in the late 1940s, and several members of Congress understood at the time that it was a problem for sovereignty. They added something called the Morse Resolution, or Connally Amendment, reserving to the US government, the authority to determine which matters would be exclusively within domestic jurisdiction.
As of 2016, legal architects of the US PREP Act system (Lawrence Gostin etc.) argued that the International Court of Justice could be a venue for prosecuting countries that violated terms of the WHO International Health Regulations.
The International Court of Justice would therefore be another mechanism to enforce compliance, at the nation-state level, with US-led, worldwide public-health-military (“pandemic preparedness and response”) genocide programs.
July 22, 2024 email from KW to New Zealand ICC campaign organizers:
In general, all of my work is public, and can be used by readers...
ICC complaints [have…] been tried at least once already, by a UK lawyer named Hannah Rose, filed Dec. 6, 2021. ICC acknowledged her complaint, and there has been no further action, to my knowledge.
ICC does not have jurisdiction or enforcement authority over the US government military/public health officials who are conducting the worldwide mass murder, which has been legalized by US domestic law, domestic law in other countries, and international treaties and contracts.
The crimes that have been committed happened upstream and long before the Covid vaccines, and were crimes of treason committed by lawmakers, executives, civil administrators and judges in passing, signing, executing and judicially ratifying the illegal laws that have legalized mass murder by vaccine.
Further, my work doesn't support and isn't supported by the work of Francis Boyle, Aaron Siri (testimony to Congressional committee, June 26, 2024) and Thomas Massie (House report, June 24, 2024).
Boyle argues that Covid 19 injections violate the Biological Weapons Antiterrorism Act of 1989.
I argue that intentionally lethal injections are legalized as falling under BWA exemptions for allegedly "prophylactic, protective or bona fide research" products and "select agents."
"Select agents and toxins" is the misleading term used by HHS and the Public Health Service/US military, to designate vaccine components, which are intentionally harmful biological products, and legalize their production and use on human and animal targets.
I have not read Siri's testimony in detail, nor have I read Massie's 600+ page report in detail, because both reports provide false information in the first few paragraphs.
Siri and Massie argue that there is an enforceable regulatory framework governing design, production and use of vaccines and EUA products and that the clinical trials for Covid vaccines were "robust."
I argue that there is no such enforceable regulatory framework and that the so-called "clinical trials" were non-valid and were performative only.
There is only a pretense or sham regulatory process, including fraudulent oversight of fraudulent clinical trials.
The only purpose of the multi-layer fraud is to deceive the public into believing the lies that a regulatory framework exists and has been applied to Covid vaccines, and any/all other vaccines.
There is no substantive relationship between FDA acts and decisions, and the safety and efficacy of products bearing "vaccine" labels.