What looks, smells and acts like a World Government?
An invisible legal cage is being built around us in full view. We know they want it. The UN keeps trying to control quarantine, vaccines and travel. They’ve been pushing for disinformation enforcement since 2021. It’s a trillion dollar business model, and lifelong sweet careers. A bureaucrat would have to be mad to say “no”.
Bret Weinstein, former professor of evolutionary biology, talks to Tucker Carlson in the video below, and argues that we are in effect, living inside a coup. In May this year the World Health Organisation (WHO), a UN committee, will put forward a few modifications “to protect us all”. These harmless amendments will mean the WHO could effectively be in the room when you visit your doctor. In the event of an “emergency” foreign unelected non-representatives will decide what your doctor can and can’t prescribe for you and what vaccines you need to have, and you can’t vote them out. What could possibly go wrong?
These amendments used to be called “the Pandemic Treaty” but like a shapeshifter, it now has a different name. This is part of the language battle — it’s so much harder for opposition to coalesce, or gravitate towards a moving target. It’s like wrestling with jello.
Obviously, after these clauses come into force, we could get a climate or flu emergency practically any day…
The Turnkey Totalitarian Planet is an invisible cage built around us:
8:49| The Covid Pandemic caused us to become aware of a lot of structures that had been built around us; Something former NSA Whistleblower William Binney once described as the Turnkey totalitarian state. A totalitarian state is erected around you, but it’s not activated. And then once it’s built the key gets turned. We’re now seeing something that even outstrips Williams Binney’s description because it’s the Turnkey Totalitarian Planet. The World Health Organisation is above the level of nations, and it’s going to be in a position, if these regulations pass, to dictate to nations how they are to treat their own citizens — to override their own constitutions. So that is frightening…
It’s a loophole of the mind, not the constitution
Our rights aren’t necessarily extinguished by a UN committee “treaty” but in reality people’s willingness to accept the erosion of their rights can make it a daily reality anyhow.
As I have said before — A constitution is just a sheet of paper with words on it — it’s only as strong as the will of the people to fight for it is. And we have seen many times how the words have been effectively neutralized. The US and Australian constitutions both say that nothing but gold and silver coin are legal tender, but who cares? (See USA Article S10.C1.3 and Australian constitution Act Sect 114.) For two years Australians were banned from leaving Australia unless they took an approved injection. The Health Minister said this was so we could meet our international obligations — which means effectively the UN was deciding who came and went.
Only idiot conspiracy theorists, of course, would suggest that the UN wants to be a World Government, but nearly 150,000 Australians were denied the right to leave the country without an injection, unless they swam or paddled across the Arafura Sea. What looks, acts and smells like a government we didn’t vote for — one that stops us getting on a plane.
…
Weinstein offers no exact legal quotes, which is a shame, but the difficulty of finding quotable quotes is no doubt also part of the strategy. Some of these UN amendments are unreadable — there is often no single complete sentence in sight, only grammatical warfare, with dependent clauses split across sections and articles and changes buried in appendices. The swamp of legalese can hide a crocodile and who would know? Bad writing is a crime.
In May the UN World Health Organisation (WHO) will table their little amendments (for your own good). My understanding is that we have a ten month window to get our PM or President to write to the UN to opt out. For people in the US this will be decided at the election. Trump says he will terminate the Treaty. No wonder they work so hard to stop the voters getting that choice.
The new conservative New Zealand Government has sensibly added a “national interest test”.
UPDATE: To clarify those WHO legal requirements
The new proposed amendments strike out the words “non-binding” with respect to WHO advice, so it’s “binding advice” now? They also strike out “with full respect for the dignity, human rights and fundamental freedoms of persons” which are apparently out-dated and dangerous terms for public health. Where the old agreement says “public health risk” that’s now going to become “all risks with a potential to impact public health” which almost certainly includes the risk of climate change, nasty language, and any discussion of the failings of vaccines or the WHO itself. See Article 3.
Obviously criticizing the WHO would be “a danger to public health”.
The 46 page document is loaded with layers of legal origami that are hard to unpack. But if WHO advice is “binding” and “State Parties shall implement these regulations…” and “develop and maintain capacities to implement the Regulations”, there are plenty of dangerous phrases for UN lawyers, and compliant corruptocrats to work with.
Australia will be obliged to follow the WHO’s “recommendations” in relation to public health, in the event of a public health emergency such as a pandemic. We can see this in black and white in the proposed amendments to Articles 1, 13A, 42 and 43 of the IHR. Yes, it will be Australia making the decisions, but we will have given the WHO the legal authority to tell us what those decisions should be.
You can argue ’til the cows come home whether that’s “ceding sovereignty” but I ask you: why would an Australian government want to put us in the position where we are legally obliged to follow the WHO’s “recommendations” in the first place, noting that the list of (binding) recommendations in Article 18 includes – but is not limited to – mandatory vaccination, isolations, medical treatment and restrictions.
Now that “recommendations” are to become binding, Australia finds itself in the bizarre position of its parliament having to pass legislation in order to avoid becoming indentured to the WHO. This is a magic trick!
If the UN is so smart and it’s intentions are so good, why do we need to enshrine our lack of choice into law? We could just let them persuade our elected representatives for each and every incidence instead. What’s wrong with that? Klein asks:
-
-
- Why does the Federal government want to hand decision-making over to the WHO?
- If the Federal government doesn’t intend to comply with binding WHO public health “recommendations”, why is it supporting the power transfer? What would the sanctions be for non-compliance? (See here for a good discussion of the likely influence of the amendments despite the lack of formal enforcement mechanisms.)
- If the government does intend to comply, why?
- How is committing to complying with future WHO legally binding “recommendations” in Australia’s national interest?
-
If it gets accepted, our only option is to exit the entire UN — and since this “treaty” is so draconian, and filled with ill intent, let’s do that anyway.
Related: The WHO want digital vaccine passports.
In any totalitarian state the question is always asked: “Which side are you on?” \ “Whose side are you on?”. When the totalitarian state is washed up – as happened with East Germany – that question is then asked again: “Which side were you on?” \ “Whose side were you on?” and the repercussions then come along.
Totalitarian states kill themselves: 1) they spend massive amounts of money in i) indoctrination, ii) surveillance, iii) enforcement, 2) they turn people against each other – they destroy loyalty, 3) they provide a negative answer to the “Why bother?” question so people don’t bother. They lie, cheat and steal. If there is a one world government they won’t have anyone who they can steal new technology from.
420
They only have power if we comply.
283
If they can’t communicate with us. If we can’t understand what they are saying. If we are not connected to their media. Then they will have no power over us. They will be no different than a barking seal.
233
Tell that to the Victorians who were harrassed and beaten but thugs masquerading as police
511
If only it were that easy.
If 90% do comply, including the police and your jailers that won’t be much fun. If you lack The Media support, the Radio stations, the banker money and the Academic megaphone, it will be hard to convince the other 90%. And if you are declared a danger to the public because you are reducing their faith in the WHO or in vaccines, then you may not comply but you will be fined or jailed. See how this works?
580
Yep, I also have studied Orwell.
10% is 2.5 million, with nothing left to lose.
220
I like the way you think. 2.5 million is a fairly large minority especially when those 2.5 million are committed to rectifying the situation. The 90% are largely followers rather than leaders and tend to lack initiative.
120
If you lack The Media support, the Radio stations, the banker money and the Academic megaphone … AND enough ‘conservative’ politicians who are prepared to fight these issues on behalf of ordinary (powerless) people …
It’s the same story with every cultural issue, isn’t it? The Left ALWAYS win in the end. Name a single significant ‘cultural’ victory that ‘conservative’ governments have delivered — or even taken the lead in fighting for — in the past 40 or so years.
As always, Sir Humphrey explains how our ‘democracy’ works:
https://youtu.be/QurCB1lCHp0?si=agHpftU6USEmnIXu&t=76
(4 min video)
90
You forgot the recent referendum. Let us hope the LNP at the upcoming election in Qld get the message and the High Court understand.
The USA has to get senate approval for any treaty. There is no approval for Kyoto ot Paris climate ageement. In Switzerland an agreement for sny treaty requires referendum approval. Australia should follow Switzerland -One Nation has a policy for referenda ss in Switzerland
70
No, I didn’t forget the referendum. The No campaign was won by the handful of conservatives in the media who took a stand against The Voice from the very beginning.
00
Actually it is, but everyone needs to be fully awake and willing, not just 10% of the population.
Of course if everyone just said “NO!” what could das gubermint do?
Jail 25 million people after spending 10 years building enough jails, and this sh#t will all be over in 8 years anyway?
It’s clear that while people here have the understanding, they still seem to think fighting back will stop the inevitable; the inevitable that will be driven by the 90% asleep finally waking up at the precipice, not by those 10% already awake.
The police and military exist to protect the people of this country against all enemies foreign and domestic. No much on the foreign front is there.
I don’t understand why they can’t grasp the simple concept that “you will NOT be magically spared from what’s coming, so by obeying the criminals who are behind the looming nightmare, you are sealing your own fate and of those you love”.
Media – same deal. Wake up, tell the truth or wave bye bye.
40
Don’t wait for the 90% to wake up.
From the most unlikely of sources:
— BBC
40
They’re not going to wake up, because they don’t want to wake up.
00
ALP full compliance is 100% guaranteed.
Agreement by 50% of the coalition is guaranteed!
We’re in real trouble here.
20
They have three tools, lies, fear and violence. When the lie unravels the fear is gone, this leaves them with one tool, as the protests showed.
230
The trouble is that at least 80% comply with anything ‘Simon’ sez. Simon sez get more boosties, Simon sez luv the WHO & UN. Simon sez sacrifice yourself for the common good. Simon sez 2+2=5. Any government loves these compliers because they are easy to control. The remaining 20% need to be ‘nudged’ more to get them to be more pliable. Whoever is left over because ‘nudging’ failed to break them is a threat to the government and therefore an enemy of the State and must be persecuted with loss of priveledges and freedom. For these survivors 2+2 is always going to equal 4 because that’s the truth and this truth makes them free.
110
The biggest lie begins at approx 5:28 where the WHOs Tedros talks about fake news that suggests countries will write and impose the rules in accordance with their own constitutions!
310
Canberra is driving us down the long, slow road to economic ruin and serfdom!
370
I wouldn’t say it’s such a “slow” road, actually.
The pace seems to be increasing, and it will take only a few more imposed restrictions or limitations to complete the digital locking up of the population.
80
Over my dead body, if necessary.
180
‘Necessary’ might not be the right word.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soylent_Green
🙂
80
The overriding problem is the two major cultures that have developed, or nurtured might be more accurate.
We in the Climate space watched it happen.
One, the polite ‘Follow the Science’ culture.
And those of us that did follow the science and noticed where it was leading, and started waving our hands and sounding the alarm.
It led to this.
The Franken Global Health Monster.
The ‘Follow the Science’ faction outsmarted us.
They understood that people follow fashion.
We naively thought ‘Science’ and rationality had defeated superstition forever.
It is Reformation 2.0.
This one will make the last one look pedestrian.
I fear ‘Pandemic’ (a political marketing term) was the end, not the beginning.
Evidenced by guileless folk like us and Bret Weinstein realizing too late that the conspiracy theorists weren’t nuts after all.
And dark forces had not been defeated by the Light.
I think I’ll go check the latest thing Alex Jones is talking about.
(Clue: notice how a fringe infotainment guy like AJ was so ferociously targeted by the establishment?)
330
“(Clue: notice how a fringe infotainment guy like AJ was so ferociously targeted by the establishment?)”
And then they went after Tucker Carlson.
The Elon Musk battle tank may survive.
Methinks they will eat their way to the bottom of the food chain.
250
Significant UPDATE added to the post with links to the 46 page document. The word vaccine appears 22 times. Note what they want to delete. Like the words: “non-binding”!
380
It is Insurrection to be against Vaccine.
(Humorous note: on my local college hipster music radio station, the young college DJ was reading the ‘news’ on Jan 6 …
“Today is the anniversary of the ‘deadly’ January 6 ‘Insur … erection’ “.)
Poor kid was unable to read and pronounce the word. 🙂
280
Some “deadly insurrection”; the only person who died directly as a result of actions that day was an unarmed female protester, shot in the back by a security officer.
150
Yes! I’ll drink to that! Those blood suckers are nothing but glorified bureaucrats.
340
The U.N. needs to be disbanded as they are failing their original goal of preventing wars and facilitate treaties instead it has turned into a power grabbing organization bent on taking over the world a platform that doesn’t exist in the original charter.
300
The problem here is that on the surface it looks so reasonable. We have an organisation that collects all the information about world health, and contains well-qualified doctors who can thus see where a problem is developing and initiate procedures that can stop a local problem developing into a worldwide one and thus save millions, maybe billions of lives. If you act quickly-enough, and stop people moving from where the problem is, or shut the borders when necessary, any disease can be isolated. Yep, stopping people going where they want to is against their human rights, but it has been used in the past and has been effective against pandemics, and it’s a balance of human rights against a massive death-toll in the country if you allow possibly-infected outsiders into it. Similarly, we’d expect those doctors in the WHO to prescribe a vaccination that worked and prevented transmission of the disease from the vaccinated people, because they’re experienced and qualified, and understand how the immune system works, so they wouldn’t be prescribing vaccination in a population where the disease was already rampant given that for around 2 weeks after vaccination the immune system becomes far less effective as it builds the new immunity.
Basically, the experts should know best.
However, the reality we saw during Covid didn’t match that ideal. Initially, the WHO said that Covid wasn’t infectious, and couldn’t be passed between people, but only caught from bats or other animals. Their investigation gave the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) a clean bill of health as being the source, and instead pointed to the wet market in Wuhan (maybe not helped by the investigation being led by Peter Daszac, who had funded the research at WIV). The vaccination chosen was injected, which doesn’t stop a respiratory disease from being caught and incubated, and also doesn’t stop transmission of that disease because it doesn’t produce antibodies in the airways. The WHO also said that the transmission could be stopped by a mask, because it was not aerosolised but carried by droplets (fomites), and again that was found to be wrong. The claims were that getting the injection would stop you getting ill and also stop your granny catching it from you, again both wrong statements. Later it was restated as reducing the risk of you being hospitalised. Recently the reduction of risk turned out to be maybe 1% or so, with a related problem of an increase in the risk of getting ill – the reduction of risk was stated as relative rather than absolute, making a small decrease in absolute risk seem a useful gain.
Thus the idea of passing absolute control to such an organisation that has demonstrated serial incompetence looks very risky to me. Not many countries got the response right, though Sweden probably was the least damaging. The WHO response was in my opinion because they knew initially that the source was WIV, and thus knew it had been engineered to be very infectious in humans, and they also expected it to be a lot more fatal that it in fact was because they knew all the stages of its development. The rest was ass-covering, trying to keep that vital information out of public knowledge.
A big problem here is also that we expect scientists to tell the truth and to use only logic in deciding the best course to take. This has rarely been true. Many people working in science rely more on beliefs than seeing all available data. This is pretty obvious in Global Warming, where the data showing that it’s (mostly) not human-caused is clear but such data is ignored by many people in positions of authority. Add to that the faith in computer models where “if the computer says so, it’s correct” even when again the evidence that the models are wrong is clear and even admitted by Gavin Schmidt of GISS. So what we got was the WHO having an unshakeable belief that vaccines were the only answer and that everyone should receive many of them, even once it was known that the protection wore off in around 3 months and that multiple injections risked provoking the body into a “ignore this virus” state allowing people to become repositories of infection rather than destroying the virus. For some reason, the already-available medicines that worked against Covid (HCQ, Ivermectin, antihistamines and Hydroxyurea) were ignored as being useless and even banned, though early on some pioneering doctors had shown that they were useful and even a Fauci report on SARS-COV from some years before said that Chloroquine worked.
The big problem is that we can thus expect the WHO to make a cock-up next time, and to run on a belief that may or may not be right, and to impose that on everyone. If they are near-enough right, it’s OK (though with maybe more deaths than necessary), but if not then all countries end up with the same problems at the same time. We need diversity in the system. Some countries will make better decision than others, and thus will do better, others make poor decisions and crash, but at least civilisation continues. Same problem with communism in general, in that if the decision making isn’t too bad the system staggers on, but some poor decision-making can collapse the whole system. The people who want power tend to get into positions where they have it, but it’s pretty rare that they are as competent as they think they are.
410
There is utility in noting what is motivating behaviour. The WHO is fronted by a psychopath Tedrhos who was installed with Bill Gates. Bill became rich pirating programmers intellectual property and was stuck with a nominal problem until inspiration struck whilst micturating. I came across the link to Epstein (who is alive= he did not kill himself- the man they garotted was a stand in) who was inexplicably wealthy and insinuated in to the political, Royal, media honeypot that is brimming with juicy recordings of naughtiness in his “private’ Isle.
We have just lived through a Problem,Reaction,Solution scamdemic. it contributed to me losing my profession, employment, my Father’s death and my 60 yo Brother’s death from two “Turbocancers”.. However I now know that our societal management is profoundly manipulated by psychopaths who are enriching themselves whilst killing or minimising longevity by multiple simultaneous attacks on societal structures.
A modern phenomenon is the “corporation’ and “committee” enabling seemingly good upstanding people to create systems that are evil whilst gaslighting us when Toto pulls the green curtain.
190
Simon Derricutt,
Thank you for this summary of events.
Some (many?) might dispute its accuracy – but that could happen because other narratives (propaganda?) are in conflict.
This makes your task rather difficult. It moves from creation of an accurate chronicle, to having to convince others that it is indeed accurate.
Same as with climate change, the hard part is not accurate science, but is convincing policy makers and voters that it is accurate.
Sadly, it comes back to “follow the money”. The well-paid, unelected bureaucrats in the UN do not care much for accuracy, so long as they can construct an edifice that channels money to them.
The planned UN takeover of aspects of global health is not really about better health for all. It is more about trade in commodities like recent vaccines and who profits from them. Geoff S
100
Geoff – it’s as accurate as I can make it so far. It’s a fair bet that most of the people involved in giving the orders thought that they were doing a Good Thing at the time they did it, since not many people like to think of themselves as bad people. Given the HIV sequences included in the virus, this may have been part of Fauci’s lifetime quest to produce a vaccine against HIV, but that’s just a guess. It remains that governments were far more worried about this virus that the data said, after all the average age of death from Covid was greater than the average age of death from all causes. What did they know, that wasn’t made public, that made them so scared?
With Climate Change, though there’s a lot of science to be done, the politics ignores the actual data and runs on what is believed, and the things that show that the changes must be mainly naturally-caused are simply ignored. Then again, I’ve lived through many end-of-the-world predictions and didn’t notice anything different. Fool me once, your shame, fool me twice, my shame. As The Who sang, we won’t get fooled again…. Except of course that people do get fooled again.
The medical system is not set up to make people healthy. There’s no profit in healthy people who don’t need medicines or treatment. Instead, there’s profit if people need to keep coming back for treatments or for pills that mask the symptoms of the underlying illness. Once people retire and stop earning money, they cost the State money instead, and the cost of medical care at end of life is likely more than the person paid in to the system. Thus it would make economic sense to quietly remove those unprofitable people if there’s some epidemic to blame it on, or even better some saintly World Organisation’s decisions. One death is a tragedy, a million deaths is a statistic.
Following the consensus is for most of the time the optimum option, but there are situations where the consensus is simply wrong. It is however very hard to then get people to accept the new information.
10
Quite a bit to digest there but nothing said that l disagree with. One thing relating to the WHO that l think should be remarked upon is its declaration in early 2020 that covid had a mortality rate of 3.4%. The media and many governments ran with that number and accordingly created hysteria and overreactive responses. Concurrently, epidemiologist Jay Bhattacharya, who estimated the mortality rate at around 0.2%,was either being ridiculed or having his reputation attacked. Similarly people- Joe Rogan springs to mind- who said that they thought young healthy people shouldn’t take covid vaccines were described by critics as purveyors of misinformation.
In December, I emailed my local MP suggesting our country needs to exit the WHO. I got 3 responses. 1.This is an automatic reply… 2.Merry Xmas, stay safe hope your family is all well
3.A personalised birthday card from my MP
To summarise: the MP did not address the issue I raised with him whatsoever. Probably no surprise to most of the commenters on this blog
30
Yes in general but not to the idea of
a balance of human rights.
With the right set of objectives no balancing is needed.
Example- freedom of movement is an objective, better, it is a right, it is not to be balanced by others’ fears, even legitimate. It is the fearful who need to make decisions on accepting the new risks or of isolating themselves.
00
To Australians, “Don’t do it” because as the kid in Time Bandits says, “It’s Evil!!!J”
120
Here is the full 59 minute interview.
Now there are 5.8 million views, and counting; pass it on.
https://twitter.com/TuckerCarlson/status/1743405833667371329?s=20
130
Time to get out o there. They are totally rotten. Look at their role in the Russia-Ukraine conflict. Not much good. And we still send them money.
210
Is it legally valid for an Australian government to make a treaty with a body that is not another government?
170
Paul S,
That would depend on the legal definition of “treaty”. I suspect that this WHO document is more accurately an “agreement” or even aspects of it a “contract”.
But, if it helps, I do not know the answer and I have been looking for it since 1973.
Geoff S
40
WHO is made up of governments. It is a “mere” coordinator, but the treaty exists as an intergovernmental agreement – it is the same with all international intergovernmental organisations – ICAO, IMO etc.
20
Four words and four digits for any US readers:-) “Vote Trump for POTUS 2024”.
260
And perhaps fight to get rid of electronic cheating machines. Watch every minute of the vote count. Demand the rolls get cleaned in your state. etc
Spread the word about the cheating…
100
Vote early and vote often .
00
The UN is a disaster and has already set us up to WASTE TRILLIONS of $ on the so called CC crisis and now they hope to further trap us into any new health scare they choose.
Of course they’ll require a new monster bureaucracy to force us to tow their line and we’ll never escape their net if we are stupid enough to help finance this new prison.
140
We are building it, for ourselves.
10
WHO’s Tedros is in the CCP’s pocket. A petition with a million signatures to remove him was simply ignored. We absolutely must leave the WHO.
https://www.timesnownews.com/international/article/petition-seeking-resignation-of-who-chief-tedros-adhanom-ghebreyesus-garners-over-1-million-signatures/583972
180
Tawdry Anhydrous Yesus.
Has come a long way in his journey through life.
Trouble is, it’s been through our lives!
60
Indeed, Tedros is Teflon coated. In your link he declares Africa is particularly under threat from covid in the early days. Most African lower economic countries with low covid vaccination rates reported low mortality rates…most of those countries, prior to the pandemic, endured River Blindness and treated it with ivermectin. Just saying.
*nay sayers look up the APOC program*
50
New Zealand fudged the data on how kidneys fare after a Covid injection.
In a January 2023 preprint in The Lancet, the New Zealand government released a study showing a 70 percent increased rate of kidney injury following two doses of Pfizer mRNA vaccines. Even more telling of injury was the dose-dependent effect. That is, one dose of Pfizer showed a 60 percent increased rate of injury within three weeks post-injection, while two doses showed a 70 percent increased rate of injury three weeks post-injection. “Acute kidney injury” was not defined by the authors but is understood in a clinical setting to include measurable changes in lab results and/or serious signs and symptoms such as bleeding, pain with urination, kidney stones, nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, or other renal dysfunction.
source; https://www.theepochtimes.com/health/nz-fudged-the-data-on-how-the-kidneys-fare-after-the-covid-vaccines-5556902
Australia needs a Royal Commission into the way Covid was managed. Criminal charges should be laid where required.
200
Aren’t royle commissions impotent?
20
Yes, when they allow vitnesses to commit perjury (eg the judge found that Julia Gillard did not tell the truth but no consequences). In the Wivenhoe commission no public servent or government minister was held responsible for misinformation which required a call back of the commission and orders about the late release to dam water. The Pell case showed some had lied to the Royal Commision on paedophilia and the victorian courts. That ABC woman should be [snip = investigated / charged / put on trial].
20
And here they are again fudging the truth by prosecuting a whistleblower who published some accurate data! And just like the Victorians over Dan Andrews “we don’t believe that negative stuff”.
60
Must say I’m felling a little powerless as a western society democratic voter. If it’s anything to do with the UN, then in Australia it’s got bi-partisan support from a political point of view. Our long history with the UN and our initial role in its genesis seems to ensure our devotion to this now moribund organization. So, it’s no use writing or talking to your local federal member. Obviously no use with the state reps either. Petitions seem to be ignored. You would hope referendums might be conclusive but I keep hearing YES advocates discussing parliament votes to enact Voices and treaties. Some states already have aboriginal voices to government in place. After COVID I have no faith in federal bureaucrat Health department personnel, TGA or politicians. They’ve all lost their basic sense of humanity. The only thing I can do is resist and pink pill family, friends and acquaintances. But it’s hardly the subject that comes up in general conversation is it? “ Oh, by the way, what’s your thoughts on the latest WHO pandemic guidelines.” Hardly the banter starter.
110
Political blindness is alive and well and flourishing in our LabLibGreen Uniparty.
https://richardsonpost.com/cliff-reece/34379/attorney-general-mark-dreyfus-takes-on-nazis/
10
Ross,
About 1985 my employer, Peko, agreed with my proposal to go to Court to prevent the United Nations world heritage mechanism from taking away our legal mineral exploration and mining rights in the NT, in a large area around the Ranger Uranium project area.
We won the first hearing, before a single Judge in the Federal Court (Beaumont). The Commonwealth appealed and won before 3 Judges in the Full Federal Court. We sought leave to appeal before the High Court. The Full Bench declined to give that right, arguing among other matters of the embarrassment that Australia might face from a challenge to an International Treaty. It was clear to us that even back then, our top judges were parochial in outlook and fearful of being seen as little Aussie Davids taking on the UN Goliath.
So far as I know, this trait of Aussie judges has now worsened, to a stinking, rotten mess of bowing to global propaganda. For example, note the legal silence after the last Referendum was rejected, yet leftist politicians and NGOs seem set on forcing the changes that 60% of us rejected. They seem obligated to be led by international Treaty people on racial recognition, some being from the UN.
It has a simple remedy. Australia should withdraw from all UN activity and funding. The UN is not a benefit to Australia. Geoff S
181
In Mukinbudin the No Vote was 91%. In Koorda the No Vote was 88%. In Bencubbin the No vote was 81.25%. This was because of the school teachers and Centre Link clients with mental health issues voted Yes in Bencubbin 😉
50
The UN is a lot of things, but alas “moribund” is not one of them.
40
I had the same feeling.
Moribund doesn’t give the right impression; evil.
60
Yep, I think it was wishful thinking. Moribund = dying. Evil is way better. Interesting the other day spokespeople for Gutierres said he never said “ boiling” in relation to climate change. Pure evil.
70
The W.H.O. has a ‘ health plan’ in mind,
Which by free nations should not be signed,
About lockdowns, forced vaccines,
Mandated therapies for your genes,
And sold as the hope of mankind.
80
With the League of Nations, which was the UN version 1.0, it only took one major delegation to say no and literally walk out, to render it inert.
If it’s a “binding treaty” then that opens the door for the USA to “walk out” or for it not to go effect, because the Swamp doesn’t have the legal power to enter into a treaty without a super majority in the Senate okaying it. It won’t be worth the paper it’s printed on-legally. And without the US, the UN will have no power. Especially if others follow in a domino effect.
However, that was case with Paris during 2015, but Obama did it anyway. It all depends on what happens during the next 10 months.
80
No living organism is meant to live in perpetual stasis. Struggle with environment, with others, with our own need for food and shelter, to raise families and eventually die are the foundational purposes of existence. This current order is sick and it is dying. As it moves towards its inevitable dissolution those who live the lives furthest removed from the foundations will act out with the greatest levels of irrationality and violence.
The smartest move for those who do not wish to be a part of that world is to seek out the high water mark of this civilization and put down roots. Rediscover the most basic skills and traditions that have endured throughout human history across all cultures; self-sufficiency, family, community involvement, literacy, and a deep connection to the natural world rather than manifest realities or the urbanite.
This is a test.
https://www.theburningplatform.com/2024/01/07/the-ruling-class-is-growing-weaker/
20
If the majority of people cannot work out global warming is a hoax, then what hope do we have.
20
The majority do know it’s a hoax and have for years. Do you read my site Kevin? I’m genuinely curious. I’ve covered this many times in many surveys. Consistently 50 – 60% answer as skeptics in most polls.
https://joannenova.com.au/tag/polls/
This is Kryptonite for fake science preachers: 60% of voters agree Climate Change is a religion March 2023.
111
Dear Jo Nova, Love and admire your work, hugely appreciate your reply, when you have time.
https://twitter.com/VigilantFox/status/1741281847168913467
Study Finds Staggering 17 Million Deaths After COVID-19 “Vaccine” Rollout
https://twitter.com/VigilantFox/status/1744799909281226817
“The whole problem of this global warming is a complete nothing,” Dr. Willie Soon told Tucker Carlson.
10
This is only the last of a long list of reasons Australia, indeed every western nation, has to abandon all links and treaties or covenants with the United Nations.
I cannot think of a single thing the UN has done, or Australia has accepted from the UN, that has been to my advantage. Surrendering Australia’s sovereignty, and that of its citizens, to an unelected body run by third world thugs who hate us is nothing short of treason.
And if what my government is doing is not to my advantage, then what exactly is its purpose?
140
??? WHO IS FUNDING WHO ???
The U.S. courts, in adjudicating state attempts to tax federal property, have established the Sovereign is not subject to a tax by an inferior tax agency. The Constitution establishes the Citizens of this Republic are Sovereign and thereby are not subject to taxation by the subordinate federal government. Ref. Article IV, Section 4.
Further, the clause of LIBERTY of the 5th and 14th Amendments establish the Pursuit of a Livelihood by Citizens to be a Right, similar to a Trial by Jury, which is not subject to a tax or fee. If the current income tax is valid, the government can tax 100% of a Citizen’s earning and resurrect the society of 1860. Indeed, that appears to be the objective. An income tax on Sovereign Citizens is not Constitutionally valid. The Power to tax is the power to destroy.
The Federal Reserve system has been analyzed to have profited by the amount of Deficit Spending. The profit is concealed by the FRBNY’s exclusive control of the auction accounts of government Treasury securities. The auctions currently handle $16 trillion annually. It is alleged the records conceal $34 Trillion profit over a span of 100 years to unidentified private entities. All profit legally belongs to the government. The FRBNY’s accounting records of government funds have never been publicly audited. Ref. 31 CFR §375.3.
It is submitted the above two unconstitutional actions constitute a coup by financial entities of the United States. It appears to be funding current corruption of the U.S. government by organized voting fraud, screened job placements, and open borders; the monopoly control of business; the domination of foreign nations by debt and military occupation; and many other WEF globalist projects. NOTE: THE UN, AND WHO, AND THE IMF, HAVE BEEN FUNDED BY WALL STREET.
The Constitutional framers, inspired by the initial historic religious rebellion at Runnymede against King John’s war-monger decree that his appointed territorial governors were to finance and staff an invasion of Normandy, formulated the most magnificent document of a societies’ freedom from oppression that mankind has ever seen. In 1776, and in 1789, a similar document was formulated in 13 colonies. Regrettable, tolerance of repeated infringement by nefarious operators has corrupted their benchmark in history.
30
WHERE DO WE GO ???
Pascal Najadi, an insider of the WEF, now labels it a den of evil. He holds WEF responsible for poisoning 5.7 billion people, including his mother, with a poison bioweapon as a democide [read govt killing]. The agenda of the WEF is for national representatives to grant sovereign political authority to the WEF. The program for their upcoming meeting is to again address the lack of public trust. Ref. https://rumble.com/v3qf7ig-breaking-documentary-short-cutting-off-the-head-of-the-snake-geneva-switzer.html
A considerable amount of money has been involved in the WEF development. What sources of the funds, beyond Gates, should we look for ?
Globalist territorial domination projects have required much money. Michel Chossudovsky [GLOBALIZATION OF POVERTY AND THE NWO] and William Blum [KILLING HOPE; US MILITARY AND CIA INTERVENTIONS] have identified the IMF to scheme financial domination of nations. John Perkins, as a front point man, identifies Wall Street financiers to be behind the IMF in CONFESSIONS OF AN ECONOMIC HIT MAN. Major Wall Street financiers have been identified to be Rothschild affiliates and organizers of the Federal Reserve.
WHO, as a component of the United Nations created by Wall Street financiers, has plans for global control by medical passports and national lockdowns. Fauci, while developing Covid-19, was desperately looking for funds. Where the funds came from is unknown.
The CIA is alleged to have been developed by Wall Street, using their crony Allen Dulles, to cover their nefarious acts under a cloak of National Security. One of the CIA’s first coups in 1953 used Kermit Roosevelt and two suitcases stuffed with cash to put the Shah back on the Peacock Throne so Wall Street oil moguls could receive control of the nationalized Iranian British Petroleum oil fields. Many more CIA coups have benefited Wall Street interests. It is assumed Davos’ attendees who want to protect their current status are mindful of this.
The IMF’s use of sanctions to achieve national domination has a role in the current seizure of an Iranian oil tanker and a million barrels of oil that may kindle open hostile military action.
The Federal Reserve is among other global bankers currently seeking direct withdrawal control of depositors’ accounts by CBDC. This control is what Trudeau used in Canada to seize funds of truck businesses and China has imposed on their people. Total control of individuals’ financial earnings was outlawed in 1866. But talk at Davos will center around controlling climate by farmers and cow farts.
The Fed has been accused of profiting from their receiving deficit spending Treasury securities [as collateral for book-entry credit on government ledgers] which seem to disappear after being received. The Fed has exclusive control, as a fiscal agent of the government, over the formulation, auctioning, and disbursement of auction funds from Treasury securities for redeeming maturing securities. Ref: 31 CFR §375.3. All profit of the Fed belongs to the government. Those accounts, currently handling > $15 trillion annually, have never been audited. The lost funds exceed $33 Trillion.
Where do we go from here ??
10