Ivermectin, WHO, UN, Merck, The World Bank & Kissinger’s World Population Plan Of Action

All signs point to genocide

Video walkthrough now available:

In 1974, Kissinger announced the “world population plan of action” under Nixon’s presidency. NSSM 200 is nothing short of an atrocious secret government document talking about the capping of the world’s population at 8 billion. This menacing declaration of genocide was official US government policy and has been declassified in part (Document link)

Mass Ivermectin Administration

According to an article from Merck, they have shipped 4 billion doses of one version of Ivermectin, Mectizan, to people of poor countries:

“The Program reaches more than 400 million people annually; over 4 billion Mectizan [Ivermectin] 3mg tablets have been shipped to endemic countries by Merck since the inception of MDP in 1987.”

According to another Merck article, they claim the total Ivermectin doses donated surpasses 4.4 Billion… with the help of a public-partnership between Merck, the Task Force for Global Health & the WHO.

Here’s a list of all the countries that receive or have received Ivermectin donations from Merck (as per Mectizan Donation Program article):

American Samoa, Angola, Benin, Brazil, Burkina, Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Chad, Colombia, Congo, Cook Islands, Côte d’Ivoire, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Ecuador, Egypt, Ethiopia, Fiji, Ghana, Guatemala, Guinea, Guyana, Haiti, India, Indonesia, Kenya, Kiribati, Liberia, Malawi, Malaysia, Mali, Marshall Islands, Mexico, Mozambique, Niger, Nigeria, Niue, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Senegal, Sierra Leone, South Sudan, Sri Lanka, Sudan, São Tomé and Príncipe, Tanzania, Thailand, Timor-Leste, Togo, Tuvalu, Uganda, Vanuatu, Venezuela, Vietnam, Wallis and Futuna & Yemen

From a 2015 WHO report:

The Task Force For Global Health

Ivermectin For Fertility Reduction

In part 1 and part 2 of the Ivermectin Vs Fertility series, we looked at a number of very concerning studies showing deleterious fertility effects of ivermectin. Let’s examine 3 of these studies again:

Study 1

In a study called ‘Adverse effects of repeated doses of Ivermectin alone or with the combination of vitamin C on reproductive system of female rabbits’ by Jawad et al, researchers tested different amounts of Ivermectin and Vitamin C on rabbits and measured the number of offspring they beget.

“The results of fertility study revealed adverse effect of ivermectin therapy on fertility and block the pregnancy in all treated group except the fifth group which administered vitamin C only as compared with control group… In conclusion: Ivermectin has adverse effects on reproductive efficacy on female rabbits”

Study 2

In a study called ‘Toxicological and pathological studies of Ivermectin on male albino rats’ Elzoghby et al, researchers examined sperm count & percentage abnormal sperm of White Albino rats given ivermectin.

Sperm Count

“Significant decrease in total sperm count with significant increase in sperm abnormality was also demonstrated.”

Study 3

In a study from Nigeria entitled ‘Effects of Ivermectin therapy on the sperm functions of Nigerian onchocerciasis patients’, some very concerning findings were published.

“We observed significant reduction in the sperm counts and sperm motility of the patients tested. On the morphology there was significant increase in the number of abnormal sperm cells. This took the forms of two heads, double tails, white (albino) sperms and extraordinarily large heads. It is suspected that the above alterations in the already determined parameters of the patients’ sperm cells could only
have occurred as a result of their treatment with ivermectin.”

World Bank & Ivermectin

I was able to find 2 documents from the World Bank concerning the mass Ivermectin distribution program.

https://thedocs.worldbank.org/en/doc/332251619015560863-0240021996/original/WorldBankGroupArchivesFolder30137017.pdf
https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/116611468204860193/pdf/31570.pdf

World Bank River Blindness/ Ivermectin Video: “We Need To Finish The Job”

It brags about “spraying insecticide” to combat river blindness in 1974:

Ivermectin “works like a miracle against river blindness.. putting an end to infected people going blind” claims the video.

Well it isn’t a very effective miracle! The video continues, “Just one or two pills a year, per person. No exceptions”

The video ends with the very ominous line: “If we stop, river blindness WILL come back. WE MUST FINISH THE JOB”

It’s hard not to see the Kissinger world population plan of action reflected in the organizations listed at the end of the video.

UNICEF Paid Propaganda About River Blindness & Ivermectin

UNICEF wrote a “paid” propaganda article in Forbes magazine using much the same tone and talking points as the World Bank video on river blindness, 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/unicefusa/2022/01/30/progress-on-the-fight-against-neglected-tropical-diseases

UNICEF says Ivermectin was deployed in mass in Nigeria by “109,378 community-directed distributors.”  In large font UNICEF emphatically quotes a Nigerian man “I wish I had this knowledge previously, especially about the medicine called Mectizan (Ivermectin). My child wouldn’t have died.”  This utterance is alleged to have occurred “after attending a community outreach session run by UNICEF-trained leaders.”  It goes without saying that UNICEF cannot be trusted to properly capture peoples’ sentiments in this cherry-picked quote.

UNICEF writes in the Forbes article:

“A UNICEF partner since 1991, the pharmaceutical company Merck & Co. donates Mectizan (originally known as ivermectin) to fight river blindness. Merck works with UNICEF and other organizations to distribute the drug free of charge to all who need it.”

Gates “Fights Parasites” In Africa

Gates also is VERY interested in “combating parasites” in Africa: https://www.gatesnotes.com/Health/Meguro-Parasitological-Museum

Mexico

Brazil

According to an article by PostSen.com, 79.5% of Brazillians surveyed reported using Ivermectin when they had symptoms of covid in 2022. The poll was conducted by the Barcelona Global Health Institute.

The UN And Depopulation

The United Nations and the billionaire oligarchs who control them seem much more interested in reducing the future population than alleviating suffering or helping human health & well-being.

I recently put together a compilation of video clips exposing the hidden genocide from the mouths of some of the key perpetrators:

Many of these depopulation proponents are tied in closely with the United Nations.

Overlap With The Tetanus Hcg Immunocontraceptives Disguised As Vaccines

While on the topic of NSSM 200, it’s helpful to remind ourselves of the atrocities seemingly perpetrated by the WHO and UN’s UNICEF agency with sterilants in the vaccine.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12346214/

Kenyan Catholic Bishops put out a 2014 press release after independently testing the tetanus vaccine being deployed widely in their country.

Watch Next:

All my ivermectin videos in an easy to watch & share playlist: https://odysee.com/@TimTruth:b/major-fertility-hit-ivermectin:a?lid=008d0c4c5527c12b317f6dee675b36cbe6f654b8

THE NEW OCCULTISM: CHOAS MAGIC, DISCORDIANISM AND TRANSHUMANISM

The trickster is able to bring up in a humorous way issues that may still be too controversial to begin serious debates over. Willingness to parody ourselves protects us from becoming truly ridiculous, and renders parodies of us by our enemies utterly useless. If the New Agers were more willing to parody themselves, their culture might have filtered out some of its more absurd notions, and spared itself much vicious lampooning from without. It is the job of the Discordian to disrupt unhealthy patterns, including one’s own. It should be noted that making pointless wisecracks just as the energy is peaking in a ritual is not a positive use of irreverence.
      On a larger scale the chaos magician is able to work vast changes unattainable through ordinary, orderly means. Where chaotic systems exist, it is now well known that in the right place, a small flutter can transform the entire system. This is known in chaos science as the butterfly effect. In these fast changing times, at this crossroads of history, in this time of crisis and opportunity, our entire society is a chaotic system. By observing society keenly, and choosing the appropriate moment for the golden apple to be launched, the chaos magician can work great changes in society through the social butterfly effect.

GLOBAL MIND: TRANSHUMANISM, FREEMASONRY AND THE INTERNET AS GOD

This—the evolution of man into superman—was always the purpose of the ancient Mysteries, and the real purpose of modern Masonry is, not the social and charitable purposes to which so much attention is paid, but the expediting of the spiritual evolution of those who aspire to perfect their own nature and transform it into a more god-like quality. And this is a definite science, a royal art, which it is possible for each of us to put into practice, whilst to join the Craft for any other purpose than to study and pursue this science is to misunderstand its meaning.[1]

TRANSHUMANISM & THE ILLUMINATI

Electric information environments being utterly ethereal foster the illusion of the world as spiritual substance. It is now a reasonable facsimile of the mystical body [of Christ], a blatant manifestation of the Anti-Christ. After all, the Prince of this world is a very great electric engineer.

The global world order is centralized at levels above the nation-state

The illusions of a transition from a “unipolar” U.S. to “multi-polar” BRICS order

Until you know who has lent what to whom, you know nothing whatever of politics, you know nothing whatever of history, you know nothing of international wrangles. – Ezra Pound

In the 2022 Brazil presidential election Brazil’s version of the deep state successfully rigged the election against popular populist Bolsonaro, running the same strategy that they had deployed against Trump in America. Protesters had their funds stolen from their bank accounts and they were held down and forcibly COVID vaccinated against their will and then jailed. Lula, the globohomo candidate, immediately announced that Brazil would begin de-dollarization efforts. Lawfare efforts commenced against Bolsonaro and he fled the country.

During the 2022 Canadian Freedom Convoy protests against COVID vaccine mandates, Justin Trudeau and one of his top ministers announced that they would steal the funds out of the bank accounts of the protesters. The next day, chagrined, they reversed themselves – they had received a reprimand from above; it was not yet time to roll it out in Canada. Meanwhile, all new trucks by 2025 will have remote kill-switches installed in them, preventing such protests from fomenting in the future.

In 2022 Pakistan’s National Assembly and Supreme Court ousted populist leader Imran Khan and lawfare efforts were then initiated to imprison him. Khan was ousted because he was neutral in the Russia/Ukraine conflict.

In 2022 Romania arrested populist clown-figure Andrew Tate because Tate was upsetting globohomo with his pro-masculinity takes. Romania had little to no interest in investigating or imprisoning Tate but did so on orders from above.

In 2020-2021 the CIA attempted to overthrow Alexander Lukashenko in Belarus, repeating what they accomplished against a democratically elected leader in Ukraine, which was thwarted.

In mid-2023 Russian nationalist Igor Strelkov and many others were arrested and thrown in prison by authorities with little to no justification offered during the ongoing globohomo-sponsored Ukraine war.

I could go on as these are just a handful of examples. These events are viewed as disparate events by most people, but I see them as a connected conspiracy, orchestrated from the owners of the world central banks who use the political actors of their nation-state subjects to crush populism wherever it is found.

Look, all one has to do is observe the worldwide coordinated efforts during COVID to see how global this monster is. Every country in the world worked in lockstep on economic shutdowns and forced untested, deadly vaccinations, including the so-called independent states of China, Russia, Iran, Brazil, Saudi etc. Only Africa was exempt from these forced measures and Sweden feebly resisted to a very limited extent. Dissenters worldwide to this process were banned from the public realm, lost their jobs or worse. Of course the creator of the PCR test, the gold standard of COVID testing, believed the PCR test was wildly inappropriate for testing for COVID (and he curiously died right before the start of COVID), but this was seen as a benefit by globohomo because they could get any result they wanted from the tests depending on the number of cycles they used for amplification (amplifying tests more than 25x would come back positive for anything, and there are reports COVID tests were amplified at varying rates over time but as high as 40x) — in other words, globohomo could create surges of COVID waves at their will depending on political needs.

See this great post by Iain Davis
where he breaks the argument down further:

All governments in all major economies are avid enthusiasts of SDGs, biosecurity, digitalisation, tokenisation, the censorship of "disinformation," CBDC (digital money), population surveillance and, most crucially, global governance under the auspices of the United Nations (UN)….This suggests oligarch control external of international relations and conflicts. There is evidence of supranational sovereignty and political authority being exercised, right now, by a global network that operates beyond the reach of national governments”…

Quite evidently, there is very real and bitter conflict between nations and it is causing immense suffering. In fact, one of our chief concerns is that the transition to a MWO will cause significantly more suffering.

What we are saying is that there is no disagreement on the pillars from any quarter. But this is no claim that national governments are “all in it together.” On the contrary, the fact that there is both conflict and, at the same time, global agreement on the pillars, suggests a “geopolitical reality” that no member of the multipolar fan club seemingly wants to discuss.

Agreement on the pillars does not suggest all national governments are of one, single hive mind. It suggests that governments do not control the global governance system. They are subject to it, just like the rest of us. The best they can achieve is "partner" status. And they are not senior partners.

The pillars did not originate with national governments. The pillars were mapped out by public-private globalist think tanks and international organisations that serve the interests of oligarchs.

The cabal structure is represented as follows from here:

The BIS is the coordinating entity of the world central banks and is based in Basil, Switzerland. It is not subject to the laws of Switzerland and has its own police force. The BIS itself is owned by a very small number of families although the exact details are of course closely guarded and not released for public consumption. See this link which explains how most of the layers above the Policy Subject level are exempted from paying taxes. In other words, this system is a worldwide parasitical system that extracts wealth from the public for its own consumption.

The private owners of the world central banks are seemingly animated by a malevolent Demiurgic spirit which seeks a total inversion of human values and quite possibly an end to humanity itself, as Tree of Woe
points out here. While they may not be literally inspired by an actual Demon, their actions are indistinguishable from it.

As Ezra Pound said, “Wars in old times were made to get slaves. The modern implement of imposing slavery is debt.” The central banks of the world print funds out of thin air and then loan those funds to governments at interest. If you think U.S. debt is bad now, look at what is being projected by the Treasury:

Debt held by the public is a measure of all federal debt that the federal government owes to those outside of the federal government. It includes debt held by individuals, businesses, banks, insurance companies, state and local governments, pension funds, mutual funds, foreign governments, foreign businesses and individuals, and the U.S. Federal Reserve Bank. An increase in government borrowing reduces the amount of money available to other borrowers, putting upward pressure on interest rates and reducing private investment.

I had previously posted a representation of this neoliberal feudal structure as follows:

One of the last things that Julian Assange had tweeted was a subset of this structure before he was silenced. I previously covered Assange’s story here.

Many of you reading this are well educated; most have spent a lot of time following political developments. Why do so few know about this structure even though it is both hierarchical and simple to understand? The answer is they make every attempt to conceal it from the public; even the far right basically just focuses on the World Economic Forum or the Federal Reserve or Jews (the relationship between the Jewish people and the central bank owners I covered previously here). The propaganda outlets would never discuss the actual structure of the world, nor academics or anyone who receives benefits from this system. As the Rothschild firm of London wrote to associates in New York, 1863:

“The few who understand the system will either be so interested in its profits or be so dependent upon its favours that there will be no opposition from that class, while on the other hand, the great body of people, mentally incapable of comprehending the tremendous advantage that capital derives from the system, will bear its burdens without complaint, and perhaps without even suspecting that the system is inimical to their interests.” 

A system designed like this must stay in the shadows and must keep the world’s population focused on distractions. It is more akin to a parasite on a host than anything else. It is a closed feedback system: it prints unlimited money out of thin air via their privately owned central banks then it feeds the media, academic, intelligence community and political systems which then push values and laws that increase the power of the central banks further and impoverish the general population via increased crime, illegal immigration, etc. It is a closed system so the ability to impact it from the outside is very low (the limited extent it can influence the system is finding ways to decrease the system’s legitimacy, such as via the Canadian trucker protest during COVID), and the #1 priority of the system is to oppress political threats to its continued propagation – hence, it crushes, viciously, any organized opposition. It is basically like the mafia. And this is very dispiriting for those outside the system who want to have an impact: dissident energies and funds are quite limited without any institutional or foreign support, and when this closed system simply ignores them and doubles down on egalitarianism and open borders the energies of dissidents get depressed and then dissolve…

With that said they are few in number and we are many; hence populism is what the system is most afraid of, because if enough people wake up to how this worked they would be furious and overthrow it. This is why free speech is de-facto banned and any attempts at organizing are immediately infiltrated with federal provocateurs.
CDN media
A man painting the Federal Reserve on fire

Now, this is a train with no brakes: every system carries momentum within it, and if a system is not striving toward something then it could easily break up amidst squabbling and lack of control. This is what European Central Bank President Christine Lagarde means when she says CBDCs are required or else they will lose control (even this Substack is tiny evidence of populist attacks on their control; people are slowly, ever so slowly, waking up): they need to push forward with instituting total, permanent control over the masses via a slave CBDC system or their criminal enterprise could fall apart. They need to further weaken and destroy the host (even though a dead host could kill the parasite) because not doing so entails certain destruction. This is why the EU wants to import 75 million more illegal migrants in furtherance of the Kalergi plan.

As part of this strategy the central bank owners could issue a transition from a unipolar to a multi-polar world as is currently being publicly hinted at in a number of ways and as argued by bloggers like The Dissident Writer
with a surface level analysis here, but such a transition would not change the structure of the above hierarchy, especially the upper layers and hence it is false and a lie, even if it ends up in dramatically lowering U.S. quality of living by BRICS de-dollarizing and shifting off the petrodollar system. The negative inflationary effects of unlimited monetary printing pushing more and more people into poverty was recently covered by Theodore Atkinson
here; it will get much worse.
Note the intentional demarcation within this pseudo-”multi-polar world” between Europe and Russia in accordance with Mackinder’s still-highly relevant 1904 Heartland Theory, as discussed here

How did this system arise?

This system originally arose due to carveouts which gave Jewish families the exclusive right to money lend to the masses during the European Middle Ages; see this post and the second half of this post for details on this process. A small, highly successful sub-set came to understand how money is the primary driver for most people and that by manipulating the money supply one could manipulate human behavior for their own ends. There was no competition; no one else understood what money really represented at its core, and it was not the ability to trade, consume or wage war but the ability to shape belief. It wasn’t usually done as crudely as direct bribery; rather, money was printed out of thin air via the Bank of England (established in 1694) and then funneled to favored causes and organizations that would increase its power and destroy their enemies. As Mayer Amschel Rothschild famously stated, ″Permit me to issue and control the money of a nation, and I care not who establishes its laws.″ His lovely wife also supposedly said, “If my sons did not want wars, there would be none.”

There has been a flat zero significant1 opposition to this system since the end of World War 2 where Germany was set up for failure by the world’s financial forces. Before that globohomo conquered America in 1913 with the establishment of the Federal Reserve and conquered Russia by overthrowing the Tsar and brutally murdering him and his entire family. China has been owned by globohomo for a long time and their project concluded with the country’s induction into the WTO with US patronage, while Iran has always been a globohomo plaything, first by toppling Mossadegh (1953) and then by handing Iran to Khomeini (1979) who was living in Britain before the handover, much as the British handed Russia to the Bolsheviks (and Lenin was also living in the West beforehand). Rurik Skywalker
touches on some of these ideas about Iran in his recent post here.

Again, there was not significant competition because the Tsar, kings and emperors were operating on a different, lower plane; they saw the use of money incorrectly for tapping its full potential. These kings pursued a personal power maximization strategy, risking their lives and thrones jostling in battles against other kings for territorial changes to improve their reputations. But they were always controlled by the funding that they relied on, and by controlling the money supply the central bank owners could make or break kings (the latter by funding their opposition2) while setting the incentives in place for societal changes as a whole. They had no need to put their own necks on the line or to be identified as the source of power to the public. The central bank owners were five steps ahead and their vision so much greater.
An illustration of the European balance of power. Who do you think was doing the balancing?

The understanding of the globohomo structure is critical to understanding the Russia/Ukraine war from the proper perspective. It is easy otherwise to get fooled by governmental, media or alternative (usually CIA backed) propaganda like from Larry Johnson, Scott Ritter or otherwise, or by bloggers like Simplicius. Both Russia and Ukraine are mere “Policy Enforcers” of this system and both are beholden to the forces at the layers above them.

This is a big reason why both garden-variety civic nationalism and far-right white nationalism is a dead end: putting aside that the West is rapidly turning brown and black and that the Germans who elected the Nazis had a 98% white country (i.e. it was an easy Schelling point at the time), and that the white world population has shrunk from 25% of the world population in 1900 to 6.5% today, it doesn’t understand that their globohomo opposition suppresses nationalism everywhere, therefore resistance to it needs to take place on a global basis from a position of populism and nationalism everywhere. Everyone in the world other than the tiny number of central bank owning families and their underlings is a slave to this system, therefore everyone has an incentive to upend it. Even if the end goal is nationalism, it cannot be accomplished while this global system is in force. A focus on race, gender, sexual orientation, etc. is a distraction given the scope of the problem, except perhaps to understand the complicated relationship between the central bankers and the Jewish people as a whole. Indeed, encouraging the populations of the world to fight amongst each other, rooted in the egalitarian ratchet effect, is one of globohomo’s chief methods of control to keep people from discovering their ongoing theft. Any objective of self-sovereignty must begin with the identification of this system as it structurally exists and then fought locally and worldwide with the conviction that globohomo’s national “leaders” are mere powerless figureheads for global forces. In other words, the North Star when viewing “new political or social developments” should be with the structure and motivations of the world’s central bank owners in mind. And as OGRE
points out, the more knowledge of truth spreads the weaker globohomo becomes.

Thanks for reading.

Terrain Theory – Recontextualizing the Germ – Dr Sam Bailey

Once again Dr. Sam blew it! Amazing lady there, God Bless the Baileys! Cheers!

This article was originally published on The Secular Heretic on February 16, 2022.

Why is it considered “settled science” among epidemiologists, virologists and the general public that certain diseases like Influenza and COVID-19 are transmitted through human contact, when in fact it has never been proven that diseases spread this way? For more than a century Germ Theory has had the dominance and authority of religious orthodoxy, yet a far more plausible explanation for how and why we get “infected” with certain illnesses is Terrain Theory, which illustrates that a multitude of environmental and genetic components combine to determine the incidence of disease in a population or individual. In the following essay, Torsten Engelbrecht, Dr. Claus Köhnlein, MD and Dr. Samantha Bailey, MD draw on material gathered in their extraordinary book Virus Mania to reveal the explanatory power of terrain theory.

For about 120 years in particular, people have been very susceptible to the idea that certain microbes act like predators, stalking our communities for victims and causing the most serious illnesses named COVID-19, AIDS, hepatitis C, avian flu etc. But such an idea is thoroughly simple, too simple. Unfortunately, as psychology and social science have discovered, humans have a propensity for simplistic solutions, particularly in a world that seems to be growing increasingly complicated. But medical and biological realities, like social ones, are just not that simple. Renowned immunology and biology professor Edward Golub’s rule of thumb is that, “if you can fit the solution to a complex problem on a bumper sticker, it is wrong! I tried to condense my book The Limits of Medicine: How Science Shapes Our Hope for the Cure to fit onto a bumper sticker and couldn’t.” [1]

By focusing on microbes and accusing them of being the primary and lone triggers of disease, we overlook how various factors causing illness are linked together, such as environmental toxins, the side effects of medications, psychological issues like depression and anxiety, and poor nutrition. If over a longer period of time, for instance, you eat far too little fresh fruits and vegetables, and instead consume far too much fast food, sweets, coffee, soft drinks, or alcohol (and along with them, all sorts of toxins such as pesticides or preservatives), and maybe smoke a lot or even take drugs like cocaine or heroin, your health will eventually be ruined. Drug-addicted and malnourished junkies aren’t the only members of society who make this point clear to us.

For billions of years, nature has functioned as a whole with unsurpassed precision. Microbes, just like humans, are a part of this cosmological and ecological system. If humanity wants to live in harmony with technology and nature, we must be committed to understanding the supporting evolutionary principles ever better and to applying them properly to our own lives. Whenever we don’t do this, we create ostensibly insolvable environmental and health-related problems.

“The doctor should never forget to interpret the patient as a whole being.”

Dr. Rudolf Virchow

These are thoughts which Rudolf Virchow (1821-1902), a well-known doctor from Berlin, had when he required in 1875 that “the doctor should never forget to interpret the patient as a whole being.”[2] The doctor will hardly understand the patient, then, if he or she does not see that person in the context of a larger environment. Without the appearance of bacteria, human life would be inconceivable, as bacteria were right at the beginning of the development towards human life.

Bacteria could very well exist without humans; humans, however, could not live without bacteria! It is, therefore, unreasonable to conclude that these mini-creatures, whose life-purpose and task throughout biological history has been to build up life, are, in fact, the greatest, singular causes of disease and death. Yet, the prevailing allopathic medical dogma of one disease, one cause, one miracle pill has dominated our thinking since the late 19th century, when Louis Pasteur and Robert Koch became heroes.

Louis Pasteur (1822-1895) is considered the “father of germ theory.” He believed the healthy human body was sterile and got sick only when invaded by tiny bacteria too small for any microscope in his time to see. Robert Koch (1843-1910), one of the founders of modern bacteriology, expanded on Pasteur’s germ theory and developed his Koch’s Postulates, long considered the gold standard for linking specific microorganisms to specific diseases.

Prior to that, we had a very different mindset, and even today, there are still traces everywhere of this different consciousness. “Since the time of the ancient Greeks, people did not ‘catch’ a disease, they slipped into it. To catch something meant that there was something to catch, and until the germ theory of disease became accepted, there was nothing to catch,” writes Edward Golub in his work. Hippocrates, who is said to have lived around 400 B.C., and Galen (one of the most significant physicians of his day; born in 130 A.D.), represented the view that an individual was, for the most part, in the driver’s seat in terms of maintaining health with appropriate behavior and lifestyle choices. “Most disease [according to ancient philosophy] was due to deviation from a good life,” says Golub. “[And when diseases occur] they could most often be set aright by changes in diet—[which] shows dramatically how 1,500 years after Hippocrates and 950 years after Galen, the concepts of health and disease, and the medicines of Europe, had not changed”[3] far into the 19th century. The German Max von Pettenkofer (1818-1901), once appointed rector of the University of Munich, jeered: “Bacteriologists are people who don’t look further than their steam boilers, incubators and microscopes.”[4]

Just a few hours after birth, all of a newborn baby’s mucous membrane has already been colonized by bacteria, which perform important protective functions. Without these colonies of billions of germs, the infant, just like the adult, could not survive. What’s more, only a small part of our body’s bacteria have been discovered.[5] “The majority of cells in the human body are anything but human: foreign bacteria have long had the upper hand,” reported a research team from Imperial College in London under the leadership of Jeremy Nicholson in the journal Nature Biotechnology in 2004.[6] In the human digestive tract alone, researchers came upon around 100 trillion microorganisms, which together have a weight of up to one kilogram. “This means that the 1,000-plus known species of symbionts probably contain more than 100 times as many genes as exist in the host,” as Nicholson states. It makes you wonder how much of the human body is “human” and how much is “foreign.”

Nicholson calls us “human super-organisms”—as our own ecosystems are ruled by microorganisms. “It is widely accepted,” writes the Professor of Biochemistry, “that most major disease classes have significant environmental and genetic components and that the incidence of disease in a population or individual is a complex product of the conditional probabilities of certain gene components interacting with a diverse range of environmental triggers.”[7] Above all, nutrition has a significant influence on many diseases, in that it modulates complex communication between the 100 trillion microorganisms in the intestines!

“Alone the production of a large part of the food that lands on our plates is dependent on bacterial activity.”

Dr. René Dubos

How easily this bacterial balance can be decisively influenced can be seen with babies: If they are nursed with mother’s milk, their intestinal flora almost exclusively contains a certain bacterium (Lactobacillus bifidus), which is very different from the bacterium most prevalent when they are fed a diet including cow’s milk. “The bacterium lactobacillus bifidus lends the breast-fed child a much stronger resistance to intestinal infections,” writes microbiologist René Dubos. This is just one of countless examples of the positive interaction between bacteria and humans. “But unfortunately, the knowledge that microorganisms can also do a lot of good for humans never enjoyed much popularity.” As Dubos points out:

Humanity has made it a rule to take better care of the dangers that threaten life than to take interest in the biological powers upon which human existence is so decisively dependent. The history of war has always fascinated people more than descriptions of peaceful coexistence. And so it comes that no one has ever created a successful story out of the useful role that bacteria play in stomach and intestines. Alone the production of a large part of the food that lands on our plates is dependent on bacterial activity.[8]

The term mysophobia (fear of germs) was first coined by William A. Hammond in 1879 to describe a case of obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) in a person repeatedly washing one’s hands. Irrational fear of germs has been aggressively exploited by Big Pharma, allowing bells on the industry’s cash registers to ring in perpetuity. Image credit: Merlijn Hoek

In this context, it should not be forgotten that a gigantic industry has been built up around the fear of microbes, earning multi-billion dollar profits from the sale of drugs and vaccines, whereas no one earns nearly as much money from advising folk to eat healthier, exercise more, breathe more fresh and clean air, or do more for one’s emotional well-being.

One may ask, But haven’t antibiotics helped or saved the lives of many people? Without a doubt. But, we must note that it was only as recently as 12 February 1941, that the first patient was treated with an antibiotic, specifically penicillin. Therefore, antibiotics have nothing to do with the increase in life expectancy, which really took hold in the middle of the 19th century (in industrialized countries), almost a century before the development of antibiotics; and plenty of substances—including innumerable bacteria essential to life—are destroyed through the administration of antibiotics, which directly translated from the Greek, means, “against life.” Further, nowadays millions of antibiotics are unnecessarily administered, and in fact antibiotics are held responsible for nearly one fifth of the more than 100,000 annual deaths that are traced back to medication side effects in the United States alone.

Indeed, the ledger for vaccinations of any kind reads poorly because there is no solid, placebo-controlled study demonstrating that vaccination—usually an intervention on a healthy body—is better than doing nothing. Meanwhile, there are placebo-controlled studies showing that vaccination is worse than doing nothing—as well as dozens of studies showing that the unvaccinated are better off than the vaccinated.[9]

Furthermore, “It is well known that deaths from common infectious diseases declined dramatically before the advent of most vaccines due to improved environmental conditions—even diseases for which there were no vaccines,” as Anthony R. Mawson, professor of epidemiology and biostatistics, pointed out in 2018.[10] This is exemplified by measles. The measles vaccination was introduced in West Germany in the mid-1970s (see the syringe in the graphic below), at a time when the “measles scare” was essentially over.

Measles vaccination was introduced in West Germany in the mid-1970s (where the syringe is shown in the graphic), at a time when the “measles scare” was essentially over. The arrow (early 1990s) indicates the combined data from reunited Germany. Source: Buchwald, Gerhard, Impfen: Das Geschäft mit der Angst (in English: Vaccination: a Business Based on Fear), Knaur, 1997, p. 133.

If we ask bacteriologists which comes first: the terrain or the bacteria, the answer is always that it is the environment (the terrain) that allows the microbes to thrive. The germs, then, do not directly produce the disease. So, it is evident that the crisis produced by the body causes the bacteria to multiply by creating the proper conditions for actually harmless bacteria to become poisonous, pus-producing microorganisms. This explains why the dominant medical thought pattern can’t comprehend that so many different microorganisms can co-exist in our bodies (among them such “highly dangerous” ones as the tuberculosis bacillus, the Streptococcus or the Staphylococcus bacterium) without bringing about any recognizable damage. They only become harmful when they have enough of the right kind of food. Depending on the type of bacterium, this food could be toxins, metabolic end products, improperly digested food and much more.

Pasteur finally became aware of all of this, quoting Bernard’s dictum —“the microbe is nothing, the terrain is everything”—on his deathbed. But Paul Ehrlich (1854-1915), known as the father of chemotherapy, adhered to the interpretation that Robert Koch preached: i.e. that microbes were the actual causes of disease. For this reason, Ehrlich, who his competitors called “Dr. Fantasy,“ dreamed of “chemically aiming” at bacteria, and decisively contributed to helping the “magic bullets” doctrine become accepted, by treating very specific illnesses successfully with very specific chemo-pharmaceutical preparations. This doctrine was a gold rush for the rising pharmaceutical industry with their wonder-pill production. “But the promise of the magic bullet has never been fulfilled,” writes Allan Brandt, a medical historian at Harvard Medical School.[11]

Viruses measure only 20-450 nanometers (billionths of a meter) . . . so tiny, that one can only see them under an electron microscope.

This distorted understanding of bacteria and fungi and their functions in abnormal processes shaped attitudes toward viruses. At the end of the 19th century, as microbe theory rose to become the definitive medical teaching, no one could actually detect viruses, which measure only 20-450 nanometers (billionths of a meter) across and are thus very much smaller than bacteria or fungi—so tiny, that one can only see them under an electron microscope. And the first electron microscope was not built until 1931. Bacteria and fungi, in contrast, can be observed through a simple light microscope.

“Pasteurians” were already using the expression “virus” in the 19th century, but this is ascribed to the Latin term “virus” (which just means poison) to describe organic structures that could not be classified as bacteria. It was a perfect fit with the concept of the enemy: if no bacteria can be found, then some other single cause must be responsible for the disease. Readers may wonder how it can be continually claimed that this or that virus exists and has potential to trigger diseases through contagion. An important aspect in this context is that some time ago, mainstream virus-science left the road of direct observation of nature, and decided instead to go with so-called indirect “proof” with procedures such as antibody and PCR tests, despite the fact that these methods lead to results which have little to no meaning.

According to Dr. Samantha Bailey in her video “The Truth About PCR Tests,” the PCR-test is not a legitimate clinical diagnostic tool and thus unable to actually determine if you’ve been infected with a virus. In fact, the inventor of the test, Dr. Kary Mullis, has warned that the PCR-test “doesn’t tell you that you are sick. These tests cannot detect free, infectious viruses at all.

A virus with indeterminate characteristics cannot be proven by PCR any more than it can be determined by a little antibody test. And even if scientists assume that the genetic sequences discovered in the laboratory belong to the viruses mentioned, this is a long way from proving that the viruses are the causes of the diseases in question, particularly when the patients or animals that have been tested are not even sick, which often enough is the case.

Another important question must be raised: even when a supposed virus does kill cells in the test-tube (in vitro), or results in embryos in a chicken egg culture dying, we cannot safely conclude that these findings can be carried over to a complete living organism (in vivo)! For example, the particles termed viruses stem from cell cultures (in vitro) whose particles could be genetically degenerate because they have been bombarded with chemical additives like growth factors or strongly oxidizing substances. These effects were demonstrated with antibiotic use in a 2017 study.[12]

In 1995, the German news magazine Der Spiegel delved into this problem (something that is worth noting, when one considers that this news magazine usually runs only orthodox virus coverage), quoting researcher Martin Markowitz from the Aaron Diamond AIDS Research Center in New York:

The scientist [Markovitz] mauls his virus-infected cell cultures with these poisons in all conceivable combinations to test which of them kill the virus off most effectively. “Of course, we don’t know how far these cross-checks in a test-tube will bring us,” says Markowitz. “What ultimately counts is the patient.” His clinical experience has taught him the difference between test-tube and sick bed.[13]

“Unfortunately, the decade is characterized by climbing death rates, caused by lung cancer, heart disease, traffic accidents and the indirect consequences of alcoholism and drug addiction,” wrote Sir Frank Macfarlane Burnet, recipient of the Nobel Prize for Medicine, in his 1971 book Genes, Dreams, and Realities. “The real challenge of the present day is to find remedies for these diseases of civilization. But nothing that comes out of the labs seems to be significant in this context; laboratory research’s contribution has practically come to an end. For someone who is well on the way to a career as a lab researcher in infectious disease and immunology, these are not comforting words.”[14]

To biomedical scientists and the readers of their papers, Burnet continued, it may be exciting to hold forth on “the detail of a chemical structure from a phage’s [viruses from simple organisms; see below] RNA, or the production of antibody tests, which are typical of today’s biological research. But modern fundamental research in medicine hardly has a direct significance to the prevention of disease or the improvement of medical precautions.”[15]

Medical teaching is entrenched in Pasteur and Koch’s reality-distorting focus on one enemy, and has neglected also to pursue the thought that the body’s cells could produce a virus on its own accord, for instance as a reaction to stress factors. The experts discovered this a long time ago, and speak of “endogenous viruses”—particles that form inside the body’s cells themselves.

In this context, the research work of geneticist Barbara McClintock is a milestone. In her Nobel Prize paper from 1983, she reports that the genetic material of living beings can constantly alter, by being hit by “shocks.”[16] These shocks can be toxins, but can also be from other materials that produced stress in the test-tube. This in turn can lead to the formation of new genetic sequences, which were unverifiable (in vivo and in vitro) before.

Torsten Engelbrecht works as an investigative journalist in Hamburg and is an author of the heretical and still unchallenged book Virus Mania (co-authored by Dr. Claus Köhnlein, MD, Dr. Samantha Bailey, MD, and Dr. Stefano Scoglio, BSc). In 2009, he received the Alternative Media Award for his article “The Amalgam Controversy.” He was trained at the renowned magazine for professional journalists Message and was a full-time editor at the Financial Times Deutschland, among others. As a freelance journalist, he has written articles for publications such as OffGuardianThe EcologistSüddeutsche ZeitungNeue Zürcher ZeitungFrankfurter Allgemeine SonntagszeitungRubikonFreitagGeo Saison, and Greenpeace Magazine. In 2010, his book Die Zukunft der Krebsmedizin (The Future of Cancer Medicine) was published, with Dr. Claus Köhnlein, MD, and two other doctors as co-authors. For more details see www.torstenengelbrecht.com.

Dr. Claus Köhnlein, MD, is a medical specialist of internal diseases. He completed his residency in the Oncology Department at the University of Kiel. Since 1993, he has worked in his own medical practice, treating both Hepatitis C and AIDS patients who are skeptical of antiviral medications. Köhnlein is one of the world’s most experienced experts when it comes to alleged viral epidemics. In April 2020, he was mentioned in the OffGuardian article “8 MORE Experts Questioning the Coronavirus Panic.” An interview with him by Russia Today editor Margarita Bityutskikh, published on Youtube in September 2020 on the topic of “fatal COVID-19 over-therapy,” garnered 1.4 million views within a short time.

Dr. Samantha Bailey, MD, is a research physician in New Zealand. She completed her Bachelor of Medicine and Bachelor of Surgery degree at Otago University in 2005. She has worked in general practice, telehealth and in clinical trials for over 12 years with a particular interest in novel tests and treatments for medical diseases. She has the largest Youtube health channel in New Zealand, and creates educational health videos based on questions from her audience. For her full, uncensored repertoire, visit her website.

Footnotes

  1. Golub, Edward. The Limits of Medicine: How Science Shapes Our Hope for the Cure. The University of Chicago Press, 1997: xiii.
  2. Langbein, Kurt and Bert Ehgartner. Das Medizinkartell: Die sieben Todsünden der Gesundheitsindustrie. Piper, 2003: 37.
  3. Golub, Edward. The Limits of Medicine: How Science Shapes Our Hope for the Cure. The University of Chicago Press, 1997: 37-40.
  4. Langbein, Kurt and Bert Ehgartner. Das Medizinkartell: Die sieben Todsünden der Gesundheitsindustrie. Piper, 2003: 51.
  5. Blech, Jörg. Leben auf dem Menschen: die Gesundheitserreger. S. Fischer Verlage. Frankfurt am Main, 2014. (see www.aegis.at)
  6. Nicholson, Jeremy K., Elaine Holmes, John C. Lindon, and Ian D. Wilson. “The challenges of modeling mammalian biocomplexity.” Nature Biotechnology, 22. 2004: 1268-1274. (see https://www.nature.com/articles/nbt1015)
  7. Nicholson, Jeremy K., Elaine Holmes, John C. Lindon, and Ian D. Wilson. “The challenges of modeling mammalian biocomplexity.” Nature Biotechnology, 22. 2004: 1268-1274. (see https://www.nature.com/articles/nbt1015)
  8. Dubos, René. Mirage of Health: Utopias, Progress, and Biological Change. Harper & Brothers, 1959: 69.
  9. Engelbrecht, Torsten, Claus Köhnlein, Samantha Bailey, Stefano Scoglio. Virus Mania: Corona/COVID-19, Measles, Swine Flu, Cervical Cancer, Avian Flu, SARS, BSE, Hepatitis C, AIDS, Polio, Spanish Flu: How the Medical Industry Continually Invents Epidemics, Making Billion-Dollar Profits at Our Expense, 3rd English Edition. Books on Demand, 2021: 348-357.
  10. Mawson, Anthony R.. “Vaccination and Health Outcomes,” International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, Special Issue, July 15, 2018. (see https://www.mdpi.com/journal/ijerph/special_issues/vaccination?view=compact&listby=date)
  11. Brandt, Allan. No Magic Bullet: A Social History of Venereal Disease in the United States Since 1880. Oxford University Press, 1985: 161.
  12. Buzás, Edit I. et al. “Antibiotic-induced release of small extracellular vesicles (exosomes) with surface-associated DNA.” Scientific Reports, 15 August 2017.
  13. Grolle, Johann. “Siege, aber kein Sieg.” Der Spiegel, 29, 1995.
  14. Burnet, Sir Frank Macfarlane. Genes, Dreams and Realities. Medical and Technical Publishing, 1971: 217-218.
  15. Burnet, Sir Frank Macfarlane. Genes, Dreams and Realities. Medical and Technical Publishing, 1971: 217-218.
  16. McClintock, Barbara. “The Significance of Responses of the Genome to Challenge.” Nobel speech, 8 December 1983.

Source: https://drsambailey.com/terrain-theory-recontextualising-the-germ/

Cultural Communism: The Frankfurt School – Part 1 & 2

After two or three months of frustrated looking, I finally traced the inspiration behind our failed schooling—and the bizarre sexualization of elementary school children along with the intellectual degradation of subject matter to its likely historic origins.

A discovery I am eager to share with you—with this admonitory warning: the trail I followed goes through such complicated intellectual terrain that to expound upon it comprehensively would require a full-length, scholarly book to recover all its nuances and interconnections, work I lack the physical strength to perform for the moment, in my paralyzed state.

But even a sketchy account, such as I am about to give you, will reduce the stressful pressure of asking who? For what reason? And how?

Shortly after the Russian revolution had succeeded, Lenin called a secret meeting in Moscow in 1922 of leading leftists to discuss a way to further Marxist/Communist interests internationally by undermining the cultural strength of targeted countries.

From this meeting the decision emerged to locate a forge of international trouble-makers at the University of Frankfurt in northern Germany, which became known as “The Frankfurt School”. Its guiding strategy was to organize intellectuals to cause de-moralizing acts of mischief which tended to attack the particular cultural pride of target nations.

The campaign against America, for example, was to encourage mass immigration in order to dilute national identity, to stimulate and exacerbate racial arguments, to attack, through law and media propaganda, any distinction between the genders, and to prematurely awaken lustful sexual appetites among young children by introducing pornography into school curricula , in hopes this would:

1) seduce the young away from intellectual concentration

2) to divide the young from their parents’ values, and

3) to spread moral confusion through the culture, discrediting authority as

“old-fashioned” (if in matters of sex, then possibly everywhere else too!)

4) to challenge Christian teaching.

Hitler’s government expelled the Frankfurt conspirators from Germany in the 1920s. Its personnel and seditious agenda left Frankfurt and resettled wholesale in New York City subsidized by the Rockefeller Foundation where its professors resumed employment at Columbia University where it proselytized left-leaning colleagues there and throughout the “Ivy League,” one of whom, George S. Counts threw down the Frankfurt gauntlet in 1932 with a prophetic book, Dare the Schools Build a New Social Order. It’s answer…yes!!  The Frankfurt projects next attempted (successfully) were named by journalists, “The Sexual Revolution” and “Women’s Lib”.

The structure of our bad schools pretending to be education comes to us, as you know, from Germany and from the hands of some world-famous philosophers responding to demands of politicians for a way to make the subject-citizenry reliably obedient.

The solution adopted was to force the children of oncoming generations into isolated confinement with loyal political employees, loyal to the political leader, to be taught collective habits and to lose the ability to criticize and rebel—to be schooled like fish, instead of educated to think independently.

Germany at the time, in the first quarter of the 19th century, was tending toward a system of governance known as socialism, (or under influence of another German thinker, Karl Marx, communism), a scheme to invent an entirely new system of governance, based on ideas from the culture of finance, which pitted social classes against one another and led, ultimately, to dominance of the laboring classes. Communist theory, as taught in Marx’s magnum opus, Das Kapital, led to a ringing rhetorical call to revolt, “The Communist Manifesto,” which became the banner of many violent insurrections against authority which rocked Europe in the year, 1848, signaling an enormous revolution in Russia at century’s end ultimately establishing a communist dictatorship, the Soviet Union. This alarmed traditional governors worldwide, fearful of a similar transformation of their own citizenries. Marx’s ideas had enormous influence on public thinking everywhere. This type of thinking eventually transformed schooling in

America quite radically, leading to a collapse in what economist, Adam Smith, called “educational schooling,” in his capitalist classic, Wealth of Nations. Their strategies hurt personalized learning  as collective institutions (“schools”) attempted to deliver individual intellectual training of a caliber equivalent to that expected by private academies for the children of the prosperous classes.

The great movement to dumb-down the fare of common schools originated with a bizarre group of very radical German intellectuals in the city of Frankfurt, home of the world’s original fast food, “the frankfurter” or hot dog (so called because through the 1920s it was often made with dog meat).

This group of college professors was dedicated to discovering ways to cause social change of a profound sort—revolution. Whether against governments of left or right was a matter of indifference to them. The efficient engineering of change was all that mattered to them.

Among the first principles they developed was that two institutions – the church and the family– stood in the way of social change and would have to be destroyed, or weakened.  This alone was enough to make the Frankfurt School unpopular and unwelcome among traditional governors.

  • A simple answer to a lumpen question:
  • TAKE YOUR CHILDREN OUTTA SCHOOLS NOW!!! THOSE AREN’T ANYTHING BESIDES INDOCTRINATION LABS,,, AND UNFORTUNATELY THESE LABS HAVE YOUR CHILDREN TO PERFORM TEST UPON!!!

The Rise of the Global Police State

The Rise of the Global Police State

publicerad 17 oktober 2023

Drone photo: Derbyshire Police, EnglandIcke essentiella aktiviteter. Drönarfoto: Derbyshire Police, England

“Non-essential activities” during the 2020-22 Covid years.

At this point in time, it’s crucial to realize that the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are part of the plan to implement a One World Government, where the entire world will be run by unelected bureaucrats beholden to technocratic ideals.

By Dr. Joseph Mercola. This article was first published on Mercola.com

Story at-a-glance

  • The United Nation’s Sustainable Development Goals are not about sustainability. They’re tools to facilitate the implementation of a One World Government.
  • The term the globalist alliance uses to describe its network is a “global public-private partnership,” or G3P. The G3P is composed of most of the world’s governments, intergovernmental organizations, global corporations, major philanthropic foundations, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) and civil society groups. Collectively, they are the “stakeholders” that are implementing the SDGs.
  • While SDG16 claims to advance “peaceful and inclusive societies” and “justice for all,” this goal is really about consolidating authority, exploiting threats to advance regime hegemony, and implementing a centrally controlled global system of digital identity (digital ID).
  • A digital identity is not merely a form of identification. Your “identity” is who you are, and a digital identity will keep a permanent record of your choices and behaviors, 24/7. Universal adoption of digital identity will enable the G3P global governance regime to establish a behavioral-based system of reward and punishment.
  • The COVID pandemic was used to redefine human rights and to get people used to the idea that the rights of individuals are conditional and can be ignored or suspended “for the greater good.” The United Nations’ Charter establishes a global governance regime that stands against freedom, justice and peace, and all of the UN’s SDGs need to be understood within this context.

In a two-part Unlimited Hangout investigative series,1,2 independent journalists Iain Davis and Whitney Webb expose how Sustainable Development Goal No. 16 (SDG16), which claims to advance “peaceful and inclusive societies” and “justice for all,” is really about consolidating authority, exploiting threats to advance regime hegemony, and forcing a “centrally controlled global system of digital identity3 (digital ID) upon humanity.”

As explained in Part 1,4 the term the globalist alliance of technocrats use to describe its network is a “global public-private partnership,” or G3P:

“The G3P is toiling tirelessly to create the conditions necessary to justify the imposition of both global governance ‘with teeth’ and its prerequisite digital ID system. In doing so, the G3P is inverting the nature of our rights. It manufactures and exploits crises in order to claim legitimacy for its offered ‘solutions.’

The G3P comprises virtually all of the world’s intergovernmental organizations, governments, global corporations, major philanthropic foundations, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and civil society groups. Collectively, these form the ‘stakeholders’ implementing sustainable development, including SDG16.”

The following chart, sourced from IanDavis.com,5 illustrates how the G3P operates.

How the g3p operates. Chart by Mercola.com
How the g3p operates. Chart by Mercola.com

What SDG16 Is Really About

The central objective of SDG16 is to strengthen the UN-led regime, and of all the subgoals included in this SDG, the establishment of “a legal identity for all” (SDG16.9), is the most crucial, as other goals rely on the use of digital identity. As noted by Davis and Webb:6

“Universal adoption of SDG16.9 digital ID will enable the G3P global governance regime’s to establish a worldwide system of reward and punishment. If we accept the planned model of digital ID, it will ultimately enslave us in the name of sustainable development …

SDG16.9 ‘sustainable development’ means we must use digital ID … Otherwise we will not be protected in law, service access will be denied, our right to transact in the modern economy will be removed, we will be barred from participating as ‘citizens’ and excluded from so-called ‘democracy.’”

Understanding Digital Identity

The World Economic Forum (WEF), founded by Schwab, has for years promoted the implementation of digital identity. The problem with calling it “digital ID” is that people misunderstand it to be something it’s not. There’s a huge difference between identity and identification.7

Identification refers to documents that prove you are who you say you are. A digital identity is NOT merely a form of identification. Your “identity” is who you actually are, and a digital identity will keep a permanent record of your choices and behaviors, 24/7.

Your identity encompasses everything that makes you unique, and that’s what the globalist cabal is really after. Step out of line, and every social media interaction, every penny spent and every move you’ve ever made can be used against you.

Indeed, having access to everyone’s digital identity is the key to successful manipulation and control of the global population. The graphic below, from the WEF, illustrates their idea of how your digital identity will interact with the world.

Everything you can think of is to be connected to your digital identity, and your behavior, beliefs and opinions will dictate what you can and cannot do within society. It will unlock doors where someone like you is welcome, and lock the ones where you’re not.

If you think the idea of vaccine passports is insane, wait until your access to critical infrastructure and services is dependent not just on your vaccination status, but also what books you’ve bought, what ideas you’ve shared, and who you’ve given money or emotional support to.

Digital Identity
Digital Identity. Chart by Mercola.com

Interoperability Will Link Disparate Systems Together

As people are coming to understand the threat of a One World Government, resistance against digital ID and the social credit score that comes with it has started to mount. The G3P’s answer to that dilemma is the construction of an interoperable system that can link disparate digital ID systems together. As explained by Davis and Webb:8

“This ‘modular platform’ approach is designed to avoid the political problems that the official issuance of a national digital ID card would otherwise elicit.

Establishing SDG16.9 global digital ID is crucial for 8 of the 17 UN SDGs. It is the linchpin at the center of a global digital panopticon that is being devised under the auspices of the UN’s global public-private partnership ‘regime.’”

You Have No Rights, Only Permits, Under the New World Order

You may be wondering where human rights enter into all of this. If your digital ID records every move you make, which can then be used against you, won’t that violate some of your basic rights as a free human being? Well, that depends on how human rights are defined — and who defines them. Davis and Webb explain:9

“… the Universal Declaration of Human Rights … was first accepted by all members of the United Nations on December 10, 1948. The preamble of the Declaration recognizes that the ‘equal and inalienable rights’ of all human beings are the ‘foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world.’

After that, ‘inalienable rights’ are never again mentioned in the entire Declaration. ‘Human rights’ are nothing like ‘inalienable rights.’

Inalienable rights, unlike human rights, are not bestowed upon us by any governing authority. Rather, they are innate to each of us. They are immutable. They are ours in equal measure. The only source of inalienable rights is Natural Law, or God’s Law.

No one — no government, no intergovernmental organization, no human institution or human ruler — can ever legitimately claim the right to grant or deny our inalienable rights. Humanity can claim no collective authority to grant or deny the inalienable rights of any individual human being.

Beyond the preamble, the UN’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) concerns itself exclusively with ‘human rights.’ But asserting, as it does, that human rights are some sort of expression of inalienable rights is a fabrication — a lie.

Human rights, according to the UDHR, are created by certain human beings and are bestowed by those human beings upon other human beings. They are not inalienable rights or anything close to inalienable rights.

Article 6 of the UDHR and Article 16 of the UN’s 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights … both decree: ‘Everyone has the [human] right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law.’

Note: We put ‘[human]’ in brackets … to alert readers that these documents are NOT referring to inalienable rights. While the respective Articles 6 and 16 sound appealing, the underlying implications are not.

Both articles mean that ‘without legal existence those rights may not be asserted by a person within the domestic legal order.’ As we shall see, the ability to prove one’s identity will become a prerequisite for ‘legal existence.’ Thus, in a post-SDG16 world, persons without UN-approved identification will be unable to assert their ‘human rights’ …

Article 29.3 of the UDHR states: ‘These [human] rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.’

In plain English: We are only allowed to exercise our alleged human ‘rights’ subject to the diktats of governments, intergovernmental organizations and other UN ‘stakeholders.’ The bottom line, then, is that what the UN calls ‘human rights’ are … government and intergovernmental permits by which our behavior is controlled.”

Covid Was an Opportunity to Reset the Playing Field

Our behavior is also controlled through censorship and control of information. In its “COVID-19 and Human Rights” document,10 published in April 2020, the UN presents human rights as policy tools and openly admits that “securing compliance” with health measures that severely restrict (or outright eliminate) human rights will depend on “building trust,” and that includes censoring that which might undermine trust in authorities.

Censorship of “misinformation” and “disinformation” is also required under the proposed International Treaty on Pandemic Prevention, Preparedness and Response, which places the World Health Organization at the center of all pandemic-related agendas, and in the proposed amendments to the International Health Regulations (IHRs). Importantly, both of these instruments will be binding. As noted by Davis and Webb:11

“The current proposed amendments12 to the IHR illustrate how ‘crises’ provide unique opportunities for the UN and its partners to control populations — through purported ‘human rights’ — by exploiting those ‘rights’ as ‘a powerful set of tools.’

Here is one example of the proposals being put forth: The WHO wishes to remove the following language from IHR Article 3.1: ‘The implementation of these Regulations shall be with full respect for the dignity, human rights and fundamental freedoms of persons.’

It intends to replace that regulatory principle with: ‘The implementation of these Regulations shall be based on the principles of equity, inclusivity, coherence and in accordance with the common but differentiated responsibilities of their States Parties, taking into consideration their social and economic development.’

This proposed amendment signifies that the UN and its partners wish to completely ignore the UN’s own Universal Declaration of Human Rights whenever any of these agencies declares a new ‘crisis’ or identifies a new ‘international threat.’ This exemplifies the ‘course-correction’ the UN envisioned would arise from the ‘unique opportunity’ presented by the COVID-19 crisis.”

The UN Has Already Assumed Authority; No One Granted It

Right now, the WHO appears to be set up to become the de facto global government, but the UN is also a contender, and it has openly assumed this authority.

For example, in its “UN System Task Team on the Post-2015 UN Development Agenda” document,13 published in 2013, it states that “A global governance regime, under the auspices of the UN, will have to ensure that the global commons will be preserved for future generations.”

The United Nation’s Charter establishes a global governance regime that stands against freedom, justice and peace, and all of the UN’s SDGs need to be understood within this context.

As noted by Davis and Webb:14

“The UN calls itself a ‘global governance regime.’ It is arbitrarily assuming the authority to seize control of everything (‘the global commons’), including humans, both by enforcing its Charter — citing its misnamed ‘Human Rights’ declaration — and by fulfilling its ‘Sustainable Development’ agenda.

Note that the ‘global governance regime’ will ultimately ‘translate into better national and regional governance.’ This means that the role of each national government is merely to ‘translate’ global governance into national policy. Electing one political party or another to undertake the translation makes no material difference. The policy is not set by the governments we elect.

As nation-states one by one implement SDG-based policies, the regime further consolidates its global governance. And since the ‘global governance regime will be critical to achieve sustainable development,’ the two mechanisms — global governance and sustainable development — are symbiotic.

Again, by the UN’s own admission, inalienable rights are the ‘foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world.’ Yet the UN’s entire Charter-based human rights framework comprehensively rejects the principle of inalienable and immutable rights.

The UN Charter is, therefore, an international treaty that establishes a global governance regime which stands firmly against ‘freedom, justice and peace in the world.’ All of the UN’s ‘sustainable development’ projects should be understood in this context …

You may wonder what Sustainable Development Goal 16 … has to do with protecting the planet and its inhabitants from the predicted ‘climate disaster.’ The answer is: nothing at all. But then, ‘climate change’ is merely the proffered rationale that purportedly legitimizes and lends urgency to sustainable development.

Establishing firm global governance — in effect, a world dictatorship — through the implementation of SDGs is the United Nations’ real objective. ‘Climate change’ is just the excuse.”

‘One Health’ — The Global Takeover of Everything

The pandemic treaty and IHR amendments, once enacted, will form the foundation for the WHO’s legal authority to act as a global governing body. Both are broadly focused on pandemic preparedness, planning and response, but there are built in loopholes that can easily be invoked by the WHO to turn it into a de facto global dictatorship.

The central instrument that will allow for the vast expansion of the WHO’s power is something called the One Health Joint Plan of Action, officially launched in October 2022 by the WHO, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) and the World Organization for Animal Health (WOAH).

This initiative amounts to multiple globalist organizations synchronizing their plans, while at the same time combining their resources and power.

The “One Health”15,16 agenda recognizes that a broad range of human and environmental aspects can impact health and therefore fall under the “potential” to cause harm. For example, this is how the WHO will be able to declare climate change as a health emergency and subsequently require climate lockdowns.

The graphic17 below illustrates how the WHO’s scope of control is expanded under the One Health agenda to cover vast aspects of everyday life.

One Health
One Health

On paper, the One Health Joint Plan of Action “seeks to improve the health of humans, animals, plants and the environment, while contributing to sustainable development.”18 Its five-year plan, which spans 2022 to 2026, intends to expand capacities in six key areas, including health care systems, the environment and food safety.

The plan includes a technical document that covers a set of actions intended to advance One Health at global, regional and national levels. As reported by the WHO:19

“These actions notably include the development of an upcoming implementation guidance for countries, international partners, and non-state actors such as civil society organizations, professional associations, academia and research institutions.”

In other words, the goal is to create health, environmental and food safety rules to be followed on a global scale.

The Endgame and How to Stop It

In an April 16, 2023, Substack article,20 Jessica Rose, a postdoctoral researcher in biology, tried to make sense of the last three years. Starting at the end, she believes the endgame is the “conversion of the majority of human beings into workers … like ants.”

To get there, the globalists must dehumanize us, systematically chip away at the human spirit, render us infertile and destroy all notions of bodily autonomy and national sovereignty. The plan has worked well so far, but cracks are beginning to show. More and more people are starting to put the puzzle pieces together, as Rose attempts to do in her article.

The COVID pandemic was the set-up, Rose suggests. It was geared to “test compliance levels” and set the scene for the next act, which was to normalize all things abnormal. The trans movement, which completely overwhelmed the social consciousness in a single year, is a continuation and expansion of that “normalization of the abnormal” phase.

It’s also a major component of the agenda to dehumanize and sterilize the population. After all, trans youth — who are also among the most brainwashed individuals in society right now — are the future of humanity. A brand-new report by legal experts backed by the United Nations is also seeking to normalize pedophilia,21 which would further dehumanize and de-spirit our youth for generations to come.

Adding insult to injury, the report was published March 8, 2023, “in recognition” of International Women’s Day. Never mind the fact that young girls and women are the primary victims of this sick mindset.

The “manmade climate change” hysteria and subsequent war on carbon is another fabricated “emergency” that is unhinged from science and reality. And the UN’s SDGs are perfectly tailored to enable the endgame. Under these goals, human freedom, human health and quality of life are sacrificed to “protect the environment and save the planet.”

As Rose notes, if the WHO pandemic treaty goes through, we can expect to be locked down indefinitely under the guise of “some climate catastrophe, likely linked to some ‘deadly pathogen’ passed to humans via some insect vector like mosquitoes.”

By then, central bank digital currencies (CBDCs) will also be in place, which will enable the unelected totalitarian regime to enforce whatever restrictions the WHO and its funders dream up, be it related to the food you’re allowed to eat based on your carbon footprint, the drugs you’re forced to take, what causes you’re allowed to fund, what businesses you’re allowed to buy from, when and how far you’re allowed to travel or anything else.

“A practical way I can think of to stop the endgame from being realized is to stop the CBDC,” Rose writes. “Use cash. Insist upon it. Do not give business to stores that only use cashless systems. Supply equals demand, so demand the use of CASH.”

Other Strategies to Reclaim Our Freedoms

Other ways to prevent the WHO’s power grab, include the following:

By Dr. Joseph Mercola (Mercola.com)

Sources and References

Disease X: Upcoming rockstar on world stage.

Are you getting bored of listening to the exact same song and dance numbers over and over again? Are the old “viral” bands just not doing it for you anymore? Are you looking for something new and mysterious to come along in order to spice things up a bit and reignite the dwindling levels of fear? If so, then you are in luck as there is a brand new “viral” sensation headed your way!

Introducing Disease X!

“An old adage says, “Prevention is better than cure.” Nothing exemplifies this idea better than “Disease X.” According to the World Health Organization (WHO), “Disease X represents the knowledge that a serious international epidemic could be caused by a pathogen currently unknown to cause human disease.”1

Richard Hatchett, chief executive officer (CEO) of the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI), said about Disease X, “It might sound like science fiction, but Disease X is something we must prepare for.”2 In a list of diseases that the WHO considers high priority in terms of research and development, Disease X occupies a spot among diseases such as Ebola, Zika, and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).1Unexpected outbreaks of infectious disease (Disease X) have repeatedly rocked the medical confidence and have taken the medical world by surprise.3

Some experts have even commented that COVID-19, caused by severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), met the standards to be considered the first Disease X,4 while some authors have called Zika a Disease X.5However, one unfortunate possibility is that COVID-19 and other recent pandemics might have been milder versions of what will eventually be the most prominent Disease X.

Disease X is supposed to be caused by a “pathogen X.” Such a pathogen is expected to be a zoonosis, most likely an RNA virus, emerging from an area where the right mix of risk factors highly promotes the risk for sustained transmission.6

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8367867/