The WHO Wants to Rule the World Ramesh Thakur The World Health Organisation (WHO) will present two new texts for adoption by its governing body, the World Health Assembly comprising delegates from 194 member states, in Geneva on 27 May–1 June. The new pandemic treaty needs a two-thirds majority for approval and, if and once adopted, will come into effect after 40 ratifications. The amendments to the International Health Regulations (IHR) can be adopted by a simple majority and will be binding on all states unless they recorded reservations by the end of last year. Because they will be changes to an existing agreement that states have already signed, the amendments do not require any follow-up ratification. The WHO describes the IHR as ‘an instrument of international law that is legally-binding’ on its 196 states parties, including the 194 WHO member states, even if they voted against it. Therein lies its promise and its threat. The new regime will change the WHO from a technical advisory organisation into a supra-national public health authority exercising quasi-legislative and executive powers over states; change the nature of the relationship between citizens, business enterprises, and governments domestically, and also between governments and other governments and the WHO internationally; and shift the locus of medical practice from the doctor-patient consultation in the clinic to public health bureaucrats in capital cities and WHO headquarters in Geneva and its six regional offices. From net zero to mass immigration and identity politics, the ‘expertocracy’ elite is in alliance with the global technocratic elite against majority national sentiment. The Covid years gave the elites a valuable lesson in how to exercise effective social control and they mean to apply it across all contentious issues. The changes to global health governance architecture must be understood in this light. It represents the transformation of the national security, administrative, and surveillance state into a globalised biosecurity state. But they are encountering pushback in Italy, the Netherlands, Germany, and most recently Ireland. We can but hope that the resistance will spread to rejecting the WHO power grab. Addressing the World Governments Summit in Dubai on 12 February, WHO Director-General (DG) Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus attacked ‘the litany of lies and conspiracy theories’ about the agreement that ‘are utterly, completely, categorically false. The pandemic agreement will not give WHO any power over any state or any individual, for that matter.’ He insisted that critics are ‘either uninformed or lying.’ Could it be instead that, relying on aides, he himself has either not read or not understood the draft? The alternative explanation for his spray at the critics is that he is gaslighting us all. The Gostin, Klock, and Finch Paper In the Hastings Center Report “Making the World Safer and Fairer in Pandemics,” published on 23 December, Lawrence Gostin, Kevin Klock, and Alexandra Finch attempt to provide the justification to underpin the proposed new IHR and treaty instruments as ‘transformative normative and financial reforms that could reimagine pandemic prevention, preparedness, and response.’ The three authors decry the voluntary compliance under the existing ‘amorphous and unenforceable’ IHR regulations as ‘a critical shortcoming.’ And they concede that ‘While advocates have pressed for health-related human rights to be included in the pandemic agreement, the current draft does not do so.’ Directly contradicting the DG’s denial as quoted above, they describe the new treaty as ‘legally binding’. This is repeated several pages later: …the best way to contain transnational outbreaks is through international cooperation, led multilaterally through the WHO. That may require all states to forgo some level of sovereignty in exchange for enhanced safety and fairness. What gives their analysis significance is that, as explained in the paper itself, Gostin is ‘actively involved in WHO processes for a pandemic agreement and IHR reform’ as the director of the WHO Collaborating Center on National and Global Health Law and a member of the WHO Review Committee on IHR amendments. The WHO as the World’s Guidance and Coordinating Authority The IHR amendments will expand the situations that constitute a public health emergency, grant the WHO additional emergency powers, and extend state duties to build ‘core capacities’ of surveillance to detect, assess, notify, and report events that could constitute an emergency. Under the new accords, the WHO would function as the guidance and coordinating authority for the world. The DG will become more powerful than the UN Secretary-General. The existing language of ‘should’ is replaced in many places by the imperative ‘shall,’ of non-binding recommendations with countries will ‘undertake to follow’ the guidance. And ‘full respect for the dignity, human rights and fundamental freedoms of persons’ will be changed to principles of ‘equity’ and ‘inclusivity’ with different requirements for rich and poor countries, bleeding financial resources and pharmaceutical products from industrialised to developing countries. The WHO is first of all an international bureaucracy and only secondly a collective body of medical and health experts. Its Covid performance was not among its finest. Its credibility was badly damaged by tardiness in raising the alarm; by its acceptance and then rejection of China’s claim that there was no risk of human-human transmission; by the failure to hold China accountable for destroying evidence of the pandemic’s origins; by the initial investigation that whitewashed the origins of the virus; by flip-flops on masks and lockdowns; by ignoring the counterexample of Sweden that rejected lockdowns with no worse health outcomes and far better economic, social, and educational outcomes; and by the failure to stand up for children’s developmental, educational, social, and mental health rights and welfare. With a funding model where 87 percent of the budget comes from voluntary contributions from the rich countries and private donors like the Gates Foundation, and 77 percent is for activities specified by them, the WHO has effectively ‘become a system of global public health patronage’, write Ben and Molly Kingsley of the UK children’s rights campaign group UsForThem. Human Rights Watch says the process has been ‘disproportionately guided by corporate demands and the policy positions of high-income governments seeking to protect the power of private actors in health including the pharmaceutical industry.’ The victims of this Catch-22 lack of accountability will be the peoples of the world. Much of the new surveillance network in a model divided into pre-, in, and post-pandemic periods will be provided by private and corporate interests that will profit from the mass testing and pharmaceutical interventions. According to Forbes, the net worth of Bill Gates jumped by one-third from $96.5 billion in 2019 to $129 billion in 2022: philanthropy can be profitable. Article 15.2 of the draft pandemic treaty requires states to set up ‘no fault vaccine-injury compensation schemes,’ conferring immunity on Big Pharma against liability, thereby codifying the privatisation of profits and the socialisation of risks. The changes would confer extraordinary new powers on the WHO’s DG and regional directors and mandate governments to implement their recommendations. This will result in a major expansion of the international health bureaucracy under the WHO, for example new implementation and compliance committees; shift the centre of gravity from the common deadliest diseases (discussed below) to relatively rare pandemic outbreaks (five including Covid in the last 120 years); and give the WHO authority to direct resources (money, pharmaceutical products, intellectual property rights) to itself and to other governments in breach of sovereign and copyright rights. Considering the impact of the amendments on national decision-making and mortgaging future generations to internationally determined spending obligations, this calls for an indefinite pause in the process until parliaments have done due diligence and debated the potentially far-reaching obligations. Yet disappointingly, relatively few countries have expressed reservations and few parliamentarians seem at all interested. We may pay a high price for the rise of careerist politicians whose primary interest is self-advancement, ministers who ask bureaucrats to draft replies to constituents expressing concern that they often sign without reading either the original letter or the reply in their name, and officials who disdain the constraints of democratic decision-making and accountability. Ministers relying on technical advice from staffers when officials are engaged in a silent coup against elected representatives give power without responsibility to bureaucrats while relegating ministers to being in office but not in power, with political accountability sans authority. US President Donald Trump and Australian and UK Prime Ministers Scott Morrison and Boris Johnson were representative of national leaders who had lacked the science literacy, intellectual heft, moral clarity, and courage of conviction to stand up to their technocrats. It was a period of Yes, Prime Minister on steroids, with Sir Humphrey Appleby winning most of the guerrilla campaign waged by the permanent civil service against the transient and clueless Prime Minister Jim Hacker. At least some Australian, American, British, and European politicians have recently expressed concern at the WHO-centred ‘command and control’ model of a public health system, and the public spending and redistributive implications of the two proposed international instruments. US Representatives Chris Smith (R-NJ) and Brad Wenstrup (R-OH) warned on 5 February that ‘far too little scrutiny has been given, far too few questions asked as to what this legally binding agreement or treaty means to health policy in the United States and elsewhere.’ Like Smith and Wenstrup, the most common criticism levelled has been that this represents a power grab at the cost of national sovereignty. Speaking in parliament in November, Australia’s Liberal Senator Alex Antic dubbed the effort a ‘WHO d’etat’. A more accurate reading may be that it represents collusion between the WHO and the richest countries, home to the biggest pharmaceutical companies, to dilute accountability for decisions, taken in the name of public health, that profit a narrow elite. The changes will lock in the seamless rule of the technocratic-managerial elite at both the national and the international levels. Yet the WHO edicts, although legally binding in theory, will be unenforceable against the most powerful countries in practice. Moreover, the new regime aims to eliminate transparency and critical scrutiny by criminalising any opinion that questions the official narrative from the WHO and governments, thereby elevating them to the status of dogma. The pandemic treaty calls for governments to tackle the ‘infodemics’ of false information, misinformation, disinformation, and even ‘too much information’ (Article 1c). This is censorship. Authorities have no right to be shielded from critical questioning of official information. Freedom of information is a cornerstone of an open and resilient society and a key means to hold authorities to public scrutiny and accountability. The changes are an effort to entrench and institutionalise the model of political, social, and messaging control trialled with great success during Covid. The foundational document of the international human rights regime is the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Pandemic management during Covid and in future emergencies threaten some of its core provisions regarding privacy, freedom of opinion and expression, and rights to work, education, peaceful assembly, and association. Worst of all, they will create a perverse incentive: the rise of an international bureaucracy whose defining purpose, existence, powers, and budgets will depend on more frequent declarations of actual or anticipated pandemic outbreaks. It is a basic axiom of politics that power that can be abused, will be abused – some day, somewhere, by someone. The corollary holds that power once seized is seldom surrendered back voluntarily to the people. Lockdowns, mask and vaccine mandates, travel restrictions, and all the other shenanigans and theatre of the Covid era will likely be repeated on whim. Professor Angus Dalgliesh of London’s St George’s Medical School warns that the WHO ‘wants to inflict this incompetence on us all over again but this time be in total control.’ Covid in the Context of Africa’s Disease Burden In the Hastings Center report referred to earlier, Gostin, Klock, and Finch claim that ‘lower-income countries experienced larger losses and longer-lasting economic setbacks.’ This is a casual elision that shifts the blame for harmful downstream effects away from lockdowns in the futile quest to eradicate the virus, to the virus itself. The chief damage to developing countries was caused by the worldwide shutdown of social life and economic activities and the drastic reduction in international trade. The discreet elision aroused my curiosity on the authors’ affiliations. It came as no surprise to read that they lead the O’Neill Institute–Foundation for the National Institutes of Health project on an international instrument for pandemic prevention and preparedness. Gostin et al. grounded the urgency for the new accords in the claim that ‘Zoonotic pathogens…are occurring with increasing frequency, enhancing the risk of new pandemics’ and cite research to suggest a threefold increase in ‘extreme pandemics’ over the next decade. In a report entitled “Rational Policy Over Panic,” published by Leeds University in February, a team that included our own David Bell subjected claims of increasing pandemic frequency and disease burden behind the drive to adopt the new treaty and amend the existing IHR to critical scrutiny. Specifically, they examined and found wanting a number of assumptions and several references in eight G20, World Bank, and WHO policy documents. On the one hand, the reported increase in natural outbreaks is best explained by technologically more sophisticated diagnostic testing equipment, while the disease burden has been effectively reduced with improved surveillance, response mechanisms, and other public health interventions. Consequently there is no real urgency to rush into the new accords. Instead, governments should take all the time they need to situate pandemic risk in the wider healthcare context and formulate policy tailored to the more accurate risk and interventions matrix. The lockdowns were responsible for reversals of decades worth of gains in critical childhood immunisations. UNICEF and WHO estimate that 7.6 million African children under 5 missed out on vaccination in 2021 and another 11 million were under-immunised, ‘making up over 40 percent of the under-immunised and missed children globally.’ How many quality adjusted life years does that add up to, I wonder? But don’t hold your breath that anyone will be held accountable for crimes against African children. Earlier this month the Pan-African Epidemic and Pandemic Working Group argued that lockdowns were a ‘class-based and unscientific instrument.’ It accused the WHO of trying to reintroduce ‘classical Western colonialism through the backdoor’ in the form of the new pandemic treaty and the IHR amendments. Medical knowledge and innovations do not come solely from Western capitals and Geneva, but from people and groups who have captured the WHO agenda. Lockdowns had caused significant harm to low-income countries, the group said, yet the WHO wanted legal authority to compel member states to comply with its advice in future pandemics, including with respect to vaccine passports and border closures. Instead of bowing to ‘health imperialism,’ it would be preferable for African countries to set their own priorities in alleviating the disease burden of their major killer diseases like cholera, malaria, and yellow fever. Europe and the US, comprising a little under ten and over four percent of world population, account for nearly 18 and 17 percent, respectively, of all Covid-related deaths in the world. By contrast Asia, with nearly 60 percent of the world’s people, accounts for 23 percent of all Covid-related deaths. Meantime Africa, with more than 17 percent of global population, has recorded less than four percent of global Covid deaths (Table 1). According to a report on the continent’s disease burden published last year by the WHO Regional Office for Africa, Africa’s leading causes of death in 2021 were malaria (593,000 deaths), tuberculosis (501,000), and HIV/AIDS (420,000). The report does not provide the numbers for diarrhoeal deaths for Africa. There are 1.6 million such deaths globally per year, including 440,000 children under 5. And we know that most diarrhoeal deaths occur in Africa and South Asia. If we perform a linear extrapolation of 2021 deaths to estimate ballpark figures for the three years 2020–22 inclusive for numbers of Africans killed by these big three, approximately 1.78 million died from malaria, 1.5 million from TB, and 1.26 million from HIV/AIDS. (I exclude 2023 as Covid had faded by then, as can be seen in Table 1). By comparison, the total number of Covid-related deaths across Africa in the three years was 259,000. Whether or not the WHO is pursuing a policy of health colonialism, therefore, the Pan-African Epidemic and Pandemic Working Group has a point regarding the grossly exaggerated threat of Covid in the total picture of Africa’s disease burden. A shorter version of this was published in The Australian on 11 March Published under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License For reprints, please set the canonical link back to the original Brownstone Institute Article and Author. Author Ramesh Thakur, a Brownstone Institute Senior Scholar, is a former United Nations Assistant Secretary-General, and emeritus professor in the Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University. View all posts Your financial backing of Brownstone Institute goes to support writers, lawyers, scientists, economists, and other people of courage who have been professionally purged and displaced during the upheaval of our times. You can help get the truth out through their ongoing work. https://brownstone.org/articles/the-who-wants-to-rule-the-world/

The Committee of 300 - Dr. John Coleman (1994) RULERS OF OUR WORLD: The Committee of 300 is a small group of insidious people who control all aspects of our world. Through MI6 they ordered the murder of President Lincoln and President Kennedy. AIDS was created and WHO injected it into millions through the Smallpox vaccines. THEIR GOALS: 🔹 (1) A One World Government with a unified church and monetary system under their direction. 🔹 (2) The utter destruction of all national identity and national pride. 🔹 (3) The destruction of religion and more especially the Christian religion, with the one exception, their own creation mentioned above. 🔹 (4) Control of each and every person through means of mind control and nanotechnology which would create human-like robots and a system of terror. 🔹 (5) An end to all industrialization and the production of nuclear generated electric power in what they call "the post-industrial zero-growth society." 🔹 (6) Legalization of drugs and pornography. 🔹 (7) Depopulation of large cities. 🔹 (8) Suppression of all scientific development except for those deemed beneficial by the Committee. Especially targeted is nuclear energy for peaceful purposes. 🔹 (9) Cause by means of limited wars in the advanced countries, and by means of starvation and diseases in Third World countries, the death of 3 billion people by the year 2050, people they call "useless eaters." 🔹 (10) To weaken the moral fiber of the nation and to demoralize workers in the labor class by creating mass unemployment. 🔹 (11) To keep people everywhere from deciding their own destinies by means of one created crisis after another and then "managing" such crises. 🔹 (12) To introduce new cults. 🔹 (13) To cause a total collapse of the world's economies and engender total political chaos. 🔹 (14) To take control of all Foreign and domestic policies of the United States. 🔹 (15) Give full support to supranational institutions such as the United Nations (UN), the World Health Organization (WHO), the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the Bank of International Settlements (BIS) and the World Economic Forum(WEF) and the World Court. 🔹 (16) Penetrate and subvert all governments, and work from within them to destroy the sovereign integrity of nations represented by them. 🔹 (17) Organize a world-wide terrorist apparatus and negotiate with terrorists whenever terrorist activities take place. 🔹 (18) Take control of education in America with the intent and purpose of utterly and completely destroying it. ❇️ The Club of Rome, ❇️ The Venetian Black Nobility, ❇️ The Royal Institute for International Affairs (RIIA), Chatham House ❇️ The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), ❇️ The Bilderbergers, ❇️ Trilaterals, ❇️ The Zionists, Freemasonry, The Illuminati, the Order of St. John of Jerusalem. 🔹 https://rumble.com/v26xzwy--1994-lecture-dr.-john-coleman-reveals-the-dark-secrets-of-the-committee-of.html 🔹 https://www.bitchute.com/video/9Nj36i6RgPvL/ Follow https://t.me/sgdefense and share 😇

Professor of African history calls for an inquiry into African governments’ responses to covid Rhoda WilsonFebruary 1, 2024 The assumption that covid would be an equal threat in Africa as it may have been elsewhere was wrong. An accounting must be made of the mistakes so that such an inept response driven by wealthy nations and foisted onto Africa never takes place again. The first mistake was lockdowns, writes Toby Green, a British professor of West African history and global inequality. Lockdowns had already been trialled in Freetown, Sierra Leone, and Monrovia, Liberia, during the Ebola epidemic. Esteemed groups such as Doctors Without Borders had counselled against lockdowns and subsequent academic research deemed them to have been ineffective. (Related: Covid Lockdowns Caused Chronic Poverty and Starvation in Zimbabwe and South Africa) Although the following article refers to covid “mistakes” we know that mistakes were not made. The Great Democide of 2020 was not a mistake. Let’s not lose touch…Your Government and Big Tech are actively trying to censor the information reported by The Exposé to serve their own needs. Subscribe now to make sure you receive the latest uncensored news in your inbox… Africa Needs an Inquiry into Covid-19 Mistakes The following was authored by Professor Toby Green and was published by TRT Afrika on 29 January 2024. It has been four years since the WHO declared covid-19 as an epidemic outbreak of international concern. The end of January also marks four years since the African continent first began taking measures against the novel coronavirus: Rwanda closed its borders to flights from China on 31 January 2020. In the initial panic over the new virus, many commentators pointed to the experience of Guinea, Liberia and Sierra Leone with Ebola in 2014-15 as a good indicator of how to manage a serious epidemic outbreak. However, as time has gone on, it has become all too clear that the international global health industry drew the wrong lessons from that experience. In fact, the covid-19 pandemic response was a disaster in Africa. As a covid inquiry gathers pace in the UK, something like this is urgent in Africa. An accounting must be made of the mistakes so that such an inept response driven by wealthy nations and foisted onto Africa never takes place again. Some commentators point to the extremely low death rates of covid-19 in Africa as an indication of Africa’s success in handling the pandemic. However, this is to look at things the wrong way around. Ebola Lessons With a median age of lower than 20, Africa was always likely to have a low death rate from covid. This is not an indication of success, but instead of the catastrophe that took place when assuming that covid-19 would be an equal threat in Africa as it may have been elsewhere. The first mistake came with lockdowns. These were pushed by the WHO, who in their report on their fact-finding mission to Wuhan on 25 February 2020 recommended that all countries with cases of covid-19 follow the Chinese model of lockdowns. However, lockdowns had been trialled in Freetown and Monrovia during the Ebola epidemic. Esteemed groups such as Doctors Without Borders had counselled against this move then, and subsequent academic research deemed that they had been ineffective – as impossible to maintain in environments where the informal economy is so important. Such research must surely have been known to WHO, who nevertheless advised these measures in all cases, regardless of socioeconomic infrastructure. A second grave mistake was in ignoring basic demographics. By the end of March, commentators were noting that Africa’s low median age meant covid might well not be too serious there. Cramped Spaces This research was ignored, in favour of an eradication strategy that could never have succeeded in countries where informal settlements mean disease spread of a respiratory virus is impossible to eradicate. Thus, the third mistake came with curfews. Confining people at certain times of day in the cramped accommodation of informal settlements – in Nairobi, Lagos and Kinshasa – had no discernible epidemiological rationale. This was a disease which spread more indoors, and by forcing people to share cramped spaces the outcome was certain to be increased virus spread. These can all be deemed scientific errors. They stemmed from the fact that scientists with decision-making influence at WHO and other supranational organisations all lived in “wealthy nations.” Apparently, they did not understand the demographic characteristics of social life in urban settings on the African continent. This was, in effect, a colonial policy, shaped by the financial dependence of African institutions on so-called foreign donors both in the West and in China. A full covid inquiry in Africa must however not be limited to scientific matters. A fourth mistake came in ignoring the social determinants of public health – the social context in which science and medicine takes place. Devastated Health Systems Social scientists have long known that wealth and health are closely connected. In poorer countries, the relationship between GDP and life expectancy has been clear for decades, elucidated in the “Prescott curve”. Effectively, just as increases in GDP raise life expectancy, so reductions lower it. In Africa, the closure of informal markets, transport shutdowns, and curfews, were all policies ensuring increases in poverty. They were policies which could only reduce wealth, health and life expectancy. With the World Food Programme now saying that more than half of those experiencing acute hunger entered this condition since 2020, and the United Nations Development Programme (“UNDP”) that 50 million Africans entered extreme poverty during covid, it’s clear that the policies driven by the WHO and powerful supranational organisations in the global health industry devastated public health in Africa. Beyond this, there are many themes that must be considered. First, there is the closure of schools and the impact on and child labour. Second, there are the impacts of movement restrictions on harvests and crop-growing cycles. Third, there is the “shadow pandemic” of gender-based violence prompted by the measures. Fourth, there is the impact of global transport shutdowns and reorientations of priorities on supply chains of vital medicines including malaria rapid tests, which are still in short supply. No doubt that an African covid inquiry will have its work cut out. One thing alone is clear: whoever runs it, it cannot be the WHO or any other supranational institution which cheerleads the imposition of such ruinous policies on the continent. Featured image: South African National Defence Forces patrolling in Johannesburg to enforce the lockdown (left). Coronavirus lockdown costs South Africa millions of jobs (right). https://expose-news.com/2024/02/01/calls-for-inquiry-into-african-governments-responses/ https://donshafi911.blogspot.com/2024/02/professor-of-african-history-calls-for.html

Dr. David Martin: The Next Terror Campaign on the World Is Already Being Planned “Preparing for Disease X” The Vigilant Fox The World Economic Forum held a 47-minute meeting in Davos this week titled “Preparing for Disease X.” In that meeting, Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, the Director-General of the World Health Organization, warned that the next pandemic is not a matter of if but when. Technologist and entrepreneur Dr. David Martin, often known for his viral address to the European Parliament, agrees — but from a slightly different perspective. He said, during a space hosted on 𝕏, that the next terror campaign on the world is already being planned: “What they’re doing right now is they’re planning the sequence of events where they can actually cascade another terror campaign, which then triggers not only the need for allegedly another medical countermeasure, but it also, this time, is going to involve the other piece that they failed to achieve with the COVID campaign, which is the eradication of cash-based transactions in commercial interaction because it turns out that one of the things that they desperately need to do is to make sure that they have central control on the flow of value exchange and the mapping of the networks associated with that.” Dr. David Martin mentioned that his organization, M•CAM International, “continues to maintain vigilance on all the 64 scheduled and funded pathogens that are in the queue for release against humanity." He highlighted that the ongoing events in Davos serve as a preliminary exercise for yet another pandemic exercise “to get ready for the passage of the IHR (International Health Regulations) World Health Organization Treaty reform, which is intended to take over a supra sovereignty on any declared emergency …” “They blundered their way into Covid,” remarked Dr. Martin, “and unfortunately (for them), they did not do the full control takeover that they wanted, which is exactly what is on the agenda for Davos this week.” Leave a comment The World Economic Forum’s 2024 meetings can be watched at weforum.org. The full conversation with Dr. David Martin can be listened to here. https://open.substack.com/pub/vigilantfox/p/dr-david-martin-the-next-terror-campaign?r=29hg4d&utm_medium=ios&utm_campaign=post

Greetings, dear Guardians of humanity and our respective democratic constitutions, Welcome to this captivating interview, delving into the creation of the sensational famed documentary short film titled "Cutting Off the Head of the Snake in Geneva". https://rumble.com/v3wtvjv-who-wef-democide-the-interview-about-cutting-off-the-head-of-the-snake-in-g.html "Cutting Off the Head of the Snake in Geneva" has created an astounding moran than 600 million views and connections since we have given it the wings of freedom to fly on October 19th 2023, meticulously measured by our esteemed friends in the United States, who possess cutting-edge technology capable of monitoring every aspect, even extending to the vast expanse of space. This remarkable historic filmographic work of art was produced at our home amidst the majestic Swiss mountains, nestled at an altitude of 5000 feet, a mere two-hour journey from Geneva. For those who have yet to witness this extraordinary historical testament, which unveils the first and final act of democide against the divine Human Species, I implore you to click on the link below: https://rumble.com/v3qf7ig-breaking-documentary-short-cutting-off-the-head-of-the-snake-geneva-switzer.html Both the short film and this interview are dedicated solely to the millions of innocent Millions of lives being taken and countless individuals who have suffered at the hands of the WHO, WEF, Biden, Fauci, Tedros, Bill Gates, GAVI, and numerous clandestine government entities. These malevolent elements meticulously planned, orchestrated and executed the lethal Covid-19 bioweapon mRNA injections upon over 5.7 billion individuals, cunningly disguised under the perverted veil of the 2020/2023 Covid PsyOp. The atrocities committed by these bad, depraved Covid tyrants and betrayers of our respective constitutions transcend even the most harrowing tales depicted in biblical scriptures. Rest assured, our response to their heinous actions will be of an unprecedented multiple beyond Biblical magnitude, ensuring that no future generation ever dares to replicate such abhorrent crimes against humanity. Anyone who has seen the short film and does not repost and share it with their family, friends and divine Humanity arguably is on the wrong side of the river and is caught in their own darkness of inaction. To remain silent about this film is akin to helping the cover up of this Democide that unfortunately will kill and injure billions more of us innocent divine Humans, including countless Children and Teenagers over the next five years from now. Now the call of duty has come to stand up and simply say STOP as eloquently proclaimed by President Donald J. Trump a few weeks ago: "We will not comply" and in French "Ni Oubli Ni Pardon." Anything short of this is a Travesty of Justice. The fallible state, federal, and civil courts shall be rectified through the implementation of military justice, which is already in force since quite some time, awaiting the opportune moment. It is crucial to note that I am not the Producer of this film. And, I do not call the shots on what is now underway, reportedly being the unstoppable. This exclusive prerogative lies solely with the current and esteemed Wartime President and Commander-in-Chief of the United States of America, President Donald J. Trump. "We are the Guardians of Humanity and our Light obliterates the darkness of evil, Always." Semper Supra! Sincerely, Pascal Najadi Guardian

"Atunci cand ne lasam provocati de o alta persoana, cand ii permitem sa ne irite/enerveze, noi ne cedam puterea acelei persoane, ii dam putere asupra noastra. Cand tu imi "apesi butoanele” exista doua variante: eu iti pot permite sa ai putere asupra mea sau pot sa-mi asum/ manifest puterea personala, refuzand sa ma las provocat de comportamentul tau, refuzand sa ma las atras intr-un conflict/o disputa. Daca eu iti permit sa ai putere asupra mea (adica ai puterea sa ma faci sa ma enervez/ sa fiu furios/ sa ma simt inferior tie/ sa ma simt vinovat, etc), inseamna ca imi cedez/diminuez puterea personala. Eu incerc sa fiu un exemplu pentru ceilalti, asumandu-mi puterea personala si aratandu-le celor din jur ce inseamna cu adevarat sa fii un om puternic. Si subliniez: le arat prin propriul meu exemplu ce inseamna sa fii puternic, nu le rezolv eu problemele, fiindca asa nu vor ajunge niciodata puternici. Este necesar ca fiecare sa-si faca propriile alegeri/greseli, sa-si asume consecintele, sa-si invete lectiile si sa acumuleze intelepciune si putere."(Jason Estes)

Supra looking super clean ✨️✨️ #somee #speckless #supra

Quick and efficient overview of the "supranational entity" that is the WEF. Is this how a distopian world begins? https://www.rt.com/news/550523-wef-davos-agenda-covid-schwab/

New partner announced on twitter. Sounding good.... SoMee is delighted to partner with @SupraOracles for layer 1 smart contract bundles, cross chain-liquidity, and DeFi swapping features Source: SoMeeOfficial on twitter

About SupraOracles new somee partnership integration. Exciting partnership announcement here's a little sneak peek on what SupraOracles will be helping somee with. Who are SupraOracles It's aims to connect boost traditional market with web3 services by making it easier for developers and web3 projects to build and deploy applications and other interesting programs with easy and less hassle. In general SupraOracles help boost projects performance in building equip and scalable application and smart contracts protocols. How #Somee will benefit from this partnership. 1. Somee will receive assistant for developing a cross chain NFT marketplace. 2. Somee will use SupraOracles for layer 1 chain, use it's smart chain, swapping with decentralized finance (DeFi) features and cross chain liquidity. This is a good move for somee growth hope y'all are excited. Check out SupraOracles website https://supraoracles.com/ Information source https://supraoracles.com/news/supraoracles-forms-new-partnerships-with-web3-leaders-in-defi-gamefi-and-nfts/ [image source](https://twitter.com/SoMeeOfficial/status/1593687625897979905?s=20&t=59d7g_kVNu6ehvrFQ185Qw)