[Held virtually on 19 July 2024]
The following were among the many extraordinary insights provided by the Summit’s participants about the globalists’ bid to crush national sovereignty and eliminate individual freedoms via four complementary and synergistic vectors.
General
Hon. Nigel Farage M.P.: The whole post-war construct was based on a mistaken idea. It was based on the thought that the very existence of a nation-state had led to two cataclysmic world wars that had affected everybody. You know, cost tens of millions of lives in both conflicts. And so, the thinking was, we’ll set up a new form of government, basically leading to world government, where the clever people, the educated people, will decide what’s good for all the rest of us. And if we eliminate the nation-state, we will eliminate war. We will eliminate poverty. And that was the thinking behind all of it. But of course, at no point was this explained to individual voters in our respective countries.
Hon. Ralph Norman M.C.: To cede our power and our sovereignty to an organization that totally floundered about the COVID-19 virus and totally lied about it is insane. To give 5% of our gross medical dollars spent for health care is insane. To give our intellectual properties to China; how they came up with China as a developing country is beyond me.
All that [is] to say, we’ve got to take action on this. The Senate is going to have to consider this, hopefully. I’m sure they will find out about it, but I hope they can get the necessary votes to make sure this doesn’t take place. We simply cannot give money—which is money we don’t have—or give our sovereignty away. And it looks like that’s what this administration, or whoever is guiding this administration, wants to do.
Dr. David Bell: [00:54:19] …There’s a danger that we’re messaging around that these [amendments] are not as bad as we thought, that there [were] great gains made in watering them down. I think this is a real misunderstanding of the issue, that this was never about WHO taking over the world. This was about WHO having been taken, taken over the last 20 years or so, and being used as a tool by a much wider movement. And that’s what we’ve really got to face.
And it’s not the first time that public health has been used in this way. The eugenic era in the past was very similar. We saw public health used as a tool of national fascist regimes in Europe very widely in the past. And there’s nothing really different about what’s happening now to what happened then, except that this is beyond national boundaries. They’re using international organizations to do this. So during the last few years during COVID, we saw the World Health Organization, the World Bank, the G20 high-level panel, and other international entities that we used to trust, essentially used by this movement, completely misrepresent the risk around pandemics, around COVID, for the enrichment and the increase in power of this relative few.
And we’re seeing it again in the wording around climate and health. So, with the UN Summit of the Future, this is going to become much, much broader. This goes beyond health into virtually all aspects of societal life. I think in response to this, we’ve got to be really careful. There are kernels of truth in all these issues around pandemics, climate, environment, gender issues, and population issues. There are kernels of truth, and we have to recognize those because they are being used and twisted for this authoritarian model. And the intent to do this is laid out very clearly. It’s not a sort of a conspiracy theory.
It’s laid out in the wording of the World Economic Forum, the various UN documents, etc. and it’s hard for many people to grasp this because they don’t expect these organizations to be lying to us. But, they need to understand that these organizations are doing this. They’re being used to do this for a purpose by others.
I think we have a very difficult and intense battle ahead of us. We need to very aggressively tell the truth and keep doing that, and support legislators and others who are standing up and doing this against a very strong tide. And, you know, in the end, there’s an attempt to build a global regime based around lies. And the biggest enemy for this is truth. So that’s where we have to be. And I think the Sovereignty Coalition is playing a really important role in pushing that.
Dr. Andrea Nazarenko, PhD: One of the main mechanisms that they used for control, and they have been using for control and they will continue to use for control, is that of fear. A fearful society is just like a fearful individual. An individual who is in a state of fear, does not have proper decision-making capacities, does not have self-efficacy, has learned helplessness….It is a controllable individual. An animal that’s in fear is more controllable than not. And the same is true at a societal level. Fear embedded in societal systems weakens the fabric of collective resilience. When they create fear, they create the context through which they are able to control.
***
We are in uncharted territory because as we begin to look at systems, never before have we had a system where the globalists are in direct lines of influence over our outermost macro level system. We now have a group of individuals who have the power to influence, directly and indirectly, economic ideology, religious and philosophical beliefs, our environment, our laws, our culture, our technology and our social policy. And this is unchartered and very dangerous territory.
Kris Ullman, J.D.: We should be asking our candidates for Congress and for president, and wherever you are in the world, what are these politicians’ positions on national sovereignty? Do they believe in ceding power in violation of the UN’s own declaration of human rights, to ceding power over our life, our liberty, our security, our right to travel, our right to earn a living, our right to choose the education for our children?
These are all the things that we saw happen during the COVID pandemic and the WHO response to it. We can put aside what caused the pandemic and the WHO’s responsibility in that, and we can look at the response and what they forced people around the world to do. And that is what we reject wholeheartedly as they talk about the Pandemic X or the bird flu or these other things.
The WHO’s International Health Regulation (IHR) Treaty
Dr. Peter McCullough: We have a situation here where the WHO is completely inadequate on pandemic crisis after pandemic crisis….I would make the case that the WHO, at this point in time, is disposable in that the world should look towards leaders in each and every country to take initiatives to help protect their populations against purported infectious disease threats as we move forward. WHO in no way should have any input over plants, animals, or humans from this point forward, and throughout the remainder of human history. They’ve greatly misled us. And this group is withdrawing all support for the World Health Organization.
Philipp Kruse, LL.M.: We must understand that the basis for good decision making, in particular in crisis, is the full range of information that shall be freely considered. So that also second opinions and other opinions have their fair share and can be considered without that, and with an obligation of the Member States to exclusively, exclusively provide WHO the exclusive power to define what is good, what is bad, what is dangerous, and what is healthy. Governments will lose their own authority and competence to protect their people. And this is actually what it is all about. And what it is all, what it all should be about. We are here in the public health sector. While the health of the people is the most important and most relevant aspect, it will be impossible to protect people with such a new regime. So, we need to resist it from the bottom up with the help of local politicians and to influence our governance.
Mat Staver, M.A., J.D.: The WHO is coming up with a meeting on Infodemics. And they wanted to press the Infodemic idea. I mean, think about that. We’re not talking about just misinformation or disinformation. We’re talking about accurate information that is too much of accurate information. So in other words, this disease of information needs to be stopped, like the spread of a virus. And it can include what they call misinformation and disinformation. But it can also include truth. As long as you’re giving too much truth so that people can make a decision that is contrary to the narrative that the WHO wants to push….That’s a startling situation.
Kris Ullman: [At] Eagle Forum, we are working with the Sovereignty Coalition and groups from across the political spectrum to educate voters on the important issues in this election, on electing people who will commit to rejecting any international agreement, especially with requiring a vote by the US Congress by the United States Senate to give advice and consent before our government signs on to any treaty or international agreement that has the effect of a treaty like the I.H.R. amendments, which actually do affect US law. We are advocating both in Congress for a bill that will require that vote. We are also working with state attorneys general, state governors, and even local communities to pass resolutions that say that these international agreements will not have an effect if they counter US law that US law is supreme. That’s what sovereignty means.
We, the people, will elect the people who make laws regarding our health, our education, our employment, and any of these things; we have the ability to do it. We need to exercise this right. And I encourage all of those around the world, and especially in the United States, to join us at Eagle Forum and the Sovereignty Coalition to learn what you can do to hold your elected representatives responsible for protecting your individual sovereignty and our national sovereignty.
The WHO’s incipient Pandemic Preparedness, Prevention and Response Treaty
Hon. Ariel Kellner, M.K.: In Israel, we’ll we have already started legislative processes to prevent international treaties from applying here without explicit legislation by the elected representatives of our democracy in our Parliament. I encourage you to act in this spirit so that we can protect the sovereignties of our nations and democracies.
Reggie Littlejohn, Esq.: COVID-19 is just the dress rehearsal for the real trap that they’re setting for us in the next pandemic, which appears to be the bird flu pandemic. And what has happened recently is that the World Health Organization passed international health regulations that, while some of the worst language did not make it through, enough did make it through to establish a globalist totalitarian surveillance police state.
There is article 35, which establishes health documents, requires health documents that can be either paper or digital, and the country can decide….And if you want to know what the digital IDs are going to do, they’re not going to simply be tracking our health and our vaccine status.
If you go on to the World Economic Forum website, you can see that the digital ID is going to be required to open a bank account, to own a communications device, to travel, to buy and sell, to vote, to collect government benefits. It’s basically going to be required for every aspect of life on earth, of civilization. And if you step out of line by, for example, refusing to be vaccinated or boosted, or if you criticize the government and you are considered to be a promoter of misinformation or disinformation, they can cut you off from any of those aspects and basically paralyze you. It’s also connected to your bank account and your credit card. So, this is why I’m saying that the International Health Regulations, even without the pandemic treaty, are enough to establish a global totalitarian police state.
The UN’s Summit of the Future and the “Pact for the Future,” “Declaration on Future Generations,” the Emergency Platform and the Global Digital Compact
Stefano Gennarini, J.D.: This kind of modus operandi, where the secretary general essentially proposes themes and the way forward for the organization and simply seeks to rubber stamp his decision through the approval of the General Assembly, is very much a controversial development for the United Nations system, where the secretary general was never understood to be some kind of CEO, have some kind of presidential role, but more of a secretarial role. That’s why he’s called to lead the organ of the United Nations called the Secretariat.
But we have this new system where the secretary general essentially proposes summits, proposes themes, proposes resolutions, proposes areas for action and concern, and the Member States approve it. We’ve seen this repeatedly since the early 2000s. This is a very negative development in international cooperation, which undermines sovereignty and undermines the functioning of the United Nations as a system for cooperation between member states. And it makes it more of an organ of global governance because you have a CEO or presidential-type role for the secretary general.
Dr. Jessica Rose, PhD: The antidote to lies, like David [Bell] said, is to tell the truth, which is what we’re doing. And the antidote to fear is knowledge.
The impending gain-of-function-engineered Avian Flu pandemic
N.B. The Sovereignty Coalition’s penultimate press release summarized the state of play with respect to the Avian Flu this way:
U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra took steps to reprise the official response to the COVID-19 pandemic by declaring that, pursuant to his authority under the so-called PREP Act, “there is a significant potential for a public health emergency arising from an Avian Flu pandemic. That declaration clears the way for the Commissioner of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to issue Emergency Use Authorizations (EUAs) for Avian Flu vaccines with no liability for the manufacturers.
In anticipation that such EUAs will be forthcoming, the American Medical Association published on July 19 a Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) code that will allow doctors to be reimbursed for administering Bird Flu vaccines. All other things being equal, it seems reasonable to expect that these measures will be followed once again by mandates for those “jabs” and possibly for masks, social distancing and lockdowns, as well.
That is especially the case if the World Health Organization’s Director General, Tedros Ghebreyesus, declares Avian Flu to be “a public health emergency of international concern.” That would enable him to bring to bear powers conferred on him by the recently adopted agreement amending the WHO’s International Health Regulations. He may also seize this pretext for hastily completing a sweeping new and even more problematic Pandemic Prevention, Preparedness and Response Treaty.
Globalists intent on using these public health-related accords to promote what they call “global governance” will surely justify similar surrenders of national sovereignty and individual freedoms in case of other emergencies to the UN Secretary General at the upcoming “Summit of the Future” in September.
Dr. Meryl Nass:
There are many viruses in the world. We’re aware of a few hundred of them. Uh, bird flu, H5n1, which is the one that people are concerned about now, was first isolated in birds in 1959, in humans in 1997, and in cattle this year. Um, the WHO actually tells us how many cases there have been every year for the last 20. And it turns out there have only been 901 cases in the world’s history. And in the last four years, only eight deaths from H5n1 bird flu. It has now mutated in the United States. It is primarily causing pinkeye. Eye. These are episodes of bird flu infections noted in the UK since 1959. You can see that so-called high pathogenicity bird flu, which applies only to pathogenicity and chickens and not humans, occur all the time and then disappear. This New England Journal article reveals that 20 years ago, Jeremy Farrar, Peter Horby and the World Health Organisation were raising alarms about bird flu while admitting there was no human to human transmission. 20 years later, Corby Farrar and the WHO conspired to overdose patients with hydroxychloroquine and spread lies about COVID. This is the enigma. Why are we treating it By culling chickens and, um, uh, getting rid of milk, etc., when no one has ever caught this virus from any kind of food? Uh, why have 500 chickens been culled around the world in a vain attempt to stop the virus, when it is rampant in the wild bird population and cannot be eradicated?
Frank Gaffney: [00:09:19] Sorry, you said.500. I think you meant 500 million.
Dr. Meryl Nass, MD: [00:09:23] Yes, thank you. How do you give experimental vaccines quickly to an entire population? The lawyers in our regulatory agencies have figured out two ways. One being the emergency use authorization and the other being something called a mockup or pre-pandemic vaccine. And this is how the pandemic vaccine was approved in 2009 for the swine flu pandemic that was less severe than an ordinary flu pandemic. This article tells you about the mockup vaccine program invented in 2003. Um, that allows rapid, uh, licensure of a new vaccine, grandfathering it in. This article also tells you how the mockup vaccine generates a regulatory dossier. It gets licensed. No one has any intention of using it. No one cares about it. And then a later vaccine is grandfathered in under this license. Um, this this, uh, process, however, does nothing to sort out how safe the later vaccine that will be used is. And in fact, Doctor Tom Jefferson, who led the Cochrane Collaboration vaccine group, pointed out that the whole concept of mock up vaccines was bankrupt and dangerous, according to the WHO, the EMA and US government advisers. But nobody listened to him. And in 2017, Jeremy Farrar, the same person who stoked fear of bird flu for 20 years, and Bill Gates brought the concept of vaccines developed in 100 days to Davos. With each pandemic, this organization can cash in again with new vaccines and how are they going to get them approved? By using the mock-up strategy and grandfathering them in without testing. However, in order for bird flu to become dangerous to humans, it would have to acquire two sets of mutations simultaneously: the ability to spread between humans, which it has never had, and the ability to cause severe disease, which it lost a number of years ago.
Dr. Meryl Nass, MD: [00:11:39] This, at this point, is only going to happen in a laboratory doing gain of function research. There are many viruses in the world. We’re aware of a few hundred of them. Uh, bird flu, H5n1, which is the one that people are concerned about now, was first isolated in birds in 1959, in humans in 1997, and in cattle this year. Um, the WHO actually tells us how many cases there have been every year for the last 20. And it turns out there have only been 901 cases in the world’s history. And in the last four years, only eight deaths from H5n1 bird flu. It has now mutated in the United States. It is primarily causing pinkeye.
These are episodes of bird flu infections noted in the UK since 1959. You can see that so-called high pathogenicity bird flu, which applies only to pathogenicity and chickens and not humans, occur all the time and then disappear. This New England Journal article reveals that 20 years ago, Jeremy Farrar, Peter Horby and the World Health Organisation were raising alarms about bird flu while admitting there was no human to human transmission. 20 years later, Corby Farrar and the WHO conspired to overdose patients with hydroxychloroquine and spread lies about COVID. This is the enigma.
Why are we treating it by culling chickens and, getting rid of milk, etc., when no one has ever caught this virus from any kind of food? Uh, why have 500 [million] chickens been culled around the world in a vain attempt to stop the virus, when it is rampant in the wild bird population and cannot be eradicated?
How do you give experimental vaccines quickly to an entire population? The lawyers in our regulatory agencies have figured out two ways. One being the emergency use authorization and the other being something called a mockup or pre-pandemic vaccine. And this is how the pandemic vaccine was approved in 2009 for the swine flu pandemic that was less severe than an ordinary flu pandemic. This article tells you about the mockup vaccine program invented in 2003. That allows rapid licensure of a new vaccine [by] grandfathering it in….mockup vaccine generates a regulatory dossier. It gets licensed.
No one has any intention of using it. No one cares about it. And then a later vaccine is grandfathered in under this license. This, uh, process, however, does nothing to sort out how safe the later vaccine that will be used is. And in fact, Doctor Tom Jefferson, who led the Cochrane Collaboration vaccine group, pointed out that the whole concept of mock up vaccines was bankrupt and dangerous, according to the WHO, the EMA and US government advisers. But nobody listened to him.
And in 2017, Jeremy Farrar – the same person who stoked fear of bird flu for 20 years – and Bill Gates brought the concept of vaccines developed in 100 days to Davos. With each pandemic, this organization can cash in again with new vaccines and how are they going to get them approved? By using the mock-up strategy and grandfathering them in without testing. However, in order for bird flu to become dangerous to humans, it would have to acquire two sets of mutations simultaneously: the ability to spread between humans, which it has never had, and the ability to cause severe disease, which it lost a number of years ago.
At this point, is only going to happen in a laboratory doing gain of function research.
Conclusion:
Hon. Bob Good, M.C.: I thank all of you for recognizing how important this is and for coming together to try to build awareness and resistance to this. We can’t surrender our sovereignty as a nation to any other entity, let alone the WHO or the UN, to force upon us what they consider mitigation strategies for what they consider to be a crisis, whether it’s the next health crisis, not a health crisis, or not if there’s a health crisis, but the next health crisis, because we know there’s another one on the horizon, whether it’s the avian flu or whatever it might be or whatever else they might decide is a crisis, whether it’s poverty or climate or immigration or so-called gun violence. And so, we’ve got to have congressional action. We need a resolution out of the House condemning any surrender or submission to an international organization such as WHO or the UN.
We need to reject this action, but at a minimum [this treaty] requires Senate ratification, recognizing it as a treaty. But in the meantime, we ought to be withdrawing again from the WHO, as President Trump appropriately did. And of course, Biden reversed that. But we can’t count on a Trump administration. We’ve got to prepare for the worst, hope for the best, pray for the best, work for the best, but prepare for the worst.
We should be pushing the Biden administration to withdraw from the WHO. We ought to have a congressional resolution to that effect, and we ought to defund the WHO, as President Trump appropriately did. So again, I want to thank everyone here for being part of this very important summit and trying to build awareness and resistance to what those in the Biden administration would do to weaken the United States, to threaten our citizens, and to strip away our most basic, essential freedoms, and to take another step towards essentially one world government globalism, which obviously is in direct violation to who we are as a nation, a government of the people, by the people, for the people, an independent sovereign state. This first true experiment in representative democracy, a constitutional republic. We’ve got to continue to fight for that freedom. And what you’re doing today is an important step in that direction.