INTERNATIONAL LAWYERS’ PRESS CONFERENCE REGARDING the omS
CONFÉRENCE DE PRESSE INTERNATIONALE DES AVOCATS CONCERNANT L’OMS
The HOLY BIBLE
https://holy-bible.webnode.page/
Andrea Salvatore Buffa Denunce Pubbliche 02.03.1973 PALERMO
Via Vita 12, Petro SioN TP 91020 Italy
HOMEPAGE
https://andreasalvatorebuffa2.substack.com/p/homepage-from-god
Il Santo Natale è il 2 marzo, Sofonia 1:10
Andrea Salvatore Buffa
Dec 25, 2022
https://andreasalvatorebuffa2.substack.com/p/il-santo-natale-e-il-2-marzo-sofonia-110
יהודי ITALIANO 中国人 FRANÇAISE ESPAÑOL РУССКИЙ
Napoli Franci 23/05/2024
https://andreasalvatorebuffa2.substack.com/p/napoli-franci-23052024
in caso di donazione, un'offerta ti farebbe onore:
PAYPAL
Carta numero:
5313 6400 4550 0349
Iban
FR7616598000011704682000159
ASTENERSI DAI fArmAci e dal rivotarli
https://andreasalvatorebuffa2.substack.com/p/astenersi-dai-farmaci-e-dal-rivotarli
La magistratura, una farsa della CIA di Hollywood
https://andreasalvatorebuffa2.substack.com/p/la-magistratura-una-farsa-della-cia
Molte Grazie, caro,
ECCELLENZA DOTT. AVV. AUGUSTO SINAGRA!
https://andreasalvatorebuffa2.substack.com/p/eccellenza-dott-avv-augusto-sinagra
.
ECCELLENZA AUGUSTO SINAGRA! Radio Roma
https://andreasalvatorebuffa2.substack.com/p/eccellenza-augusto-sinagra-radio
.
Lawyer Eric Lanzarone: magistrates and doctors in scandalous conflicts of interest
Avvocato Eric Lanzarone: magistrati e medici in scandalosi conflitti di interessi
L'Avocat Me Eric Lanzarone: magistrats et médecins in scandaleux conflits d’intérêts
https://andreasalvatorebuffa2.substack.com/p/lavocat-me-eric-lanzarone-magistrats
.
Andrea Salvatore Buffa Denunce !!
Jun 05, 2024
Abusare di una bambina non è stupro: lo dice un giudice. - Levitico 20:13; Se uno ha con un uomo relazioni sessuali come si hanno con una donna, tutti e due hanno commesso una cosa abominevole; dovranno essere messi a morte; il loro sangue ricadrà su di
Matteo 5; Efesini 5; Tito 3; Giacomo 2; Giacomo 3; Apocalisse 2:1-7
isiaroma@isiaroma.it Guidotti Roberto 3 Jun 2024
https://andreasalvatorebuffa2.substack.com/p/isiaromaisiaromait-guidotti-roberto
Abbaiano senza sapere Perché!!
הם נובחים בלי לדעת למה!!
Ils aboient sans savoir pourquoi !!
¡¡Ladran sin saber por qué!!
They bark without knowing why!!
Sie bellen, ohne zu wissen warum!!
他们不知道为什么吠叫!
https://andreasalvatorebuffa2.substack.com/p/abbaiano-senza-sapere-perche
VigaNò Exodus 20, no Levitico 18, il violino finto VeGano!!
https://andreasalvatorebuffa2.substack.com/p/vigano-exodus-20-no-levitico-18-il
.
Pour Marion Maréchal, "GAY N’A JAMAIS EXISTE AVANT !"
SCHWAB hat es noch nie gegeben!
GAY HAS NEVER EXISTED BEFORE!
IL GAY NON È MAI ESISTITO PRIMA!
https://andreasalvatorebuffa2.substack.com/p/pour-marion-marechal-gay-na-jamais
#petrosino
L'Europa SATANICA!
https://andreasalvatorebuffa2.substack.com/p/leuropa-satanica
Giovanni Falcone La posta in gioco Interventi e proposte per la lotta alla mafia
https://andreasalvatorebuffa2.substack.com/p/giovanni-falcone-la-posta-in-gioco
.
INTERNATIONAL LAWYERS’ PRESS CONFERENCE REGARDING the omS
国际律师就 OMS 召开新闻发布会
CONFERENZA STAMPA INTERNAZIONALE DEGLI AVVOCATI SULL'OMS
CONFÉRENCE DE PRESSE INTERNATIONALE DES AVOCATS CONCERNANT L’OMS
https://andreasalvatorebuffa2.substack.com/p/international-lawyers-press-conference
.
The threat is serious,
La minaccia è seria,
La menace est sérieuse, "VON DER LEYEN"
https://andreasalvatorebuffa2.substack.com/p/the-threat-is-serious-la-minaccia
The Ashkenazim against the Jews? !
האשכנזים נגד היהודים?!
Gli Aschenaziti contro gli Ebrei?!
https://andreasalvatorebuffa2.substack.com/p/gli-aschenaziti-contro-gli-ebrei
Vincenzo De Luca: mando i carabinieri con il lanciafiamme!
https://andreasalvatorebuffa2.substack.com/p/vincenzo-de-luca-mando-i-carabinieri
S'andrà Per TINI, Era omosessuale! Tutti i leaders sinistri! Che vara incluso! Anche Cesare e Nerone! Salvini in galera ti voglio!
Tedros Ghebreyseus declares the death of anti-vaxxers
Tedros Ghebreyseus dichiara la morte dei no vax
טדרוס ג'ברייסאוס מכריז על מותם של אנטי-וואקסרים
Fine Maggio 2024
https://andreasalvatorebuffa2.substack.com/p/tedros-ghebreyseus-dichiara-la-morte
.
Lettera ai MediCi(a) e al Prof. Di Bella
https://andreasalvatorebuffa2.substack.com/p/lettera-ai-medicia-e-al-prof-di-bella
.
Voi siete il sale della terra; ma.. . Non conoscete le SCRITTURE! Matteo 5!
https://andreasalvatorebuffa2.substack.com/p/voi-siete-il-sale-della-terra-ma
.
The Federal Government Is TRACKING Unvaccinated People!
DECRETO LEGISLATIVO 10 Marzo 2023, n. 24
Attuazione della direttiva (UE) 2019/1937 del Parlamento europeo e del Consiglio, del 23 ottobre 2019, riguardante la protezione delle persone che segnalano violazioni del diritto dell'Unione e recante disposizioni riguardanti la protezione delle persone che segnalano violazioni delle disposizioni normative nazionali. (23G00032)
(GU n.63 del 15-3-2023)
https://andreasalvatorebuffa2.substack.com/p/decreto-legislativo-10-marzo-2023
.
Bip! CENSURED, TrOP SCENSURED
https://andreasalvatorebuffa2.substack.com/p/bip-censured-trop-scensured-trop
Abbaiano senza sapere Perché!!
הם נובחים בלי לדעת למה!!
Ils aboient sans savoir pourquoi !!
¡¡Ladran sin saber por qué!!
They bark without knowing why!!
Sie bellen, ohne zu wissen warum!!
他们不知道为什么吠叫!
https://andreasalvatorebuffa2.substack.com/p/abbaiano-senza-sapere-perche
.
The Federal Government Is TRACKING Unvaccinated People!
.
SCARICA TUTTO IL SITO
DOWNLOAD THE ENTIRE SITE
04 Jun 2024
Avv. Paolo Pellegrino Marsala Andrea Salvatore Buffa May 26, 2024
Nel video parla il mio avvocato che non ricorda, dice!
https://andreasalvatorebuffa2.substack.com/p/avv-paolo-pellegrino-marsala
I AM THE EXPECTED CHRIST!
אני המשיח המצופה!
我是所期待的基督!
IO SONO IL CRISTO ATTESO!
JE SUIS LE CHRIST ATTENDU!
¡YO SOY EL CRISTO ESPERADO!
ICH BIN DER ERWARTETE CHRISTUS!
أنا المسيح المنتظر!
Я ЕСМЬ ОЖИДАННЫЙ ХРИСТОС!
मैं अपेक्षित मसीह हूँ!
私は期待されているキリストです!
https://andreasalvatorebuffa2.substack.com/p/i-am-the-expected-christ
Un gran fracasso dalle colline Sofonia 1:10
https://andreasalvatorebuffa2.substack.com/p/un-gran-fracasso-dalle-colline-sofonia-110
Napoli Franci 23/05/2024
https://andreasalvatorebuffa2.substack.com/p/napoli-franci-23052024
VigaNò Exodus 20, no Leviticus 18, le faux violon Vegan !!
VigaNò Exodus 20, no Levitico 18, il violino finto VeGano!!
.
https://andreasalvatorebuffa2.substack.com/p/vigano-exodus-20-no-levitico-18-il
.
Marion Maréchal sur France 2 #marionmarechal
.
ASTENERSI DAI fArmAci e dal rivotarli
https://andreasalvatorebuffa2.substack.com/p/astenersi-dai-farmaci-e-dal-rivotarli
La magistratura, una farsa della CIA di Hollywood
https://andreasalvatorebuffa2.substack.com/p/la-magistratura-una-farsa-della-cia
La Verità vi accusa di complicità
https://andreasalvatorebuffa2.substack.com/p/la-verita-vi-accusa-di-complicita
Exodus 20 App
https://nucleapp.com/app/6582b66b12b7696f0344ce79″
HOMEPAGE DELLA CINA 10 Apr 2024
https://andreasalvatorebuffa2.substack.com/p/homepage-della-cina-10-apr-2024
HOMEPAGE From GOD!(19).PDF
02 Jun 2024
Georgia Meloni al G20 di Nuova Delhi la scorsa settimana, una mancanza di controllo, troppa cocaina_-360p-(www.KeepVid.to).mp4
Benjamin Netanyahu è Milkowski ed è polacco
בנימין נתניהו הוא מילקובסקי והוא פולני
Benjamin Netanyahu is Milkowski and he is Polish
https://andreasalvatorebuffa2.substack.com/p/3a9
Italiano
https://andreasalvatorebuffa2.substack.com/p/benjamin-netanyahou-est-milekowski
Leggi Esodo 20 e Levitico 18, il Vaticano è stato sempre satanico!
https://www.biblestudytools.com/riv/passage/?q=esodo+20;levitico+18
Dietro a Washington o a Roma o a Paris, ecc, c'è city London, Apocalisse 17 e 18
THE ARAB/ENGLISH OFFENSIVE IN ISRAEL AND WORLD WARS!
L'OFFENSIVA ARABA/INGLESE IN ISRAELE E LE GUERRE MONDIALI!
https://andreasalvatorebuffa2.substack.com/p/loffensivaarabainglese-in-israele
Presentiamo il conto a Prodi e al PD che ci ha infinocchiati. Quindi per Fatti gravissimi di Aggiotaggio che in aggiunta alla segregazione malata, folle, senza senso come codeste losche figure a comparsa, a proposito, Occhetto e Bertinotti?
Quindi, STOP A SPESE PAZZE, STOP ARMAMENTI CONTO TERZI, STOP DEBITO PUBBLICO UNIVERSALE. GIUBILEO!
Lo Stato è MAFIA e tutti i dipendenti delle sanguisughe lgbt
The State is MAFIA and all the employees of the lgbt leeches
https://andreasalvatorebuffa2.substack.com/p/the-state-is-mafia-and-all-the-employees
Vincenzo De Luca: mando i carabinieri con il lanciafiamme!
02 Jun 2024
https://andreasalvatorebuffa2.substack.com/p/vincenzo-de-luca-mando-i-carabinieri
RESPONSABILITÀ, GRATTIERI, Oct 06, 2020
https://andreasalvatorebuffa2.substack.com/p/responsabilita-grattieri-oct-06-2020
FREE *.PDF DE LUKCA
Vincenzo De Luca_ mando i carabinieri con il lanciafiamme!(1).PDF
Vincenzo De Luca_ mando i carabinieri con il lanciafiamme!.pdf
Romani 1:18-32
Il PEDOFILO Dr. topo Jaws Fauci confessa di aver "inventato" regole covid tra cui il distanziamento sociale di 6 piedi e il mascheramento dei bambini
https://andreasalvatorebuffa2.substack.com/p/the-pedophile-dr-mouse-jaws-fauci
.
Avv. Giuseppe Sottile
Vogliono finire la Strage! Chi vota si rende COMPLICE ANCHE SE CIECO!
Vincenzo De Luca: mando i carabinieri con il lanciafiamme!
https://andreasalvatorebuffa2.substack.com/p/vincenzo-de-luca-mando-i-carabinieri
Tedros Ghebreyseus declares the death of anti-vaxxers
Tedros Ghebreyseus dichiara la morte dei no vax
טדרוס ג'ברייסאוס מכריז על מותם של אנטי-וואקסרים
Fine Maggio 2024
https://andreasalvatorebuffa2.substack.com/p/tedros-ghebreyseus-dichiara-la-morte
Abusare di una bambina non è stupro: lo dice un giudice. - Levitico 20:13; Se uno ha con un uomo relazioni sessuali come si hanno con una donna, tutti e due hanno commesso una cosa abominevole; dovranno essere messi a morte; il loro sangue ricadrà su di
.
Lettera ai MediCi(a) e al Prof. Di Bella
https://andreasalvatorebuffa2.substack.com/p/lettera-ai-medicia-e-al-prof-di-bella
.
Voi siete il sale della terra; ma.. . Non conoscete le SCRITTURE! Matteo 5!
https://andreasalvatorebuffa2.substack.com/p/voi-siete-il-sale-della-terra-ma
.
The death of police officer Rouven L. is not a wake-up call - reitschuster.de
La morte del poliziotto Rouven L. non è un campanello d'allarme - reitschuster.de
https://andreasalvatorebuffa2.substack.com/p/the-death-of-police-officer-rouven
Marco Della Luna Paolo Ferraro Sette Diego Fusaro MARSALA FORUM Francesco Miglino
Bip! CENSURED, TrOP SCENSURED
https://andreasalvatorebuffa2.substack.com/p/bip-censured-trop-scensured-trop
Abbaiano senza sapere Perché!!
הם נובחים בלי לדעת למה!!
Ils aboient sans savoir pourquoi !!
¡¡Ladran sin saber por qué!!
They bark without knowing why!!
Sie bellen, ohne zu wissen warum!!
他们不知道为什么吠叫!
https://andreasalvatorebuffa2.substack.com/p/abbaiano-senza-sapere-perche
.
The Federal Government Is TRACKING Unvaccinated People!
DECRETO LEGISLATIVO 10 Marzo 2023, n. 24
Attuazione della direttiva (UE) 2019/1937 del Parlamento europeo e del Consiglio, del 23 ottobre 2019, riguardante la protezione delle persone che segnalano violazioni del diritto dell'Unione e recante disposizioni riguardanti la protezione delle persone che segnalano violazioni delle disposizioni normative nazionali. (23G00032)
(GU n.63 del 15-3-2023)
https://andreasalvatorebuffa2.substack.com/p/decreto-legislativo-10-marzo-2023
.
Bip! CENSURED, TrOP SCENSURED
https://andreasalvatorebuffa2.substack.com/p/bip-censured-trop-scensured-trop
.
L'Europa SATANICA!
https://andreasalvatorebuffa2.substack.com/p/leuropa-satanica
Giovanni Falcone La posta in gioco Interventi e proposte per la lotta alla mafia
https://andreasalvatorebuffa2.substack.com/p/giovanni-falcone-la-posta-in-gioco
.
Vincenzo De Luca: mando i carabinieri con il lanciafiamme!
https://andreasalvatorebuffa2.substack.com/p/vincenzo-de-luca-mando-i-carabinieri
S'andrà Per TINI, Era omosessuale! Tutti i leaders sinistri! Che vara incluso! Anche Cesare e Nerone! Salvini in galera ti voglio!
Tedros Ghebreyseus declares the death of anti-vaxxers
Tedros Ghebreyseus dichiara la morte dei no vax
טדרוס ג'ברייסאוס מכריז על מותם של אנטי-וואקסרים
Fine Maggio 2024
https://andreasalvatorebuffa2.substack.com/p/tedros-ghebreyseus-dichiara-la-morte
.
isiaroma@isiaroma.it Guidotti Roberto 3 Jun 2024
https://andreasalvatorebuffa2.substack.com/p/isiaromaisiaromait-guidotti-roberto
.
Abusare di una bambina non è stupro: lo dice un giudice. - Levitico 20:13; Se uno ha con un uomo relazioni sessuali come si hanno con una donna, tutti e due hanno commesso una cosa abominevole; dovranno essere messi a morte; il loro sangue ricadrà su di
.
Lettera ai MediCi(a) e al Prof. Di Bella
https://andreasalvatorebuffa2.substack.com/p/lettera-ai-medicia-e-al-prof-di-bella
.
Voi siete il sale della terra; ma.. . Non conoscete le SCRITTURE! Matteo 5!
https://andreasalvatorebuffa2.substack.com/p/voi-siete-il-sale-della-terra-ma
.
.Bip! CENSURED, TrOP SCENSURED
https://andreasalvatorebuffa2.substack.com/p/bip-censured-trop-scensured-trop
.
INTERNATIONAL LAWYERS’ PRESS CONFERENCE REGARDING the omS
CONFERENZA STAMPA INTERNAZIONALE DEGLI AVVOCATI SULL'OMS
CONFERENZA STAMPA INTERNAZIONALE DEGLI AVVOCATI SUGLI ESITI DELLA 77a ASSEMBLEA MONDIALE DELLA SANITÀ"
INTERNATIONAL LAWYERS’ PRESS CONFERENCE REGARDING the outcome of the 77TH WORLD HEALTH ASSEMBLY"
https://www.youtube.com/live/oPqQNWliO58
Andrea Salvatore Buffa
INTERNATIONAL LAWYERS’ PRESS CONFERENCE REGARDING the omS
INTERNATIONAL LAWYERS’ PRESS CONFERENCE REGARDING the outcome of the 77TH WORLD HEALTH ASSEMBLY"
https://www.youtube.com/live/oPqQNWliO58
.
Okay. That's amazing. Yes. Alright. Okay.
11 countries from okay. Super. Mhmm. Good morning, Shabnam. Can you hear me?
Very good. We need to do I cannot hear you. We need to do a sound check still. Yes. Just a second.
Okay. Hi, Shabnam. Can you say something, please? Good morning, Shabnam. Okay.
What? I cannot hear you, unfortunately, Shlopna. Right. So if you can if there's a technical manager, we have Shabnam here, but we cannot hear her. Okay.
Let me call, the technical guy. Yeah. Thank you. Okay. Okay.
Can you hear me, Shabnam? Good morning, everybody. Welcome, ladies and gentlemen. My name is Philip Kruse Together with my 10 colleagues from 9 different countries, I would like to welcome you here at our press conference. We are here, because of this World Health Assembly's negotiations about the 2 pandemic treaties going on, and we would like to inform you.
It is an honor for me to jointly host and moderate this press conference together with my colleague, Doctor. Renate Holzweissen. Doctor Renate Holzhuysen is an attorney at law and an economist from Italy with her own legal practice in Southern Tirol and Doctor. Arthur Holzhuysen is active since the beginning of the COVID nineteen crisis in submitting the mandates to a judicial reconsideration, and also she has submitted major cases to the European Court of Justice in order to have the authorizations of the mRNA based substances being declared null and void. We will yes?
Thank you, Renate. So the purpose of this press conference is to provide you with the first critical analysis from the legal and constitutional perspective of what has been concluded or not concluded by the 77th World Health Assembly. This whole topic is widely underreported and not sufficiently understood. Therefore, we as the lawyers, we feel it as our obligation to inform the world and the people and also representatives from the different countries with respect to the far reaching effects that these two new legal instruments will have. It is Saturday, 1st June and now 20 minutes past 10 here in Geneva.
And as we speak, the 77th World Health Assembly is still going on and we still not have a final conclusion about the amendments of the International Health Regulations and the latest information I received is that both legal instruments will be postponed for a later vote later this year. In such a situation, we as lawyers must always make reservations that a proper legal analysis needs time and can only be done if the final wording is on the table. Therefore, our statements can only be of preliminary nature, but, together with other lawyers, researchers and observers, we will provide a more conclusive and more mature assessment in the weeks months to come. Now, in our press conference we will also present some of the most relevant initiatives that have been submitted by citizens and by Members of Parliament to foster a critical awareness about recent WHO developments. Now I start after this introduction part and then afterwards one lawyer after the other will present one aspect or more aspect of, these 2 pandemic treaties and the critical aspects.
Now as I said, there is no formal adoption of neither of the treaties. And regarding the new pandemic treaty, we already knew at the beginning of this week that it was going to postpone. Regarding the amendments to the International Health Regulations, there were intense negotiations going on late into this night under the tremendous pressure of the representatives of the United States to come to a conclusion. What can we say about what is on the table? Where do we have the highest concern?
And why do we have to raise our voice against these 2 legal instruments, in particular the amendments to the IHR as we have them on the table as drafts right now. Number 1. You have all heard that there is a binding rule in the international health regulations themselves, Article 55 paragraph 2, that clearly states that the final wording of any amendment to the International Health Regulations must be submitted to the member states at least 4 months in advance. The World Health Organization claims to have done so by submitting to the World and Publishing in November 2022 a compilation of 300 different proposals, almost not consolidated, in fact with many different options for many different provisions in the same time. And what we have seen from the latest drafts, they brought new aspects into the game that nobody knew before like what we have seen in Annex 1 and it is a matter of principle that all those parties that are involved and affected by the new rules are given their voice and their consent before the delegates can give their vote in favor of an agreement.
Therefore, we certainly must never put aside this 4 months rule. Then we have to clearly state that this instrument, this legal instrument of a regulation was never meant to comprise so far reaching new rules that affect member states but also citizens. And here I give you just a brief enumeration of the most relevant far reaching rules that we see on the table in the International Health Regulations in combination with the pandemic treaty. Number 1, annex 1 to the International Health Regulations under the title of core capacity provides far reaching duties, imposes far reaching duties onto the Member States and their regions and their municipalities also to establish a system of permanent surveillance with the principle or the method that is then governed by the treaty of genomic sequencing. Here, this is one aspect where we see far reaching duties coming up to the states and to their local regions and communities.
Number 2, we have an arbitrary widening of a pretext for a fake that other of my colleagues will go into more detail, but we will see that it is arbitrary how the WHO wants to allow itself to base a public health emergency of international concern on no standardized procedures based on a constant surveillance. We will have Reggie Middleton, my colleague Beate Barna, and Professor Trito speak about this principle of constant surveillance and Professor Trito about, the unlawful method of genomic sequencing. And number 3, this concept of infodemics, although the term was removed from the treaty, but still the provisions we see in the amendments and the Treaty, combined together, we see that WHO will be strengthened, and Member States as well, in their authority to dominate and control the publicly available information. Just go into Annex 1 of the IHR, go into the treaty, go to the homepage of the World Health Organization, also research about infodemics manager, which is a program that exists already for many years, and so on. What does it mean?
By strengthening WHO's capacity to control the information, we are going to deprive people of the factual basis for the decision making process and that is an element of actually dragging people into a behavior, in particular a treatment that they do not want. And ultimately a violation of mandatory international and national laws regarding, the informed consent, which will be further elaborated by my colleague Sue Gray from New Zealand and by my colleague, Doctor. Beate Pfael from Germany. Further, WHO's next point, the authority to define substances, specific substances, as a precondition for traveling and to use even and recommend even substances that have never been tested before, but authorized only under the regime of emergency use authorization. I refer to the treaty Article 14 and to the IHR rules Article 36 and Annex 6.
That will result in the Member States not being able to protect their own population against uncalculable health risks from experimental substances. And again, it will result in the breach of the most fundamental rules to protect informed consent. Further, we must state that with all this, and I have just given you some examples, but there are further accruals and increasing powers of the WHO, in particular also financial powers. We do not see anything that could be called an checks and balances or quality control and correction mechanism. With such a far reaching range of powers, it is a matter of legal, Principality that a mechanism of quality control and correction be established.
Otherwise, this is a violation of one of the most fundamental principles of democratic constitution. Now all of this taken together, we see these far reaching provisions and, as I said, so far reaching new rules, obliging member states and, their citizens ultimately and affecting their citizens were never meant to be put into this instrument of regulations as it is defined in the World Health Organization's Constitution in Article 21. They are meant only to rule about technical standards. Now we have a fundamental objection against any attempt to rush into these uncharted waters and to grant the WHO even more powers and more financial capacities, without ever having done a proper professional and critical assessment of all aspects of the WHO's pandemic management and of its recommendations and communications of the past. We believe that this should be the absolute first step before enlarging the powers of WHO and giving the WHO more financial means.
Since 2020, the World Health Assembly never acknowledged the urgent need for effective quality control of WHO's and Member States' own pandemic management. If we do not undergo this process that might be harmful for WHO and the member states, we clearly embark on a road where further and similar damages are pre programmed. And as we all know, the sole purpose of WHO according to its own constitution is to protect people from any harm and to foster health of the people of the world. What we see now is a program to harm people's health and people's right. That was just an overview of the most important aspects.
Now I gladly hand over the word and the floor to my dear colleague, Reggie Middleton from the United States. Thank you. Welcome. My name is Reggie Littlejohn. I am the founder and president of Anti Globalist International, also Women's Rights Without Frontiers, and I'm the cofounder and cochair of the sovereignty coalition.
And I wanna thank, doctor Philippe Cruza for inviting me to speak and for really the heroic efforts he has put in bringing this all together. So we come to you as lawyers from 9 different countries to sound the alarm about the pandemic treaty, and we want to show you chapter and verse exactly why from a legal perspective we are very concerned about these two treaties. One is the One Health approach. Could I have the, my PowerPoint please? This can be found in article 5 of the May 27, 2024 draft of the Pandemic Treaty.
Alright. This is okay. So what is one health? In the introduction, the use of terms, it defines one health as a means of an integrated, unifying approach that aims to sustainably balance, that's the important word, balance and optimize the health of people, animals, and ecosystems. So what does that mean?
It means that people are not the main concern. Our interests have to be balanced against those of animals and, plants in the ecosystem. So number 1, this is what The Lancet calls the call to ecological equity, and they say all life is equal and of equal concern. So that means that your life, my life, the lives of our children, our our parents, our loved ones are equal and of equal concern to the life of a cockroach or a mosquito. Furthermore, what One Health does is bring basically every aspect of life on earth under the purview of the World Health Assembly, or the World Health Organization.
So they are basically saying that everything needs to be surveilled, and that they can issue what they would call recommendations, which many countries will interpret as being basically orders and on the front of human health, animal health, plant health, and the ecology, which means that they can use climate change as a, you know, assert their authority or in the climate change area and say, look the climate is hurting health, etcetera. I mean, they can even get into aspects of of of war between nations, that it's bad for health. Try to insert themselves in that way. So and how are they going to implement this? They don't tell us.
They say that it's gonna be further defined in an instrument that is gonna be, created in the future. Now art the, article 4 of the pandemic treaty talks about pandemic prevention and public health surveillance and calls for multi sectoral multi sectoral surveillance and risk assessment, saying the parties recognize the environmental, climatic, social, anthropogenic, and economic factors that lead to human health. There again, all of these factors lead to human health under the one health approach, and that means they get to surveil all all of these areas of human existence, basically every aspect of of human existence under the one health. How are they going to do this? They're going to do this through digital IDs in part.
That's how they're gonna just surveil, Here and so the pretext of these digital IDs is the idea that in order to protect our health, they have to surveil us in terms of whether we're vaccinated, whether we're sick, etcetera. But I think that the real purpose of the digital ID can be found on the World Economic Forum website where they have this chart. And you will see in this chart that basically you will need to be have a digital ID in order to do everything on this chart, to access healthcare insurance and treatment, open bank accounts and carry on online transactions, to travel, to access humanitarian services, to shop and conduct business transactions, to participate in social media, to own a communication device like a cell phone or a computer, to pay your taxes, collect government benefits, and to vote. So if you don't have a a digital ID, you're going to be shut out of basically every aspect of civilized life on earth. And not only that, but, through their surveillance, they will be able to tell whether or not you are in compliance.
So the surveillance number 1 is whether or not you're vaccinated, but they're gonna be surveilling all if you need a digital ID to access all of these things, then there's gonna be a digital record of you in all of these aspects of your life. And what this does is it it provides the platform for the China Social Credit System, which is how I got involved with all of this. I my original organization deals with with women's rights in China, and when I saw this digital ID, I said, oh my gosh. This is the China social social credit system going worldwide. And in China they they they amalgamate all of these aspects of your life, and they give you a they give you a score.
If you have a high score, you can have freedom. And if you have a low score, they'll cut you off from your bank accounts, your credit cards. And if you keep it up, they will they will just disappear you. And if you think this can't happen, it did happen already to the Canadian truckers when they were severed from their bank accounts and their and their credit cards for having a protest on vaccine mandates. Now the pandemic agreement in chapter 3 establishes the conference of the parties, and the only thing I have time to say about the conference of parties is it's a completely separate entity.
But what it does is it has the ability to amend the pandemic treaty, and there's no ratification process for that. So the the the various governments could hammer out something finally everybody can agree with, and then the conference of the parties can just change it. And there's there's no ratification process that goes back to the nations. Regarding the, international health regulations, there is a provision there about censorship. This is in annex 1 core capacities, and each state party shall develop core capacities for risk communication, including addressing misinformation and disinformation.
They don't define what those are, but I would commend to you that this is going to be anything that is counter, narrative to what the WHO is putting out. So this is a way of shutting down scientific debate. That's all the time I have to talk to you about this, but I would say that we are facing an existential threat to our national sovereignty and our personal medical freedom. And we are at a moment in human history where we really need to draw a line in the sand and say, we'll go so far and no further. Thank you.
Thank you. To continue. So thank you, Renata. Hello. I'm a lawyer and independent researcher and a former Council of Europe experts, and my focus is on human rights, national minorities and most recently also the WHO.
I'm a member of different legal initiatives dealing with this subject. So do I need this, or is it Yeah. Yeah. I think it's Is it can you hear me also without that? Microphone.
Microphone is better. Okay. Okay. So I would like to begin with a statement which I will try to back up with a few, but hopefully illustrative examples. The 2 WHO treaties represent a threat to the dignity, freedom and even to the health of the people around the world.
The majority of the delegates in the World Health Assembly would certainly reject such a thesis. Why? There is of course no doubt that both current draft versions contain commitments to human dignity and human rights. There is no doubt that the WHO has committed itself in its constitution to achieving the highest attainable standard of health for all peoples. There is no doubt that the WHO director general, when deciding to declare or not to declare a public health emergency of international concern or more recently a pandemic emergency is bound by certain criteria more or less clearly defined.
In particular by the list of infectious diseases contained in annex 2 of the IHR. According to article 12, he has also taken into account scientific principles and the available scientific evidence, and he has to assess the risk to human health and the risk of international spread of disease. Finally, even if the director general has declared a fake and is about to issue recommendations, he is bound by objective criteria. 1st and foremost, he must again observe scientific principles and scientific evidence. On this basis he has to check even the proportionality of the measures he recommends on the basis of article 12.
For example if he recommends vaccinations or vaccination obligations he of course has to check whether this vaccination is able to contain the spread of disease or if this might not cause more harm than good. Many delegates would thus say everything is fine and even add that there is a number of committees of experts who assist the director general in his decisions. But we must then unfortunately reply that nothing is fined. All these commitments and criteria are not worth the paper they are printed on if there is no independent body to monitor the WHO and in particular the director general, especially in view of the extensive powers of the director general, an independent supervisory body, a system of checks and balances, would be indispensable and the only way to prevent unjustified ified fake decisions and violations of fundamental human rights. The WHO system does not provide of course for an independent supervisory body.
The members of the emergency committee for example are appointed and dismissed by the Director General himself and his and their recommendations are even not binding. In addition, there are other fundamental flaws in the WHO system which can have a fatal impact on its action and decision making. 1st, as we all know the WHO is now almost 85 percent dependent on voluntary donations, and the private donors include pharmaceutical foundations and organizations. We all know the Gates Foundation, around the corner here, and Gavi. 2nd, scientific evidence presupposes free scientific discourse.
Instead, the WHO has set itself the goal of combating misinformation and disinformation. So what about scientific evidence if an important part of the scientific community is being excluded from this scientific discourse. It is precisely here and of course we have censorship as my colleague has also remembered in the wake of these regulations. It is precisely here in the area that sensitively affects freedom of opinion, information, and science and also the freedom of the media that the WHO has established around 40 partnerships with big tech companies from the digital sector whose contracts are just as undisclosed as the financing of the WHO infodemic activities. The global health responsibility agency governed by doctor Sylvia Behrend from from Austria has also long since drawn attention to another lack of transparency.
For example, although WHO staff and experts must must regularly submit conflict of interest declarations, these are generally not published with reference to confidentiality and data protection, but are only managed internally by the WHO Secretariat. There is also no standardized procedure for cases of rule violations by WHO management personnel in the context of corruption prevention. Another point, in this context, the fact that both treaties now focus on so called health products including of course vaccines and the equitable distribution leaves a stale aftertaste. All the more so as according to the emergency emergency use listing procedure of August 2020 2, the relevant expert reports are merely recommendations and the WHO has eyesight full control over any subsequent decisions and actions of these committees including whether or not to publish the findings and recommendations in a WHO public report. However, this is precisely where full transparency would be called for as it is ultimately the health and physical integrity of the world's population that the WHO actually has declared to protect.
So, to conclude, there are no efficient safeguards against abuses of power influenced by private profit and other interests by the WHO. And for example, this opens the door to the arbitrary declaration of fakes and arbitrary recommendations of measures such as regulations, isolation and quarantine, travel and trade restrictions, or even lockdowns which ultimately have not been sufficiently tested for the effectiveness or harmfulness. So the WHO has long been operating outside the framework that it's still acceptable for democratic constitutional states under the rule of law. At stake are elementary human rights that have long been recognized under international law, not least the right to physical integrity and health. The WHO plans must therefore be rejected.
Thank you. Now the floor to my dear colleague from. Good afternoon. Thank you. I will preface by saying that I will not refer to specific articles.
It didn't make any sense to me since they're changing the documents all the time. So even if I will refer to them, what's true today may not be true tomorrow. Ladies and gentlemen, I am, a lawyer. I have a graduate degree from the Hebrew University, in international public law, and I focused on state responsibility and human rights. I did quite a bit of research on on the subject and wrote some papers for the, Israeli, media and the Israeli, interest parties.
I don't wanna specify them. So I'll take I'll leave it at that at this point. What I would like to focus on is the notion of sovereignty. Then the whole idea of sovereignty has been has been said here, but we need to focus on that because sovereignty is really what is being attacked. And sovereignty is comprised of 2 elements.
I'm not attempting to define it. Any definition is basically subjective. It's contextual. So I'm not defining sovereignty. I'm analyzing what it is comprised of.
What makes up sovereignty. And sovereignty is made up, I found, of 2 things. 1 is judicious evaluation of the data that you have in order to reach conclusions. The other thing is the implementation of that conclusion that you reach with your evaluation. Once you have that, if you have both contemporaneously, you are sovereign.
Take any of them away or take the contemporaneity of it. Make them not contemporaneous, and you lost your sovereignty. And here is what the WHO is doing. What they are, with very convoluted language attacking the state's ability to either employ judicious evaluation or implement what they want to do, they being the states. I'll say it unequivocally, The WHO and especially its global globalist handlers, their aim is to, get a control of the world through a centralized government.
Remember, the World Health Organization is not a health provider organization. It's a bureaucratic organization. We must not make must be mistaken about that. As expressed in the preamble of April 24, the WHO now aims at being, because it hasn't been up until now, aims at being, it wants to be the international health work, including, sorry, the directing and coordinating authority of international health work, including on pandemic prevention preparedness and response, They want to define and decide. They want to be the authority.
Mark Twain is believed to have said that a lie travels around the globe while the truth is still putting on its shoes. And the saying that half the truth is often a great lie was attributed to Benjamin Franklin. I beg to add another notion. Liars and demagogues consider manipulation of people's minds and of information to be good management, And this is what we're encountering. To understand the lies and manipulations that we're encountering, we had to dive deep underneath many layers because nothing is stated directly.
Things are stated implicitly and you really have to analyse and go deep into what's being said there. Just to give you some examples. In the in the pandemic treaty as we call it, there was an article used to be 15 2 gs but then it changed eventually to some other article, it doesn't really matter at this point, where they referred they referred to states being attached or attached to the Nagoya protocol of the 1992 1992 Rio Rio Convention. See the thing is that this 1992 convention and its following protocol of Nagoya, 40 countries did not accept it. But if you do accept the articles and the IHR, and you do accept the treaty, implicitly, you accept that instrument which the country did not want to accept to begin with.
Except they're not saying that. They're introducing it in a very underhanded manner. A second example to be found, is in the proposed amendments, is the use of the use of the term equity. Equity is not equality. Let there be no confusion.
Equity has been defined as an administered political economy in which shares are adjusted so that citizens are made equal. This is the very description of Marxism and Maoism. A third example, would be in in the attempt to introduce a compliance committee into into the, into the states plus a health authority. By that, the WHO aims at inserting itself literally forcefully into the into the sovereignty of the countries. I'm short of time.
I'm I have to finish here, but what I've just described to you are various instruments through which the what the WHO is attempting to do is circumvent and nullify the sovereignty of states and peoples. Thank you for your attention. Thank you, Alfred Schwarz. And now we, we will hear from you, Yeah. Thank you Philip.
And for that I have to remind you that although the so called, I have to, for that, I have to remind you that although the so called COVID 19 vaccines never have been designed, tested, and authorized for the prevention of the virus transmission. It was the EU Commission, which introduced the so called COVID 19 certificate and which the WHO decided last year to roll out worldwide. And although these so called COVID 19 vaccines never have been confirmed in their efficacy in preventing the disease and in their safety, because the control groups were enrolled in the clinical studies which the European Commission, based on European Union law, had foreseen in the original conditional authorization, they now are authorized for 5 years renewal and without any condition. By the way, the annulment of the control WHO that it, would have been ethically not justifiable to not offer the so called, COVID 19 vaccines to the members of the control group. Already in September 2021, the EU Commission installed the Health Emergency Preparedness and Response Authority, HERA.
And this was the first step in the creation of what is called European House Union. In November 2022, the parliament and the council of the European Union, without informing the European Union citizens, introduced already the 2 key principles, 1 health and health in all policies. And introduce also a common union wide strategy and mechanism for the so called prevention, preparedness, and response to serious cross border threats. These, so called serious cross border threats, are also referred to climate issues. And so you can imagine, the European Union has an impact in all the fields of politics of the European Union member states.
It was also installed prevention, preparedness, and response planning at the European Union level and that means that the Commission in cooperation with the member states and in accordance with the WHO Emergency Preparedness and Response Framework shall establish a Union House Crisis and Pandemic Plan, which shall complement the national prevention. And that means that an enormous market for those actors in what the European Union and the WHO understands as prevention and preparedness. The vaccine and diagnostic producers. This enormous market was created as an perpetromobile with unlimited economic growth and with enormous costs, which we, European Union citizens, have to borne. The European Commission was also given the power to formally declare a public health emergency at union level, and the European Union declared the leadership of the WHO, and they will support the binding modification of the international health regulation and a legally binding pandemic treaty.
And the Council of the European Union at the end of November 2022, after introducing these two regulations which are binding law in our European Union member states, concluded on vaccination as one of the most effective tools for preventing disease and improving health and decided to combat the so called vaccine hesitancy. And there is not a single word spent on the serious side effects of these experimental substances which are the so called COVID 19 vaccines. But there was the clear decision by our ministers, I call them none of us, to combat vaccine hesitancy, the risk of so called mis and disinformation, declaring the so called infodemics as the greatest threat. And critics to the only allowed opinion which is that of the WHO is defined by the European Union Organs as distrust in science. The council decide joint actions in vaccination programs in order to rise the vaccination coverage rates in the European Union member states by the fulfillment of the European Union Immunization Agenda 2,030, published by the WHO, in cooperation with the education sector, the social partners, and acting actions targeting the media.
And this development, in this politics, which I call vaccines from the cradle to the grave, is very alarming because we faced already the total failure of our justice system, which is simply referring to the opinion of the WHO, and to the fact that the European Commission authorized, these experimental substances. And on top of this, I have to inform you that the European General Court, in two legal proceedings regarding the request of the enrollment of the authorization of the mRNA based COVID 19 so called vaccines, declared in a dystopian orbital dictum that the member states would have full discretion to decide whether it is appropriate to impose to the doctors the use of the experimental mRNA COVID 19 vaccines, if necessary, by means of coercive measures. This is obviously the mindset of a totalitarian regime, but not, it is does not correspond to the European Union Treatise, the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and the European European Convention of Human Rights. By the way, the reporting judge in this legal proceedings now pending before the second instance, the European Court of Justice was until 2019 for many years a a high ranking political employee of the European Commission.
He was also the head of the cabinet of the president of the European Commission, and the European Commission was the opposing party in this two legal proceedings and therefore I have to conclude as a lawyer that we have in the European Union an unacceptable huge problem with the so called rolling doors, not only in the European Medicinal Agency, but also in the general court of justice, in the European court of justice, and that undermines completely the independence and impartiality of our judges and, is which who are deciding on our health and lives. And as a lawyer, I have to to question European Union core bodies. Thank you, doctor Bernardo Moltzeisen. I would like now to hand over the microphone to many technical terms in these two legal instruments that are not legal terms and need interpretation and understanding. And in the context of providing the basis for the justification for a new public health emergency of international concern, We are concerned to see that WHO wants to have a much wider system of surveillance.
Where do we see that? We see it, number 1, in article 4 of the draft of the treaty, pandemic prevention and health public health surveillance, collaborative surveillance, water, sanitation, hygiene. And we see it in the IHR, in the annex 1. Clearly, where it says surveillance on the level of the intermediate public health response and on the national public health response. And we see that this data that are being collected and found from there will be transferred onto a platform with the name Public Pathogen Access Benefit Sharing, which is by the official side from WHO, we fear to as an important source of information and exchange for information.
What does this mean? Is this really a benefit for us? Does this platform of pathogen access benefit sharing really providing some evidence for either a real threat or or is it true? All of that is done with the method of genomic sequencing, which is explained in a strategy paper of WHO for the year 2022. And now, please, doctor to professor Josefin Glico, would you please explain us the background about all of these technical details around this genomic sequencing and constant surveillance of the senator water and other sources.
Thank you very much. Thank you, from 2030, 10 years of work on global genomic surveillance strategy for pathogens with pandemic and epidemic potential. So we have assisted in this years that the definition of a pandemic or epidemic is really not a clear definition. Just to this moment, no country is available to define pandemic, epidemic and emergency pandemic or epidemic. So which trade can be immediately taking charge that can be a potential on that?
Imagine that you are in the ICS in the space, you find the bacterium that is changed, is a new bacterium, is doesn't responded to the back to the antibacterial antibiotic that we have on the Earth, and if the cosmonauterize on the Earth diffuse that, we have a new epidemic that coming from space. Very simple stupid things. But, in the in this story of the global surveillance, genomic surveillance, this start from the moment in which the CDC in the United States decide to create the Global Health Security Agenda. And after, during the Climate Change Conference in Paris in 2020, in full pandemic, people taking charge the climate change problem, and the president of European Council, mister Michel, proposed to create the pandemic treaty on that. Imagine, we are closing our house and these people working for us.
It's fantastic. Must give a Nobel Prize for humanity for for these people. The what is the implication of this global surveillance? One thing that is proposed by Bill Gates that you create an intervention force to see what's happening to the country. That is a fire drill, they called in that.
And when you look on the people who are dead in this, in this urgency, this project, there is not only people representing your country, but also people who represent private panel, private cartel, as a PGA Foundation, as a clinical foundation, etcetera. And this is totally in the infraction of the procedure of WHO that all people must remember is a simple urgency of the 14th urgency of the United Nations. So it is submitted to all the rules of United Nation and the last part, the last premiership of, WHO escape completely to this rule, not only on the definition of pandemic, on the approval on the pandemic that must be approved by the General Assembly of the United Nations, not by the Secretary, General Secretary of United Nation who create after the partnership with the World Economic Forum for the agenda of sustainable development. What is the problem of this global surveillance? There are 2 aspects from the medical point of view.
1st aspect, we must collect database. Database for all the country on the potential pathogen, whatsoever, etcetera. But this mean sequencing also the agent. Isolated the agent, put the agent into a bio bank, and then you have the sequencing with all the variety that you can find, The different the different variety of these type of things. But if you want to do that, you have the need also to take biological sample from the patient.
So this is the creation of a biobank. This mean that you can begin to investigate genomically population, not only pathogen. So the idea is to create a universal database bank for the pathogen, potential pathogen, and a biobank also for pathogen and human being. To do that, we have the need of a complete agreement all the country in the world in the United Nation because for two reason. 1st, because is the declaration of the United Right Protection, first, the first chapter.
2nd, it was declaration of the General Assembly on the protection and integrity of the human genome. And when we are in BioCell RNA or DNA, they interfere with human genome. And third is the treaty on biodiversity, on the protection of biodiversity, of which also the human being are part of this biodiversity. We are changing We have an immunity system that is modulated during the time, as at the co evolution. We are symbiotic symbiotic people with a lot of trillions of bacteria and virus throughout in our body.
They change progressively. So we're then to study our microbiome in front of the biome of the earth and now that we introduce synthetic biology with this, transfecting agent that are called the vaccine. But you remember that, DARPA, when he created this platform on transfecting agent for human application, They defined gene encoding and antigens. And after the FDA said, no, you cannot be approved in this way. So they transformed in gene encoding vaccine, but not the gene therapy because it was not possible to approve that.
So whether drugs work directly on the human genome. So we enter in the manipulation human genome. How you can trace that? Because this is a problem. We have a pandemic of also a synthetic virus.
So not people discuss on synthetic biology. If you have a synthetic virus as the virus was created in 1, in other place, there are a lot of synthetic virus, potentially pathogen for humans. How you can differentiate with the test that we have today, as infected virus in the wild and the wild virus. And this is a big problem. You don't tell that PCR test can do that.
Also, the inventor of p t s PCR test told, we cannot do a diagnosis with PCR test. We only show that there are fragment or RNA or DNA or modify RNA or DNA in nature, in the environment that the human being. And we have the need to establish a cutoff to be sure that this test can be validated. That was not done in a during the pandemic. So we are not prepared today to do a genomic study at a larger spectrum, where the need to create center that can do that, but define the appropriate test that can be done.
Because in agriculture, we founded thyroid, obelisk, there are the fluid or genetic manipulation of the transgenic plants. And now we find it that in the oral, microbiome, 50% of patients selected with the obelisk and viroid in the human, microbiome and 5% on the stool of the human being. So we are assisted today with the global contamination, what we call the bioinfestation, from the industry who worked on plant, biology, modification, etcetera, on the food chain. This is the reason that people have fear today where they need to control all things, because they know that in 20 years, they have contaminated the planet that is a living planet. We are the only people who have only this planet as our solution for the moment, not Mars.
I, think that I can close on that as a message if you want. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Okay. So, just to be very clear about that, one additional question we would like to know as lawyers, as the basis for the next day?
Very brief. Very brief. Yes. We were presented a complaint to the International Court of Leag against people who created this SARS Co2 as a recombinant chimeric viruses. And we put the list of people who cooperate on that.
They do patent during the time in China as in the United States with cooperation with the French people in Pasteur in Shanghai, in other country, also in Karolinska, etcetera. So we have all the scientific evidence that SARS Co 2 was an hybrid chimeric virus that never existed in nature, that was a progressively patented starting for SARS like viruses. That were RNA virus that are very flexible. After in the United States, they discovered the reverse transcriptase in the Vanderbilt University, so it was possible to create antiviral to stop the transcriptase as was the remdesivir or Gilead. But what was the problem?
That in a certain moment, they decide to increase the potentiality of virulence of these viruses producing laboratory with insect. That were historical insert that Luc Montaigne discussed on HIV and the bat woman in China was a fellow on the guy was responding. He he learned to create the pseudovirus HIV in France, but, what it was important, it was the insert of a furin site. The insert of furin site is an enzyme who control 360 60 metabolic pathway in the human cells and not in other cells, in the human cells. So if you put this insert, you want to block this activity, you use a furan insert.
And the furan insert, there are 2 version. 1 that was created by Moderna and the patent. And the second version was created by Chinese using a natural insert of a furin from, some bacteria who colonize virus in the algae of the sea of China. So we have fundamentally 2 version of SARS CoV-two that we can detect it perfectly. What Rob Barry told that it was impossible to detect a virus who can manipulate with gain of function is false.
Because each people who put insert into something, he put his signature. As Armani put his signature on on his dress. Do you know? The same thing. So now we are able to detect what is creating laboratory, what are the insert, where they started, where they finish, in front of a natural a natural product.
So this is very important to define also the test that we must do because test must differentiate what is nature and what is synthetic. Thank you, Professor Tryckhoff. So I just summarize that the method of genomic sequencing cannot produce valid and high quality evidence for the proof of a real, existing, and dangerous new virus. Thank you very much. And now I hand over to let me the microphone to my dear colleague, Beatrice Barner, who will now take over.
Thank you so much. Thank you, Filip Kruse. My name is Beatrice Baener. I'm a German lawyer and author from Heidelberg, specialize in medical law. I have represented many hundreds of clients against corona measures, some of them prominently before the highest court.
My last book, WHO Pandemic Treaty, analyzes both pandemic proposals and shows the real background and purposes of these two pandemic plans. So my aspect today is about the abuse of health protection for unlimited PCR testing and data collection, in the end, for the purpose of surveillance and control. Data is the new gold. In democracies, the state, however, needs a convincing pretext to request or even compel citizens to provide their highly private data. Thus, the WHO claims that health threats can only be identified at an early stage if states increase their capacities to diagnose and detect emerging threats to public to public health by constantly testing all their citizens.
We all remember corona when people were no longer allowed anywhere without corresponding corresponding vaccination or without proof of testing. All of this is now to be legalized by the 2 pandemic legislation projects. Both pandemic proposals contain an almost unlimited expansion of data collection for the alleged purpose of health surveillance. This shall even include the constant monitoring of interactions between humans and animals. Each stage shall therefore build up additional laboratory and diagnostic capacities in their public health systems in order to identify new and reemerging pathogens.
For this purpose, the WHO is even planning a so called coordinated WHO laboratory network. During corona, the herefor necessary samples were obtained due to the arbitrary PCR tests, which were demanded almost daily to participate in professional or social life. These tests were carried out a 100 of millions of times in Germany alone. And we all know that these tests are not a valid diagnostic for proof of contagious pathogens. What is worrying here is the unbelievable epidemiological intelligence surveillance.
Sounds for me like Central Intelligence Agency, CIA. Well, Germany is one of the driving forces behind the 2 WHO pandemic proposals. With the WHO Hub for Pandemic and Epidemic Awareness, WHO Hub Berlin, founded in Berlin in September 2021. Germany is to become the the data hub for pandemic control worldwide. The WHO pandemic plans also show an enormous collecting up session with regard to genomic data.
And it wants to oblige countries to undertake comprehensive genetic sequencing and thus global genomeization of all citizens worldwide. This data mania has a concrete background, namely, you already talked about it, the ID 2020 project. The organization ID 2020, which stands for Identity 2020 Systems Incorporated, was founded in New York in 2017 by, listen well, Microsoft, Bill Gates. And by the Rockefeller Foundation, also by GAVI, the vaccine alliance here in Geneva, and others. ID 2020 aims to give every person on earth a digital identity by the year of 2030, whose data can be accessed in a cloud.
This ID 2020 shall be usable for many different public and private processes, but in any case, for proof of vaccination, vaccination and testing. The COVID 19 vaccination campaign has significantly advanced this digital identity project for all stakeholders, and it has provided IT companies and governments with a huge treasure trove of data about citizens that can be analyzed fully, automatically, in real time. What are the dangers of this testing and data obsession? Well, there are several considerable risks of data misuse. Through further intense PCR testing, new or re emerging pathogens with pet pandemic potential can of course be discovered much more frequently.
This will enable the WHO to declare fake pandemics, public health emergency of international concern, fake pandemics far more frequently in the future even though these pathogens would otherwise go unnoticed and have no significant impact on the healthcare system. The further danger for citizens lies in the fact that with a unique digital identity, everything that a person doesn't, has ever done, can be called up. This means the end of all privacy. Another real abuse scenario is the so called privatization of data, especially the transfer of powers to collect and analyze publicly collected data to private companies, which is already happening in a very wide extent. The greatest danger, however, is the social control and the possibility of excluding disagreeable citizens and companies from society and from economy.
This can easily be realized by restricting their digital identity in terms of time, content or money or even by completely locking down this person digitally. China is the, is leading the way with its social credit system. Anyone who has collected a bad score is not allowed to travel to shop or even to withdraw money. If the state blocks the ID card, nothing works. As a summary, the planned unlimited expansion of testing and data collection does not serve our health.
And it obviously does not serve the protection of health. Its only purpose is the total control of all citizens worldwide worldwide by vaccine passports and travel restrictions if people refuse to get jabbed or tested, combined with the misuse of personal data for huge financial profits by global corporate corporations. So we urgently have to stop these very sinister plans of the WHO to control, profit and govern by fake pandemics. The plans are tyrannical and dehumulating. They're based on fraud and abuse and violation of law.
Thank you for your attention. French colleague. I leave now the floor to the French colleague, Leticia Rigaud, which will present a summary of the most important elements in French. Thank you. Thank you very much, my dear colleague, Jatisha Ligot, for summarizing the most important points in French.
Now we start to establish and we try to establish the contact. No. No. No. Yes.
Please. And now, as next, I would like to give the floor to my dear colleague from the Netherlands, Heike Terhoest, please. Heike. Thank you. Thank you so much, Philip Kruse for inviting me to speak here.
My name is Meike Terhorst. I'm attorney at law in Aukmeer, the Netherlands. I work with Shabnam, Aleza Mohammed from World Council For Health who's the next speaker. She's living in South Africa. Together we started the lawyers against WHO, l a w.
And as lawyers and activists from around the world, we want to help each other to stop the transfer of powers from the local or national level to WHO. And I have some very good news for you because everybody from around the world is very afraid for this transfer of powers that WHO can take over, all our rights can overrule our rights and we found a way to stop this process because what we simply can do is declare that it's not valid, this transfer of powers. So it has been hiding in plain sight, so to speak. It's not a coincidence that this pushback comes from the Netherlands because we suffered one of the most terrible lockdowns and lock ups and violence in the Netherlands and terrible things that happened during demonstrations. But after that came the good news because in the Netherlands, it was I believe the only parliament in the world that recently the parliament stood up against the government to stop this transfer of powers at WHO.
Power woman, Mona Keiser, she started a motion to request the government to ask the World Health Assembly to postpone the vote on the international health regulations because the text were not delivered 4 months in advance. And this was done on purpose because half year before, the lawyer of WHO had announced that they would not keep the 4 months deadline. So department said, either we have to ask for to postpone or we have to say no. And the Minister of Health, she simply want to ignore this. And then the parliament became very angry, so we had a debate with another motion and then the minister said, well then we will not say yes and we'll also not say no, which is a typical solution in the Netherlands.
But this was not the end of the matter because I sent a request to the department to sign a declaration of invalidity. And this letter was signed indeed by 4 brave senators and I want to read the names. Eric Kemperman, Robert von Gastren, Johan Dessing, and Bart Krogn, and a thank you for March. Eric told me that he receives every week 200 emails from citizens from the Netherlands that are afraid of this transfer of powers to WHO and what will happen in the future. And so he was very glad to do something for them.
What about this declaration of invalidity? Well it is a very simple matter. In the Dutch Constitution and Dutch legal system. The Parliament is the highest power in our Kingdom. So the minister is not authorized to just transfer the powers that belong to the Parliament to doctor.
Tyros himself. Also the World Health Assembly is bound by the Constitution of the WHO. And in Constitution it said in the recitals that the governments have the responsibility for the health of their people. And that is also pointed out in article 2 that the WHO powers are of an advisory nature. So basically they take something, they try to take something that they don't have, which is illegal.
So, and what is the aim of the current amendments of the AHR? Well, it's a digital vaccination passport. And of course it's very dangerous because it's a technical means to overrule all our personal rights and even Regi has explained it in very well. Like it's very dangerous because it can lead to surveillance of society and yeah, like the end of all our freedoms. And what's important is to ask yourself for whom is WHO working?
And I think it's very clear that WHO is executing the agenda of the WEF. And that is a collaboration between the G20, 20 most powerful nations in the world and the 500 richest companies in the world. So basically, there's this combination of power. This great concentration of power. And yesterday, we tried to hand over the letters of the senators to Doctor.
Titles himself. And so with former member of parliament Reuben von Hage, Yeah, we wanted to hand it over and then we heard that Doctor. Tyrus was in the hotel. So we tried to find him, looked everywhere but he was not there. That's already left.
So then we took a gap to the World Health Organization and there we heard he was not there, he was in the Palace of the United Nations. So then we went there and at Palace they said, no no no we have to go back to WHO. And before the building, we met some people from the delegation from another country and they said that they had bought a one way ticket to Geneva and they were not allowed to go back before they had said yes to all the amendments. Yes, and they were saying it's quite laughingly like it was quite normal. And so and then we went in and then they said they were not allowed to to officially receive these letters.
But we could send an email. So I've sent an email to Doctor. Tedros and asked him whether he would like to personally receive those letters from the Parliament of the Netherlands on the stage. And I gave him my telephone number so he can, if he wants to, come to the central stage in Geneva. So I'm yeah, quite curious to see whether he will do it or not.
Anyway, I think what we see is, with the WHO we see a false facade of legality. And brick by brick we have to take down this facade. And we also see a false facade of democracy. It is not a nice gentle meeting where everybody has is equal. So I would like to end this to say what is started as an attempt for a corporate takeover could well become a corporate pushback.
Because as all citizens in the world, we we have the power to stop this and we will do this. And I'm getting more and more convinced of this. And a special thanks in this respect to Shabnam, my dear colleague from South Africa, who's been a tremendous force and Philip, of course, and all the all your others. So thank you. Thank you.
From the from New Zealand to join us in this, press conference. Please, Sue. Thank you. Thank you so much and thank you to everybody for coming today. It's so exciting after all of our years of being isolated in New Zealand to actually be back with the world.
And I'm so sorry that we sent you our doctor Ashley Bloomfield to be one of the coordinators of these horrible international health regulations. I'm a specialist in complex emerging legal issues. I've got tertiary qualifications in law and in science and public health. And I've acted in many of the New Zealand COVID cases, including the Baby W case that many of you may have heard about. I'm also the co author of this book about the Freedom Village, which is a book about our 23 day convoy and occupation of New Zealand parliament.
I'm a big advocate for people power because we can use the law as much as we like. But actually, when it's the people standing up and saying, no, we've had enough, that really we can make change. And that's what we did in New Zealand. We'd had enough, and it made a difference. So I'm talking about informed consent.
Because really with health, we've we've been told so much about this pandemic, this fear and this hype, and that drugs are the only solution. But we know it's not true. We know that health is from our environment. It is the way we act. It is so many more things than just expecting an injection in the arm.
And that's why it's so important that we continue to remind ourselves about what it is to be a human being, what it is that we have individual needs. There is never one cure fixes all. It is always looking at our own desires, our values, our circumstances, and reclaiming our own body sovereignty that is so important. And that is why it's so difficult seeing what the World Health Organization is trying to do. They're doing the opposite of even their own definition of health.
Health is a state of complete physical, mental, and social well-being and not merely the absence of disease or infirmary, but they are trying to do the opposite of their own interpretation. They're trying to make it into a medicalisation pharmaceutical solution, one size fits all. This paternalistic approach is the opposite of what is required for informed consent for healthy communities, healthy people, that we get the overreach of what they're doing cutting right across informed consent. This doing with fear and ideology rather than sound law and sound science, they're undermining the absolute fundamentals do no harm. Informed consent and the need for proportionality, absolutely fundamental principles of both law and medicine.
And we have good international law already. We have the UN Charter, the International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights, that are intended to protect us against this abuse of power from our own governments, and now we need it even more to protect us from the other international organizations. We have the International Covenant of Civil Political Rights, the customary international law, the Nuremberg principles to protect us against experimentation on us. And the World Health Organisation, whatever treaties, whatever regulations that may pass, they cannot override these long established rights. So over the last few years, we've witnessed so much harm from the COVID response.
We've witnessed so much more harm from the COVID response than we ever witnessed from COVID. We've killed our people with experimental medication. In New Zealand, Rory Nann, a young man at no risk from COVID, died because he was coerced to get medical treatment, this experimental mRNA injection, so he could go to his own wedding. He never made his wedding because he died a few days after the experimentation, after the injection, because our government imposed this discrimination on our people. And Rory is far from the only one.
We all have examples. When we talk to each other, we all have examples of so much harm that this so called safe and effective treatment has caused to our family, our friends, our communities. So the law is simple. The law is very simple. An injection without informed consent is assault.
And an injection without informed consent that causes death is homicide. There can be no treaty that overtakes these fundamental principles of law. And as my colleagues have said, we need to stand up and take back our power. We can't get sucked down this path of big government knows best, globalists know best. We have to stand strong in our power.
So that's that's all I need to say, and I thank everybody for being here. Thank you very much, my dear colleague, Sue Gray from New Zealand. Thank you. Now we tried to establish contact to South Africa and we communicated in between. So here we have Shabnam Palessa Mohammed and just, yeah, yeah.
Shahnam, can you hear me? Are you there? Continue what you're doing right now, Sharpenet, it's all good. We bridge over, So in case, we said with Shabnam, in case it would not work she is about to record her message and that message would then be added to the live stream that is about to be taken by Hoch Zwei here. And by the way, I would like to thank Hoch Zwei for their services to provide the live stream.
Thank you so much, Regina and Patrick. So, while we let a sharpened, Beza Mohamed, continue recording her message I would like now as we have all spoken, we have never nobody forgotten, I would like to open the Q and A session now. So it's about to you the journalists here whom we are very thankful for coming and so thankful for reporting to ask you questions. So now please take the micro and who is the first to ask a question? Hi.
There was a lot of confusion this week trying to follow the WHO proceedings. From my understanding, a drafting group was, passing the 2022 HR amendments and that violations of of the WHO's policies were, the drafting, group drafting, committee, and to try to put together right at the Royal Court Assembly itself, these amendments, or was this a totally illegal process? I don't know the details about it, but I can tell you the principles and that is that the World Health Assembly is the correct authority for establishing committees, whether it is for the establishing of a new agreement or for the continuation of negotiations of 1 of these 2 new legal instruments and this would be something we would expect that they would do it because the mandate for providing these 2 legal instruments for a vote to the World Health Assembly has been terminated by today. And so for the continuation of this process they will need to establish new working groups and we can expect that this will happen. Now we have Shabnam, Palaisir Mohamad.
We just briefly do a test whether it now works. Shabnam can you hear me? We have this very nice picture. Unfortunately it's frozen. So we, Shabnam, I hope you hear me.
We stay in contact via my assistant. Oh, here you are. Shamnam, can you hear me? I can hear you, Philippe. Can you hear me?
Okay. We can hear you a little bit. I try to, foster your signal. I put the mic. Yes, the mic.
Okay. Sharpen, will we try again? Yes. Are you going to play the recording or would you like me to speak? Well, as we hear you right now I would prefer to hear you speak live and briefly briefly introduce yourself and is it possible for you to hear it?
Sorry. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Can you brief make a sound test for the audience here?
Yes. Testing. Hello, everyone. Good afternoon from South Africa. Is it possible for you to hear that?
Yes. Excellent. We can hear you. Fantastic. So we have here out as possible.
Yes. We have here sharpener plays a Mohammed, and we try to make this out as possible. But here you go from South Africa Live. Thank you so much for coming and for being with us, Sharpena. Thank you for the invitation, Philippe, Renata, and, of course, my dear friends and allies, lawyers from around the world.
My name is Shabnam Felisa Mohammed. I am a lawyer, journalist, and activist from South Africa, and I serve on 4 different organizations, including transformative health justice, the Children's Health Defense Africa, the African Sovereign Peace Coalition, and the World Council for at an international level. So of course, colleagues, the purpose of law is the pursuit of justice. We know that the UN and the WHO violated or facilitated the violation of multiple human rights during the COVID 19 chapter, including the right to free speech, the right to movement, the right to work, the right to help most essentially. And currently, this expansion of power which is being facilitated by both is what we as lawyers and civil society are resisting around the world.
Now the criteria to actually declare public health emergency of international concern is very clear, and you can find that in a legal brief on worldcouncilforhealth.org. There's 4 criteria really. The threat must be actual or imminent, involve the whole nation, place the continuation of the organized life of society at risk of extinction, and 4, be so extraordinary that ordinary measures for protecting public health and order clearly inadequate. Now if you cast your mind back to COVID nineteen, it's very clear that none of those criteria were met with the purposes of declaring a public health emergency of international concern and neither the w h nor the United Nations actually spoke out. So, of course, there's many outcomes of the WHO WHA 77 that actually need to be reviewed by us as lawyers in civil society, but what many member states are complaining about is being rushed.
We are also told their allegations around member states in threatened that they have to come out of this process with the IHR amendments being signed. Certainly very dangerous times, and when they look at the WHO through a critical lens, the problems are not only existing now with these two agreements. There's a long history of controversies, h one n one, opioid scandal, tobacco scandal, nuclear scandal. Of course, there are multiple theories in recommendations during COVID 19. Mhmm.
When you look at their financials, it's very evident that they are irregular audits, there's wasteful expenditure, and all of this is tied into conflicts of interest where the w h two is funded by, essentially, the pharmaceutical fraud and corruption everyone at some point. But the fraud and corruption also extends to travel expenses, exorbitant salaries, and there's no accountability. We do do not elect them. We do not elect our member state representatives. So if you look at the agenda for the WHA 77, many documents to review, it includes reform of the WHO.
You might want to watch an event World Council of Health recently hosted called can the WHO be reformed? And the response is a resounding no, not least of which is linked to serious harms caused by the COVID 19 and other shots. And these documents trying to give indemnity to the pharmaceutical industry or globalizing the indemnity given to the pharmaceutical industry, the harms, of course, we're seeing around our world, including in South Africa, documented through. Now other allegations against the WHO are against its leadership, including its director general Tedros, who has in Ethiopia been accused of, committing acts of genocide and interviewed someone who has filed a case against at the International Criminal Court against him. And of course, the WHO has also been accused of facilitating infertility in Kenya where they facilitated test shots to Kenyan girls and women only which were laced with HCG and rendered them infertile.
These are symptoms, violent symptoms of neocolonialism and corporate imperialism. And here are two examples. The contracts, that were really, supported by the WHO adviser, for example, with Latin American and African countries tried to include clauses that would give 5th as security for their vaccine debt, a country's military reserve bank and embassies. This is these are national sovereign act if a country capitates them for whatever reason, it would enable to steal those sovereign assets and that's why I call it corporate colonization, very dangerous. In addition, article 12 of the amendments to the IHR would give the director general of the WHO the unilateral authority to to to decay a public health emergency of intellectual concern whether or not your country agrees.
Again, a very dangerous geopolitical weapon. If your country is doing something that the WHO's funders for the globalist cartel don't like. Then, of course, there's clauses around pathogen access and sharing, which for me, coming from South Africa with our history of apartheid biological weapons is very dangerous. You might also want to read about the exploitation. And sexual exploitation by WHO workers of the girls and women of the DRC and children and men in an article I've written on children's health defense Africa.
Now, countries are thankfully speaking up as I mentioned earlier, Argentina, Belarus, Paraguay, Iran, and Uganda. We're very grateful, but much more must be done to protect our right to free speech and to jealously defend the right to public participation, which is being violated throughout this entire process. We must say, nothing for us without us. What have we done as I start to round up? I've served a notice on the WHO on Monday.
It includes, strong paragraphs around public participation referring to WHO's own constitution as well as the alma mater principles and importantly includes a declaration of invalidity which, my friend has spoken about. The statement of dispute around article 55, very important, and a notice of objection to the UN's power grab at the areas that it wants control control over, including a political declaration made by the UN in September last year unlawfully despite 11 countries speaking out. So please fill this document of the WHO and the UN and sign the petition in support. I've also drafted last night a proposal for resolution that a member state representative can use. Hopefully, they can find it.
We've asked for it to be shared widely, calling for an actual vote on these two agreements as opposed to a consensus procedure, which means that the motion would just be announced, there would be no raising of hands, and the world have assembly president would announce the resolution passed. Very dangerous and democratic and reckless. So, of course, we must insist the process is halted or there must be an actual vote so we can see where member state delegates are elected by us actually stand. In conclusion, again, I would encourage everyone to watch the film, w h o's power grab. I don't know how much more time I have, but I've been racing racing through given the time limit.
The film made is made in South Africa and it features over 100 health leaders advocates and ethical politicians speaking out against the WHO led power grabs. Not the WHO alone. Member states themselves as well as a corporate funded are themselves equally complicit. I would like to suggest that we host world freedom month every May as long as the WHO exists and even beyond that as we're doing in the World Council for Health, and I would urge us to continue our resistance as we build a better way for health, freedom, and sovereignty because the power of the people is greater than people in power. Thank you very much.
Thank you so much, Shahnam Palaisa Mohammed from South Africa, the great lawyer and journalist. This was this was your applause. We could hear you very well as a representative from South Africa, as a representative from the African continent, and obviously also as a representative from the board of World Council For Health. Thank you so much for coming. Now here we are.
We have some more 15 minutes now for our Q and A, a brief Q and A session and I would like now please, over to turn over the microphone to the first question. Yeah. Bobby Chaitnam just brought up a a great point. I'm with the highwire.cominamerica. If, you know, you're stating that we do not elect the WHO, and we do not elect the member state representatives, Could someone explain exactly how the WHO is formed, who hires or elects Tedros, and who elects these, member state representatives?
Okay. Who wants? The organization, basically, the WHO, is a special agency of the United Nations. It's worth noting, by the way, that the United Nations entered a an agreement with the WEF, with the World Economic Forum, a for strategic partnership that happened on the 19th of, I believe it was February. No.
I'm sorry. June in 2019. The World Health Organization basically appoints its own people based on whatever internet internal process that they have. They are not elected individuals by any stretch of the imagination. Another thing that needs needs to be clarified, they have absolutely no power to do anything in international law unless states sign over and enter agreements and treaties.
By definition, international law is more like a contractual law. It's basically enter a contract and an agreement between states to behave in a certain manner. And if we don't give them the power, they would be powerless and that needs to be addressed. The whole idea of law as we understand it internally in countries is not the way international law works. Not only that, the only way for them to reach us internally in the country is based on the notion or the concept of paktasunservanta, which is agreements should be adhered to, they appear the notion is addressed in the Vienna Convention of 1950 59, you know, and it's it's addressed in 2 articles there.
It's article I believe it's article 20 on in that that stipulates that that agreement should be should be, adhered to. And article 46 says that a state cannot invoke internal law in defiance of the agreement. Now the result is that every agreement that is signed internationally is being internalized into the local law. Some countries do it automatically. I know for a fact that that's what happens in France.
I'm not sure about other I'm not sure. I think many European countries, I think, do that. But by definition, when you're asking where do they get their power from? They're being given the power because states signed the power over. Thank you.
Thank you. Can you hear me okay? Yes. Thank you for the work that you all have done and inspiration. I'm Kim Yater from the Take Your Power Back show in the United States.
We in the United States are a sovereign country. Each state is a sovereign state. Each individual is a sovereign being, Our sovereignty coming from our creator. Reggie, this question is for you. Reggie, what can we, the people, do right now to hold our governments accountable to not playing into this agreement, not signing on anything, but completely holding them accountable to We The People, our voices being heard?
Thank you for your question. And there are a number of things that people can do. 1 is go on to the Sovereign Coalition website, go on to the Anti Globalist International website, sign our manifesto. There are action items on those websites. Beyond that, you're you're a woman of faith, we can pray.
Prayer is essential, and beyond that, you can call your representatives, okay, on the state level, the, you know, national level, on the local level. And also when, you know, in in debates, people can attend the debates and raise questions over and over and over again. If every debate people are saying, what's your position on the Internet on on the World Health Organization? Should we withdraw? Should we defund?
What's your position on the amendments to the international health regulations, the pandemic treaty, and just keep hammering them with questions over and over and over again, to make the to make it a major campaign issue and to make our voices heard in November that this is a very, very important issue to us. Thank you. If I may add a number of things since I got to be, also affiliated with the United States. One of the thing one of the things that you can do is to apply to your governors and to internally in each state, force the local legislation. I know that in different states, their numbers may be different, but once you acquire a certain amount, a certain number of of signatures, you can force a debate in the legislation of the individual state.
I think I I don't remember the numbers. I don't wanna I don't wanna say something I'm not so sure, but I'm I'm definitely certain that that procedure exists. The other thing is that the the United States actually speaks, let's say, to some degree, from the 2 side the both sides of its mouth if you happen to know the expression. The United the United States rejected some article in the in the, in the pandemic treaty. Was Yeah.
I think it was the pandemic treaty that had that had to do with the geno with genomics and sharing of information, and they said, well, we are we are a federal nation, and, the federal law does since every state has its own legislation to some degree and has some independence, The result of that is that we cannot enforce federal law in all aspects. Iran, by the way, responded and said, well, what you're actually doing, you're nullifying the entire agreement when you're saying that you do not have the power to enforce the the federal law, and you would need to employ the idea of employ the idea of federal supremacy. But it it's a matter of their choosing their picking and choosing what to do. So it all boils down to get the people on the street and in their homes, get them to be familiar and express their opinion. It ultimately and finally will come down to what happens in November, hoping that we don't see the same fiasco that we saw 4 years ago.
Thank you, operator Torres. I want to do some comments on your question, but also the first question because the problem on WHO is similar for all the other agency of the United Nation. I was many times in UNESCO where always the problem where coming the money. You know that regularly there is a regular budget of whatsoever agency of the United Nation and the extra budget. The extra budget is only for special program, but also for donors.
It cannot be superior to the budget of the agency. So the Agency is sponsored by the country with each specific budget. Italy is â¬100,000,000 each year, okay. So on this budget you approve the general agenda of your agency and after you ask it the approve some project with extra budget money for example, Foundation Bill Gates, it creates some things in UNESCO too that must be approved by assembly. But because it's an extra budget money, it must fit completely all the rules of the United Nations Charter.
Do you understand? So there is a second control on the extra budget program from the United Nations Central. What happened from the period when, Madame Cheng was nominated in WHO? They decided to open to big pharma to be partner, but this was never validated by United Nations General Assembly. So all this part of the things is completely irregular, but some countries support this type of partnership because it was a very useful for them from the national budget.
So there are the exception of the national country on that. But in any way what we had done at the last part, the last leadership is totally irregular in terms of the law of the United Nation related to the urgency of the United Nation. The maneuver is transformed WHO in an independent organization, sovereign actional, external that taking in charge the security of Alto population. That is another issue that we call the biomilitarization of WHO. That's all.
Just just on a final note, my recollection, because I think I remembered I think that the state of Colorado Yes. Which is which happens to where I graduated in mechanical engineering, is is I think they have a 40,000 signatures requirement in order to force the legislation to actually deal with some issue if the number is correct. I I think that's what I seem to remember, but check-in every country. Just to respond to your question with one sentence. As we all are concerned, our future lives are concerned, our health is concerned, our genomes are concerned.
It is about whole humanity to stand up, and we just want to help this process to foster and we will hand over this information to you, to the media. And we have many lawyers here and I want to show that there are so many lawyers, even more, who can provide helping you providing the message. And we are so grateful that you are here and that you are about to inform the people because we cannot make it just a few experts or just a few lawyers. We need a very strong movement that really kicks the asses of our political representatives in a very clear and strong way. Because right now, the politicians, the representatives of our countries here around the corner, they are about to commit treason.
They commit for us without our consent. So let's wake up and give them a very clear signal from the bases over our representatives that we still trust in the parliament. Thank you. Thank you. What can we do?
We have to declare and declare and declare again and again that the WHO is abusing law and violating law. They are abusing our legal system. They are abusing also contracts, yeah, and in the same time they are by doing this violating law. We have to explain and declare. I'm a lawyer from Italy, as you know.
Italy was the country with the worst vaccination mandate and measures in all over Europe. And now we have a great advantage. The population began to understand. I know that especially in Italy, on all levels, politicians on municipality level, on regional level, and on national level are getting letters. Letters from the citizens who are asking, making questions.
And, our effort will be to give the citizens the draft for the letters and in order that the politicians have to respond. And so we are able to empower us citizens altogether to stop this dystopian development. Thank you. So one last question. When you're fighting this legally, are there different representatives per your country or as it as the EU?
Yeah. Your question is a good question because it is a very strange situation. Because as I explained, on a European Union level, they decided already to go with the modification of the IHR and with the pandemic treaty. So, we have our single, individual, European Union member states, which are here as, with the delegations in order to decide, if they, want to have which kind of modification of the IHR and the pandemic treaty. But within the council of the European Union and, the members of the European Union parliament already decided that we, in the European Union, have already the one house principle and the house in all policy principle.
And we already decided with regulations which are in power as law in each European Union member state that, the leadership of the WHO is recognized. So they did something very crazy going beyond the power of the European Union parliament and of the council of the European Union. This is ultra vires, and we have get them responsible for that. And it is for that that we, as citizens of the European Union, have to struggle more than in the rest of the world to get out of this very illegal situation. Thank you enough for both sides.
I just wanna emphasize, the urgency of the situation that we're that we're in right now, which is that we may feel like we've had a reprieve, almost like a stay of execution, because both of these agreements have gone off the table for now, they're not gonna be voted on. But the European Union and the World Economic Forum, last year, already started rolling out these digital IDs and these vaccine passports. They don't need to have these agreements in place in order to effectuate what I would call a digital gulag because I showed you the chart, for the World Economic Forum of all the things that they're going to be surveilling us on. They're gonna be able to control us on it, and once this is operationalized, which could happen anytime soon, we don't have they don't have to wait for the passage of these treaties, there will be no more dissent because if you try to dissent, you're going to be surveilled, you're going to be censored, you'll be cut off from your from your, credit cards to your bank accounts, and just basically paralyzed from society. And the time to stand up is now, because once we lose our freedom, it will be basically impossible to get it back.
Thank you. Thank you, Rachel. Thank you. So now we have here, we have to come to an end. There will be time afterwards for interviews until quarter past 1 o'clock.
Please feel free to do so. And so hereby, in the name of all of my colleagues here from 9 different countries, 10 different lawyers, which is a unique undertaking so far that has never taken place so far. So we are very proud that we were able to do so and we want to thank you for spreading the word And we will certainly gladly cooperate together with you to help the message bring out. Thank you so much for coming. Just to add, one very concrete step to say no to the WHO will take place this afternoon at half past 1 o'clock on Place des Nations.
Please join us for the biggest rally for a very long time against WHO and to declare our independence from the WHO. We will declare our independence. Thank you. Thank you. Yeah.
Thank you. Very clear on your panel. Yeah. Thank you. Thank you.
Thank you. Thank you. Great. Thank you so much. Thank you.
Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.
Yes.
Pubblicato in data 5 giu 2024 - 19:56