For those who don’t think the UN would do these things, just examine UN Resolution 16/18 to ban free speech globally and criminalize criticism of Islam, or the UN Migration compact which seeks to dissolve all world borders and criminalize all negative reporting on that agenda among other things.
This site has written and reported extensively on both over time. And as the day goes by, I will try and find videos supporting these claims from indisputable sources. Like the Secretary General of the UN for instance, or MEPs and add it to this post.
Secretary General of the United Nations and lifelong communist, speaks to ambition to obliterate freedom of speech world wide
One honest reporter discusses the meaning and implication of the UN Global Migration Compact at the time it was passed.
Politicians discuss the UN migration compact and how it seeks to criminalize reportage that casts it in a bad light
Conservative MP Pierre Poilievre was falsely condemned recently for trading in conspiracy theories.
His accusers were Liberals and liberal media who misrepresented what “The Great Reset” of society — advocated by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, the World Economic Forum and the United Nations (where it’s called “The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development”) — means.
It means what Poilievre said it means — global elites using the COVID-19 pandemic and recession to fundamentally reshape society, reduce economic freedom and transfer wealth from the developed to the developing world.
It’s not a conspiracy. It’s out in the open.
It’s not a plot for global dictatorship. It’s a globalist plan to convince people living in democracies in the developed world to accept a lower standard of living (what reducing industrial greenhouse gas emissions actually means) to, we’re told, save the planet from catastrophic global warming.
Unfortunately, Goldstein can’t quite get to the main point. Global warming from human events is not happening. If anything, the stalled sunspot cycle is cooling the world, which is much worse. (Although the sunspot cycle may have restarted recently) The head of the UN is a bona-fide classical communist, to coin a phrase. His mission is the destruction of all nation states and cultures and has passed many “non-binding” UN resolutions to make that happen. The UN Migration Compact being enough of an example to not look any farther. But in case you want to:
And of course, the UN wants to literally criminalize all opposition to its own undemocratic policies as they are meant to apply to the whole world:
Yesterday we posted a couple of videos on the state thuggery that this pub was subjected to in the past few days.
Here is more updates. Below, that, our hypothesis as to how this comes to be.
This next move is genius. They declared the pub an autonomous zone. Obviously they do not expect this to work. Much like pointing out the massive election fraud. But the American people now get a look at how things actually work. Some autonomous zones are more respected than others.
Just about a month before the attacks of 911, In fact on August the 1st, 2001, the city council of Ottawa pulled a fast one on Ottawa businesses, and used illegal means to do so.
Using the now familiar trick of playing with the meanings of words, City Hall banned smoking in all “public places” which meant private businesses and bars and restaurants.
In a move that was similar to banning coal miners from working in coal mines due to the heavy presence of coal, they decided that bar workers, many of whom smoked, needed to be protected from second hand smoke and barred smoking inside for the good of their health. Of course.
And as to public, if as person tripped and fell within the premises, the business owner was liable for it, and if a customer drank too much and got in an accident, or even was arrested for DWI on a random stop, the bartender was criminally liable. So, not so much. public at all really.
It is also important to understand that Ottawa City Council, which was staffed as memory serves, by a lot of far leftists at the time, was invited to speak to New York City Council to explain how they managed to implement this ban.
The bylaw was worded in such a way that there wouldn’t be too much resistance to it, as it offered an out that they, the city, never intended to honour. It said this was for public places but private clubs were exempt. One major entertainment venue on Bank St. Barrymore’s Pub, decided to become a private club and sell memberships and all the other related requirements to be exempt from the bylaw.
But bylaw enforcement came every day and levied ENORMOUS fines, 4 figures in fact, against Barrymore’s knowing that they were operating within the law, but the cost of fighting the tickets would be too much for them.
Keep in mind that only a few years earlier, bars and restaurants had been forced to invest many thousands of dollars into special air filters and circulation devices to comply with previous anti-smoking bylaws.
But a curious thing happened during this period.
A consortium of bars and restaurants who lost on average 30% of their total sales or more, got together and hired a law firm in Ottawa. Not to fight the bylaw, they didn’t think they had a chance. Probably based on some of the illegal tactics the city had already used against them. One example being that in direct contravention of law, the city spent a great deal of public funds advertising one side of a bill before it became law. On the sides of busses and on signs all over Ottawa, there were signs that read something very much like:
“Ottawa is going smoke free soon! Please call this number to support the new proposed law!”
This wasn’t just illegal, this was pernicious. The kind of warp we now see on all issues from immigration policy to free speech now. You MUST go with the state opinion. No other views on an issue can be aired and more and more will become illegal. Just ask Geert Wilders, Marine Le Pen, Matteo Salvini, and these are just leaders of national parties! For the rest of us, well we saw what happened to a mathematician who dared speak election truth yesterday.
But what this group of restaurants did, was to sue the city and all restaurants or bars that became private clubs in order to force them to comply with these regulations.
They did not fight for their own rights. They fought to remove what they saw was an unfair advantage that those who fought the bylaw had, and close them down, or take away their right to be a private club.
And it worked. Most of those places are closed. Interestingly, all the places that had existed before the ban, but were no-smoking establishments also closed. Becuase the city forced the niche market they had on the whole city. So people who didn’t like cigarette smoke before now could go anywhere. A few great restaurants and bars in an area we were familiar with, all closed within months. And the remainder all complained that business was down on average 30%.
Entertainment was gutted. People who go out to see bands, go to enjoy themselves. That typically doesn’t include going outside in -20 C weather every half hour for a rushed cigarette and back in.
Google searching leads one to suspect that the WHO is also behind this global push to ban smoking everywhere. And at this point, by design or evolution, it looks like that was a template for all we see around us now, from Toronto BBQs to Staten Island public houses.
After conversations with Johnny U. it feels like this is worth adding.
The post above is to offer insight as to a strategic operation against the free peoples of the world. But Johnny U. pointed out the equally important tactical method of implementing the strategy. And that is to use regulation to bypass law, debate and all democratic process. Clearly this is what is taking place, and is a conscious and conceived, deliberate process.
In this clip he pushes the climate scam as well as subtle attacks on Donald Trump, which perhaps adds data points to the idea that all of these unprecedented measures taken to fight a disease over which there has been so much deception, is really just a plot to unseat Donald Trump.
If there is anything good about these times we are currently experiencing, its that fear of Donald Trump being reelected has forced agencies like the UN, that were well on the way to forcing the destruction of all nation states, peoples, and history of peoples in the world (in part through vehicles like the “Global Migration Compact” and other treacherous plots) to assert a global Marxist government at the expense of democracy via stealth and subversion to drop the facade and show their true natures.
UN #HumanRights experts express profound concern over a recent statement by the US Attorney-General describing #Antifa and other anti-fascist activists as domestic terrorists, saying it undermines the rights to freedom of expression and of peaceful assembly in the country. pic.twitter.com/2Pz2dMyq8k
— UN Geneva (@UNGeneva) June 19, 2020
And their true natures are totalitarian, and contemptuous of self rule.
Thank you ML., M., and everyone who sent in this Tweet today.
At a press conference on Wednesday, the WHO announced it would resume its global trial of #hydroxychloroquine, after its data safety monitoring committee found there was NO INCREASED risk of death for Covid patients taking it.https://t.co/jHUxVRtdOt
— Oh boy what a shot (@ohboywhatashot) June 3, 2020
Medical journal The Lancet on May 29 issued a correction to a recent study which found that antimalarial drugs Hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine were linked with an increased risk of mortality in hospitals, and an increased frequency of irregular heart rhythms.
The study, titled, “Hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine with or without a macrolide for treatment of COVID-19: a multinational registry analysis,” and published on May 22, included records of 96,032 patients from 671 hospitals in six continents. The patients were hospitalized between Dec. 20, 2019, and April 14, 2020.
Patients receiving the anti-malarials were put in four different groups: chloroquine alone, chloroquine with a macrolide, hydroxychloroquine alone, or hydroxychloroquine with a macrolide. Patients who received none of the treatments formed a control group. Researchers found the 14,888 patients in the treatment group suffered higher mortality when compared to the control group of over 80,000.
“We were unable to confirm a benefit of hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine, when used alone or with a macrolide, on in-hospital outcomes for COVID-19,” the researchers wrote.
However, more than a hundred scientists and medical professionals raised questions about integrity of data analyzed in the study and subsequently wrote an open letter to its authors and the editor of The Lancet, listing 10 major concerns.
These included the fact that there was “no ethics review,” and “unusually small reported variances in baseline variables, interventions and outcomes,” as well as “no mention of the countries or hospitals that contributed to the data source and no acknowledgments to their contributions.” A request to the authors for information on the contributing centers was denied, the letter said.
Among the scientists other concerns were that the average daily doses of hydroxychloroquine were higher than the FDA-recommended amounts and that data reportedly from Australian patients did not seem to match data from the Australian government.
Who is the Secretary General of the UN?
Here he is from a few years ago:
Make no mistake. It has always been his ambition to crush freedom of speech world wide for a communist agenda. He, like Trudeau and other communists, are using the Ram Emanual tactic of, “Never let a crisis go to waste”.
The real cost of the Wuhan Flu will be incomprehensible to most who simply do not understand how we are and will be led into an authoritarian and totalitarian regime.
UN on Global Compact on Migration:
One honest German reporter on the UN Migration policy