James Corbett at the Ottawa NCI on the WHO and the Global Pandemic Treaty

James Corbett is always good. He testified to the NCI in Ottawa from his home in Japan

Interview: Dr. Kat Lindley on the various ways the WHO are going to remove all national and personal autonomy

Story details at RIAR Foundation.co,

Urgent – my video call with the WHO this morning

For anyone who still doesn’t get that this has all been a cover for a Western-World-Wide communist revolution, please read this article on Dr. Tess Lawrie’s Substack. This is very important.

We can’t let them get away with this power grab

I just got off a call with the WHO that’s left me shaken, reaching for my affirmations and more determined than ever.

As you may know, the WHO is proposing a global pandemic agreement that would give it undemocratic rights over every participating nation and its citizens. Put simply, in the event of a ‘pandemic’, the WHO’s constitution would replace every country’s constitution. Whether your country’s elected government would agree or not, the WHO could impose lockdowns, testing regimes, enforce medical interventions, dictate all public health practice, and much more.

Over the course of this pandemic, the WHO has withheld safe and established older medicines, ignored the experiences of frontline doctors, disregarded evidence from low, middle and high-income countries, and taken no heed of the values and preferences of people affected by their recommendations. It has apparently ignored the huge numbers of adverse reactions on its own database and has failed to issue warnings about the gene-based vaccines. It has also advertised that the mRNA vaccines are as safe as normal vaccines – and this is simply not the case.

Many of us are extremely concerned that the WHO now intends to take full control over every member nation via this pandemic treaty. The World Council for Health wrote a response to this a while back and has been watching developments closely.

Well, this week the WHO pulled a fast one on the world.

On Sunday, it launched a ‘public participation process’ and invited video and written submissions. They gave two days to make video submissions, and written submissions must be received by 5pm CEST today. That’s just five days for the world’s citizens to have their voices heard.

The World Council for Health acted fast and applied to do a two-minute video submission. We put together a strong statement and this morning, I joined the hearing to say our piece.

Please read the rest at Dr. Lawrie’s Substack linked above and here.

One of Trump’s medical team details behind the scenes during Covid year 1 and more

This man is an Ive leaguer, and a Carribian Canadian who worked in DC on Trump’s team. So he has a lot to say about Ontario, Canada and the usual faces in DC. And very unflattering things to say about Fauci. This is a pleasant and interesting listen from Friday’s Reiner Fuellmich webcast.

The Mac public house in New York, and Ottawa City Council, and the totalitarian fraud that is public health regulations

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.

That’s right.

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.



Terrorist who heads the WHO uses the Wuhan Flu virus to push a Marxist agenda in a number of ways

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.

The UN is as corrupt and anti-human rights as is its components, the OIC, and the the WHO

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.

And their true natures are totalitarian, and contemptuous of self rule.

Thank you ML., M., and everyone who sent in this Tweet today.

WHO Resumes Hydroxychloroquine trials now that higher mortality rate stats are debunked

The doctors who’s anger caused the WHO to be partially honest for a bit

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.