The World Health Organization have existed for 9 decades since the first World Health Assembly meeting in 1948.
For much of this time they have been viewed as an organisation that focused on health and working with national governments for you and your families best interest.
Michele Bachmann returns to Hearts of Oak to look at a very different side to the WHO, the one that was exposed to the public over the last 3 years.
At the upcoming assembly in Geneva we will witness the biggest WHO power grab ever attempted where national governments and the interests of countries will be urged to submit their sovereignty to the WHO.
But have they overplayed their hand? With the Gates Foundation and the CCP being exposed as the 2nd and 3rd biggest funders, will the public see through this power grab.
Join us this episode for Michele's expert analysis.
Michele Bachmann is the dean of the Robertson School of Government at Regent University and was born in Waterloo, Iowa. She received a B.A. in Political Science and English from Winona State University in 1978. She married Marcus Bachmann, a clinical therapist who holds a master’s degree from Regent University. In 1986, she received a Juris Doctor degree from Oral Roberts University. She was a member of the ORU law school’s final graduating class, and was part of a group of faculty, staff, and students who moved the ORU law school library to Regent University. Two years later, she completed a Master of Law in taxation at the College of William & Mary. She worked for four years as a lawyer for the Internal Revenue Service’s Office of Chief Counsel in St. Paul, Minnesota.
Michele and her husband have five children. They also worked with a private foster care agency to house 23 children in their home during the 1990s. Their children were home schooled and also attended private Christian schools, and her political career stemmed from her interest in education reform.
In 2000, Michele defeated a long-time moderate incumbent for a state senate seat in Minnesota. In 2006, she entered the race to represent her suburban Minneapolis congressional district, winning 52 percent of the vote, becoming the first Republican woman from Minnesota elected to the House of Representatives. She easily won re-election in 2008 and 2010.
Michele's extensive career highlights include:
She was the first Republican woman from Minnesota elected to the U.S. House of Representatives.
Michele served as a United States Congresswoman representing Minnesota’s 6th District from 2007 to 2015.
She quickly became a national figure in the Republican Party and a founding member of the congressional Tea Party Caucus.
In 2011, Michele announced her bid for the Republican presidential nomination and ran for president in 2012 and is a highly respected leader who is deeply committed to conservative values in government.
Regent University
https://www.regent.edu/
Interview recorded 24.4.23
*Special thanks to Bosch Fawstin for recording our intro/outro on this podcast.
Check out his art https://theboschfawstinstore.blogspot.com/ and follow him on GETTR https://gettr.com/user/BoschFawstin and Twitter https://twitter.com/TheBoschFawstin?s=20
To sign up for our weekly email, find our social media, podcasts, video, livestreaming platforms and more...
https://heartsofoak.org/connect/
Please like, subscribe and share!
Hello, Hearts of Oak, and welcome to another interview, coming up with Michele Bachmann, who was with us a couple of weeks ago, and she joins us this time to talk about the WHO, the World Health Organization. It's an organization which she has been concerned about and following for quite a while. Obviously, we have seen it come to prominence during the last three years, but Michelle joins us to look into the workings of it. We look at the finance, Bill and Melinda Gates Organization Foundation are I think the second highest funders of it, the Chinese Communist Party are the third highest. Make of that what you will. So we discussed that and the control and power play behind that and then the clash between national governments and the WHO. The WHO seems to be a massive power play on control of the health services and sector and drugs within all countries and coming up next month in Geneva is the 76th World Health Assembly meeting in Geneva and this happened since 1948. It's the governing group body in effect of the WHO and they'll be meeting to propose a number of issues. One which is for the WHO to take full control of health inany pandemic. We discuss what that means, is this control, and then also we touch on the digital IDs of the WHO, who are very fond off on how that will affect us all. So Michele brings experience from her political background, her educational background, and I know you will be inspired as you listen to her opening the door on this issue and inspiring us to actually respond in an effective away so this does not happen.
Michele Bachmann, thank you so much for joining us once again.
(Michele Bachmann)
Peter, it's always great to be with you. I enjoy being on Hearts of Oak.
Thank you so much. And last time we obviously discussed education and if the viewers don't know, Michele is a former member of Congress and current Dean of the Robertson School of Government at Regent University down there in Virginia. And the last time we had a conversation was all to do with the education and pushing back that woke wave.
But I know that there is an issue that you also feel passionate about, as well as education, and that is a concern on the WHO, on the World Health Organization. And we've heard a lot about that, I think, over the last three years, I guess people maybe before may have been unfamiliar with the WHO. So maybe ask you personally, why is this an area of interest? Was there a particular, time or point or bill or something that happened that made you aware the WHO were maybe not what what they seem to be.
Well, just so people know what the WHO is, it's the World Health Organization. It is the health care arm of the United Nations. And so for many people, the United Nations really is not a, big figure in their lives. They hope that they're doing good things to keep peaceful relations between countries. But other than that, people don't think too much about the United Nations.
And the World Health Organization, we've always seen them as an organization that can maybe try and do good, especially in poor countries where they don't have money for healthcare so that they could help, for instance, with maternal, positive maternal outcomes for pregnancies, for young babies that are just born, dealing with diseases where the nation doesn't have enough money.
Everyone is on board with that. Nations are happy to give money toward that so that other nations have positive outcomes for their people.
So when we think of the World Health Organization, those are the kind of hopes you might say that we infuse into the organization, that we hope they are doing.
But we saw something very different, Peter, about three years ago or so with the outbreak of the COVID pandemic.
And with that, then we saw the World Health Organization in a completely different light.
Well, tell us, it is that three years that probably weren't on people's radar.
The UN people are aware of, but there are many other organisations that happen really behind the scenes and people are unaware of the effect they have on their everyday life.
And I'm looking over the last three years, I'm wondering whether the WHO have overplayed their hand, because I guess they're an organisation that have thrived in the shadows and now they're front and centre and people are aware of them.
And I kind of wonder whether they've overplayed their hand.
Well, quite honestly, it's bewildering to me how much power they were infused with. And
this wasn't actual power. This was imputed power. What do I mean by that?
Here in the United States, I can give you our example here. Our government, led by President Joe Biden, looked to the WHO, and whatever recommendation the WHO, the World Health Organization gave regarding COVID, our United States Centers for Disease Control, the director was a woman named Rachel Walensky, the World Health Organization is run by a man, his first name is Tedros, his last name is something like Galbraithius, he's from Ethiopia. He has a very controversial checkered history, he was involved in a lot of collusion cover up, allegedly, in Ethiopia. And so, of course, the way these things work, these people
often are plucked out of that position and they fail up, so to speak. So they're put in a position with even more responsibility. That's what happened to Tedros. He was made the director general of the World Health Organization. So, you know, no cry, no foul. Nobody really cared about it until along came COVID. And the United States of America is the number one funder of the World Health Organization. The number two funder of the World Health Organization, interestingly, is a man named Bill Gates. Many people may know the name of the billionaire Bill Gates, one of the richest men in the world. He was the founder of Microsoft. The third funder of World Health Organization is the Communist Party of China.
So the interesting thing is that Tedros, who himself is a communist, seems to be controlled by the number three funder at the World Health Organization, not the number one funder, but by the number three, and arguably also by the number two funder, Bill Gates. And so the World Health Organization then, unbelievably, was lifted up to a point where whatever their pronouncements were for the last three years. Here in the United States, our President Joe Biden took the World Health Organization pronouncements, and those recommendations went to our Centers for Disease Control, which is not a regulatory body, which has no power of enforcement, but they took the recommendations of the WHO, and then the CDC made those same recommendations. But weirdly, somewhere in the ether, those recommendations were treated as though they were law, as though our Congress had passed them, and the president had signed them into law. None of that happened.
Congress never passed a law regarding COVID. They never passed a law regarding the recommendations of the WHO. And yet, here in the United States, people were forced to stay home for 15 days.
They weren't allowed out of their houses. I can't even believe I'm saying that, thinking back three years ago, what we all willingly did, how naive were we?
And after that, then businesses were told they were not allowed to open.
So what did that mean? That meant for two weeks, people didn't have a pay check. For two weeks, employers didn't have employees. For two weeks, there was no incoming monies for the GDP. That's millions and millions of dollars, billions of dollars that never got made. Well, what was going to happen? Well, in that extraordinary circumstance that had never happened before in the United States saw extraordinary actions. These actions were led by whatever it was that the World Health Organization said. Here we are, arguably the greatest military and economic superpower nation on earth, and we're bowing down and kowtowing to whatever this Tedros, who heads up the World Health Organization is saying, it's kind of an interesting phenomenon that the United States would do something like that. It's almost like you could imagine a scenario where communist China, who seeks domination all across the world, who has their infamous Silk and Road Initiative, where they are trying to dominate the ancient Silk Road pattern, the trade routes that went across.
India and the Stans and making their way into Europe.
Also it has a Silk and Road initiative trying to go through the Latin American countries and South America but also now through the United States.
And it seems that they wanted to do the actions that were being pronounced for ones that would bring about economic ruination to the West, to the United States to the European nations, to Australia, to New Zealand.
It was very odd.
The COVID, the spread of COVID seemed to hit the West extremely hard. So it was after a while, it seemed inescapable to reach the conclusion that communist China seemed to be benefiting from COVID, while the rest of the world seemed to be hurt by COVID. But the WHO, the World Health Organization, seemed to be the vehicle that was being used to make pronouncements as phony and as detrimental as they were, and then countries in the West magically bowed down and did whatever the World Health Organization said. At least that's what happened here in the United States, including, Peter, social media platforms like Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Google. We saw that here in America, people were thrown off of their social media accounts. They were cancelled if they disagreed with what the World Health Organization said. As a matter of fact, these social media companies, including Google, would put up a notification that their standard for knowledge and information was the World Health Organization. And if anyone disagreed with them, they would be thrown off. And the same was true of the United States government. Their standard was the World Health Organization. There was no legal requirement for this. They didn't have to do this, but they chose, they imputed power to the World Health Organization, even though over and over again, the World Health Organization contradicted the recommendations.
The recommendations were found to be faulty afterwards. They were, they pretended.
The people who cried the loudest pretended to always say, the science, the science, we're following the science.
When as a matter of fact, they chose to silence free inquiry and scientists who were not finding the same results as the World Health Organization.
Any opinion that deviated in any way from the World Health Organization was not only silenced, they were also accused of being misinformation and they were blackmailed. They were censored. Here in America, doctors were thrown out of positions in medical schools if they disagreed with the World Health Organization's opinion.
I think if you could step back about 50 steps and take a look objectively at what's happened the last three years, people would be aghast. But unfortunately, the media hasn't done that.
There hasn't really been allowed, at least in America, an overview of all of the mistakes that have happened in the last three years. I'll give you one example. I just read an article this morning about the incredible damage that mask wearing did to people, whether they were old or whether they were young. And what they found is that within five minutes of wearing a mask, damage already began to individuals.
Up to and including the stillborn birth of unborn babies to pregnant women.
Little children had cognitive damage from the build-up of CO2 hurting their brain functioning.
There are all sorts of issues that have come out and that's just mask wearing, let alone the vaccines, let alone other things like lockdowns that were encouraged by the WHO and were implemented by the WHO.
Probably in America, nothing was more damaging than the shutdown of economic activity in our nation. We saw literally trillions of dollars take wings and fly away because they were unearned.
And we also printed money that we didn't have. We spent money that we didn't have. We're continuing to do that. And here in the United States, we have a contagion of inflation.
That is very difficult.
It's a tiger by the tail. It's hurting the poorest in the United States and the middle class, and it's inhibiting the creation of new start-ups and new businesses.
So the WHO, an innocuous healthcare arm of the United Nations has a lot to answer for.
But unfortunately, in the structure of the United Nations, there doesn't appear to be an accountability structure.
And it appears that just like the fellow who's heading the WHO, Tedros, failed up.
He was rewarded with failure from Ethiopia.
It appears now that the World Health Organization also will be granted benefits and even more empowered after their failures.
And so they may also soon fail up as well with even more power, more control over more people across the earth.
Oh, well, Tedros has been rewarded with another five years in charge, so things are not going to get any better.
There are a whole lot of those things you come to like pick you up on.
But one is the social media. We have been amazed that actually it is discussing COVID that affects you on social media.
I personally thought having a robust conversation on Islam or have a robust conversation on the gender nonsense would.
But actually it was it was COVID and of course you've been on Mark Steyn's show many times and Mark Steyn was removed from GB News through Ofcom, the regulatory body in the UK on communications because he talked to those who were vaccine injured. And I'm wondering, you looking at the States, is there a way through that or are social media companies going to hold that over us all, that if we talk out of line then immediately people will be punished.
Where does that leave a free and open conversation?
Well, it's stifled here in the United States. We have what is called the First Amendment protections.
We have our Constitution of the United States, and we have what's called is the Bill of Rights.
This is in the Constitution. It's equal to the Constitution.
And America is built on the fact that our government is supposed to have very limited powers.
The people are supposed to have an expansive set of powers, and those powers are guaranteed by the Bill of Rights, the first being freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, freedom of worship and religious expression, the right to petition our government, the right to gather together and assemble.
Those are all a part of the First Amendment freedoms and including our Second Amendment, which is the right to keep and bear arms, guns, for the right to protect yourself.
And when the founders passed the Second Amendment, it was so that the people could protect themselves against the government.
That was the intention. So we have 10 of those amendments of rights.
And what we've seen is that there's a new cohort of people in the United States, many of whom have obtained positions of power, and those people don't agree with what we have as our constitutional rights.
And so we're seeing not only the threat to those rights in law, but in practice.
And we've seen it most particularly through social media, where we are no longer allowed to have free speech.
And as a matter of fact, it's even worse because people are told if they disagree with the the state line.
That they are giving misinformation. In other words, they're harming the public.
By giving an opinion that digresses from government. And I think you've had to deal with that in the United Kingdom as well. And it's egregious because it is anti-science.
It is anti-freedom. Quite frankly, it is anti-human. Because if you look at the carnage, for instance, the fallout that happened from wearing masks, from being forced to get a vaccine when you didn't want to, but your livelihood depended on it, so you felt you had to. And then, despite everything that we were told, that we would be instantaneously cured of COVID if we take a vaccine. We would never go to a hospital. We wouldn't transmit the virus. We wouldn't die from it. Every one of those claims was proved false. And even more egregious than that, the number of people that we're seeing over and over the excess deaths, if you will, in the United Kingdom, in America, anywhere that these vaccines were pushed, people's lives are continuing to be harmed by what's happened. And there's been no review. There's been no honest, transparent review of what happened during those three years. We're still going through that.
Here in the United States, Peter, there are colleges that still mandate that students must get vaccinated before they come into college. And this is after even the CDC director, the Centers for Disease Control director, Rachel Walensky, just this last week admitted, yes, you can still transmit COVID. You can still get COVID even if you take a vaccine. Well, what was this thing worth?
What was it worth? Especially when you see the people who are physically harmed after taking this vaccine. So I think we need to move our compassion toward those who are trying, who are we're believing?
Just on face value with the government and what the World Health Organization, what the CDC said, they just said, okay, well, they must be looking out for my welfare.
Well, we don't wanna impugn motives if the CDC or the WHO was or wasn't looking out for people's welfare, that we don't know.
But what we do know is the objective fact of what happened to people's lives.
And there's ongoing carnage continually from these lockdowns, mask mandates, vaccines, all of the restrictions that happen, we're continuing to deal with the downstream impacts of it. And it is devastating, probably one of the worst public policy failures in human history.
One thing on the damage for going on to say some more more with the WHO. I was with a friend today from, who's over from the States and his business is property. He was talking about the ghost towns are being created across America. I mean generally in Europe we've had a, probably the majority have returned to work, to an office, but still you have some working from home. But he was giving me a picture of how bad it is of people working from home and then the damage that's causing to towns and cities across the country and then I guess the bankruptcy that's going to happen with property spaces not being filled and banks having to, I mean it's it seems to time bomb I mean what is it what is it like in the U.S. have people returned to the workplace or are they still working from home?
Well, you're right. It is a huge problem. A lot of people who got used to being able to be at home so they could answer the door, take the dog out, throw the laundry in, throw it in the dryer.
People just got used to that, not having to dress up for work, not having to commute.
A lot of people like that. So in some ways, the positive is that some businesses saw that they don't have to take on the expense of leasing office space. They can get just as much productivity from employees at home. However, a lot of businesses have seen we don't get as much productivity from our employees who are at home. Plus, what we're really missing is that magic that happens when people come together and they talk to each other and they get ideas and they exchange information that they wouldn't have known otherwise. That just doesn't happen in a Zoom call or a Zoom meeting. And so there's a lot of interactions that no longer happen. I know.
You know, in the United States in major metropolitan city after major metropolitan city, you hear of huge downtown office buildings, that no longer are being filled like you had mentioned in the UK and it's happening here as well.
If I could just deviate for one second, when you opened your remarks, it reminded me of something else that happened.
And that was, it was extraordinary when COVID hit that landlords who own apartment buildings or own smaller units that they leased out.
Landlords were prohibited from evicting tenants if they couldn't pay their rent.
And so here a landlord was not relieved of the duty to pay taxes or insurance or a mortgage, but they weren't allowed to evict anyone.
So this went on for months and months and months and months and months.
How do you penalize one business, one portion of the business sector, It's just unbelievable the confusion. So then you look at landlords of huge office buildings.
I'll give you one example. Maybe people have heard of the corporation Target.
That is from Minneapolis, Minnesota. So this is a huge department store in America and Target Corporation leased all sorts of office space in downtown Minneapolis.
Well, there were a lot of riots that happened after George Floyd.
That people in the UK heard of the George Floyd situation. And so Minneapolis downtown became very dangerous.
People don't, employees don't wanna go downtown plus COVID.
So now we see office building after office building.
The largest hotel in Minneapolis couldn't make money because you remember hotels were shuttered because of the World Health Organization. And in our case in America, the CDC.
So the largest hotel in downtown Minneapolis went up on auction because they couldn't make it anymore.
So hotels, office buildings, then you have the guy trying to shine shoes, and then the guy trying to sell coffee, and then the local diners.
And so what we're seeing is an absolute implosion in metropolitan areas.
And metropolitan areas are like the tent post holding up a tent.
And then you've got all the suburban areas.
So that impacts real estate, people's abilities to buy homes, sell homes.
So this is all continuing to happen. We're three plus years on.
And these horrible decisions made by these bureaucrats at the World Health Organization with no accountability, and at the Centers for Disease Control in America with no accountability, and I'm sure for you it's the NIH, the National Institute of Health.
These decisions are continuing to go on.
Let me give you one more example.
And this is one that we're not used to in the United States.
We've always had very high quality health care in the United States.
But now in the United States, you'd call, you'd make an appointment, you'd probably get in to see your doctor the same day.
Now it's not like that. Now we have to wait weeks, in some cases months, to get in to see a doctor.
That has never happened before in the United States.
Now we're seeing waiting times on being able to get in And we've primarily been a private healthcare system, which has worked beautifully.
The more government has gotten involved in our healthcare system, the worst it's gotten, the more expensive it's gotten, the more the times are lengthening.
So the World Health Organization, from my perspective, caused a chain reaction of events that we're continuing to be harmed from today.
And so that's why, Peter, again, it's so dangerous, the proposals that are on the table, to empower them even more after their failure?
One area you talked about was the clash, the power of the WHO.
Before we look in the funding in China, but simply that clash between national governments and their responsibility for their population and the WHO.
And maybe in Europe, we have had that control above national governments in the European Union.
But by and large, you don't really have the World Trade Organization doesn't have that much power in relation to what was in the WHO.
So, I mean, it's it is concerning that every country seems to have to, well, fall into line or to bow down to the WHO's latest edict.
And I wonder where that leaves nations like the US, like other nations, that independent, that supporting what is best for their populations, that seems to have gone out the window and the WHO seems to be the one that kind of plays the tune and countries have to dance to it.
Well, we can blame the WHO, but really what we have to do is blame our own political leaders.
I can't blame the WHO today entirely because they are a recommendation and advisory only body.
That's it. So they can give advice. And the 194 member nations of the World Health Organization, There's about 200 nations in the world and 194 are members of the World Health Organization.
So those nations don't have to follow those dictates if they don't want to, because the WHO only issues recommendations. The problem is our leaders, our leader, President Joe Biden, who took whatever the WHO said as gospel and forced that onto our our healthcare system, our centres for disease control, and then our national health grants, and our Dr. Fauci and Dr. Birx, the ones who were standing up and telling Americans, you must do this, you must do that, even as silly as Dr. Fauci coming out on stage, wearing not one mask, not two masks, three masks, in some cases, four masks. It's like, this was theatre.
This was theatre when he would come out and wear these masks.
Especially in light of the evidence that was available before on masks, but even now more profound after COVID, how damaging and worthless these masks are.
Not one of those masks could stop the prevention of COVID.
So what was the point? Why did people have to sit for eight hours on an airplane flight wearing a mask when all it did is hurt the passenger? It didn't save anyone else on that plane.
So this is the kind of nonsense we've had to deal with.
And now there's an effort by our political leader. You know, you have your political leaders and what they've imposed on your population.
Our political leader, Joe Biden, empowered, he didn't have to, he empowered the World Health Organization.
But now last year in 2022, the Biden administration offered 29 amendments, to the World Health Assembly in Geneva, Switzerland.
They meet annually once a year to change and radically alter the WHO.
I'd like to say before that.
During COVID, our president was Donald Trump, and Donald Trump saw the mess that was coming out of the World Health Organization. He saw a lot of the nonsense and a lot of the confusing contradictory pronouncements that they were making. So Donald Trump said, we're getting the United States out of the WHO. We're not going to stay in.
So he pulled the funding for the WHO, and he also gave notice to the World Health Organization, to the UN, the United States will no longer be in. Well, the protocol that you have to follow is that it takes one year for a nation to fully pull out of the World Health Organization.
As your audience knows, Donald Trump was not returned to the White House in 2020.
Joe Biden became president of the United States. So on the very first day that Joe Biden became president, he put the United States back into the World Health Organization, and he restored all of their funding.
And from there, he empowered them even more, to the point of offering and he's been the aggressor, he's been the lead, President Biden, to offer these amendments at the World Health Assembly, the World Health Assembly is the governing organization that governs the WHO. So the WHO is the UN organization, but the governing board is the World Health Assembly. And they meet once a week, the last week of May in Geneva, Switzerland. This has been going on since 2005.
But curiously the amendments that were being offered would completely transfer the World Health Organization away from being an advisory only body to becoming an international regulatory body.
And in some respects, these amendments are so incredibly strong, it would create a platform in the World Health Organization for a global system of government, so that the World Health Organization would be empowered to declare a public health emergency of international concern.
Well, what's that? That means that the WHO would have the power to declare a global emergency.
And then they would be empowered to set the standard and to put the orders out for what each nation has to do, whether it's lockdowns, whether it's masking, whether it's vaccinations, whether it's all of the PPP that people had to come up with.
They could even order a country to supply PPP, pay for it, supply it to other countries.
So this would be a redistribution of wealth. This is an absolutely jaw-dropping increase of power that they would have.
This would affect the budgets of various countries, but it would impact the freedom that people have.
These amendments are also stating what could be said and what couldn't be said in countries on healthcare.
So if we thought that we were restricted on speech during this last pandemic, this would be globally enforced, what we can say and what we couldn't say.
Every nation would be expected to toe the exact same line. Because remember, in Sweden, they didn't shut down their schools. Kids went to school in Sweden.
Whereas in America, kids had to stay home. So this is an absolutely jaw-dropping level of power that the Biden administration tried to push.
Now with those amendments in 2022, a few African nations pushed back.
Thank God for these African nations like Botswana.
They said, we don't wanna go along with these amendments.
So they didn't go through last year.
So now behind the scenes, President Joe Biden.
And other nations have gotten together, and they're kind of spreading these amendments around with other countries.
And I've got a video clip, actually I can send to you, Peter.
And it's a video clip of the foreign minister from Indonesia meeting last November, the first week of November in 2022 at the B20.
There's the G20 and the B20, the top 20 businesses.
And this foreign minister said quite clearly that what they're planning to do is pass the international health rule amendments in Geneva, Switzerland in May of 2023.
And that would change the World Health Organization. So they would be empowered to tell all nations on earth and all people on earth what they must do.
And one of the first things they want to do is demand that every person on earth get a digital identity that would be on their phone.
We'd all have our own digital identity and we would each be assigned a QR code.
And what he was saying is this will be so great. Now we all don't have to stay home and be restricted from being able to travel. Those who do what they're told will be allowed to get on a plane.
They'll be allowed to buy groceries at the grocery store or go to a hardware store, or they'll be allowed to buy things or get on public transportation.
But woe be to those who don't follow with what the World Health Organization says.
Their life is basically over. This has never happened before in human history.
This has never happened. What country in their right mind would empower the World Health Organization, basically the UN, to become a platform for global governance?
The last thing we would give the UN is power and more money or a military or the ability for taxation.
You would never do that because here in the United States, as we've seen, our rights infringed by our own government and by corporations. Can you imagine? There are no rights when the UN controls the world. They're the rights. Whatever the elites want, that's what they get. So you're talking essentially global dictatorship.
And the president of the United States is pushing this and the leaders of various foreign countries are pushing this.
So this is a two track approach, Peter. One is through a global pandemic treaty, which is far more difficult to get adopted, but it is a possibility.
The other track approach is changing these amendments at the World Health Assembly in Geneva, Switzerland.
That's a far easier proposition because that's basically majority rule and you can get it through.
And so that's why we're very concerned. Now, in the rules of the World Health Assembly nations have 18 months to opt out, but I'm telling you, you don't want to get to that point.
You don't want something like this to pass. And then you've got to try and figure out how to get out of it.
You just don't want it to pass in the first place.
And you would know better than anyone, your country has dealt with Brexit and the empowerment of the EU over your decisions in your nations.
And so now imagine that breath-taking level of control going to the World Health Organization with the UN.
So this is the World Health Alliance next month meeting in in Geneva, and my huge concern, you talked about funding with with the Bill and Melinda Gates organization being number two and then with China being number three.
And you wonder what lies behind this push, because the call will be that it will make our lives easier.
And convenience is a double-edged sword in many ways.
But where, because then when you look at the digital ID, you're looking at the intrusion of AI.
And obviously Bill Gates has a lot of experience in the tech world and branching out into all of the vaccines and the farming.
And then China, it seems as though You've got some organisations that are, I guess, being forced along.
But other organisations or countries are more intentional.
China seems to be intentional with what it's doing, as does the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, where other countries seem to be, I guess, useful idiots, kind of caught along. So tell us kind of about that power play that's happening?
Well, it's honestly, this isn't very difficult to figure out and see what's going on. It's control.
There are some people in this world who are are just control freaks and they they tend to be extremely wealthy.
We've got a lot of them in the United States. Mark Zuckerberg, who has Facebook now called Meta.
He's one of them. And Bill Gates, who has Microsoft, and he was an early funder in vaccines.
And now he's buying up farmland, and he is a very interesting character, Bill Gates, but he's not the only one. There are other people who are interested in being able to increase their level of control and perhaps even their own bottom line. They have their own ideas about how we should be living our lives, and it isn't necessarily in line with our interests.
These people really fundamentally hate the idea of democracy. They hate the idea of people being able to choose the leaders to serve them, but then also the way that they live and the laws that they live under. They think they know better. This is a global nanny state that they're looking to create, but it's global control. So this isn't hard to figure out because if you look at the the entire, we have 5,000 years of recorded human history.
And if you look at that history, there's a lot of ugly, bloody efforts where people, history is man's attempt to enslave man, to control mankind for their own best interests.
And it's the idea of faith and religion in particular, the faith of the Bible where you kind of see that the story play out, where you have another way other than madmen controlling other men.
And God, through the Bible, talks about freedom for men, and various governments were created because people were enlightened by that image of men being free.
This worldview that we're seeing with trying to lift up and enlarge the power structure of the World Health Organization, primarily the UN is what we're talking about, that is not that structure, looking to empower people or to enhance freedom or have better options for people or better health care for people. That's not what this is.
This is about more control for a very small group of people and less control for the rest of us. So it's easy to see what will happen. We all become serfs in a modern morality tale where we're the losers and very few people are the winners.
Can I just finish looking at the political response just last question on it because obviously this is the WHO are wanting this global push and control over each and every country and certainly in the US it doesn't matter if you've got one state which is red, one state which is blue, that kind of removes that advantage when when you have a large organization like this overarching countries.
So does this, is this a pushback from the Republicans there in the States?
And we look to you because we don't have, we have bright sparks of conservative movements breaking out across Europe, we do.
Certainly in Sweden, in Hungary, in Italy, possibly in Austria.
So there are things happening, but what does it mean for the U.S. politically?
Politically, what it means is people, this issue hasn't been a high profile issue by design.
The Biden administration has tried to down pedal this. They've really tried to go under the radar so no one knew what was going on. But there are some people who know. And I don't know if your listeners know, I mean, here in America, we are losing more and more rights every day to freedom of speech and expression, which again, from the inception of our nation is unknown. We've always had the rights to freedom of speech and expression, but we're seeing them squelch, particularly through social media companies. But people are finding out. So in America, because we are a constitutional republic where people can contact their representatives and let them know what they think, people are letting their senators and representatives know, we, don't want Joe Biden's plans to succeed. We don't want the World Health Organization to to take over our sovereign choices on healthcare.
We wanna keep our choices on healthcare.
So people are trying to get that message out. It's tough, it's a tough environment to get that message, but we're always hopeful. The one thing about Americans, they tend to be very optimistic.
And just like we saw last year, it was literally a miracle where countries like Botswana and some African nations pushed back and stopped this from passing.
They raised real concerns. There's no reason why people can't contact their representatives in the UK, in England, in Scotland, in Wales, in other nations throughout Europe to let your country know you have a vote.
Every single country has a vote. There's 194 votes.
Every country can register opposition and say, look, we're not giving over sovereignty to the World Health Organization.
Because trust me, it won't be just healthcare, it will expand.
And for instance, there's some language that I've read in the global pandemic treaty, but also with the healthcare amendments in Geneva, Switzerland, where they're saying that if a country is deemed to be racist, that that would be considered a health problem, or from climate change, if something is deemed to be climate change, the World Health Organization steps in. So it's about two steps away from world government. That's really what this is. So don't delude yourself into thinking this is only about trying to help poor countries during a pandemic. This has nothing to do with that. This is all about empowering a global entity. So this global entity will be able to force all governments to do its bidding.
And the number one question I get, Peter, from people is, well, Michele, this would never happen because if the World Health Organization told our country to do something that we didn't want to do, our government wouldn't go along with it. Well, if Joe Biden is the lead instigator of handing over this sovereignty to the World Health Organization, I think he will be the enforcer because we will lose massive rights.
And if there's one thing that history teaches us, it's this.
Once you give up power, once you lose freedom, it's very difficult to get it back.
And when it comes back, if it comes back, it's in a very different form.
So a country like the United States was very unique when it was founded.
And we've seen our own freedoms and our own rights chipped away to an extent that people in the United States, frankly, don't even recognize our country anymore.
And we've been the nation that people have looked to, to help safeguard their rights. If the United States is no longer open and free and able to help safeguard other nations' rights, then where do we go. We all see what's happening, this is no clandestine story.
Communist China has very clear designs on ruling the world. Just a couple of weeks ago, Xi Jinping was in Moscow with Putin, and he said, we will rule the new global order, the new global alliance. He said it three times during his visit. And again, if history teaches us anything, it's when a madman speaks, listen, Xi Jinping is stating the obvious, and he wouldn't state it unless he felt China was at the threshold of being able to accomplish this. They see the United States as past tense. They see themselves not only at the ascendancy, but just about to grab the brass ring of global domination. And part of that domination is having the 194 nations blindly and voluntarily give up their sovereignty on health care to the World Health Organization.
Because Communist China knows they control the organization anyway, and then they can project their power to dominate the rest of the globe and be the true hegemon, the true leader globally if we have foolishly given away our power to the World Health Organization.
And then just recognize the world will never be in the same place. So this isn't just doom and gloom despair. That's not what I'm saying. The reason why I'm saying this is we're free men, free women. At least that's what the advertising is. We're free men, free women. And so we've got to do what prior generations have done. We have to act. We have to make our voices heard, but we have to let our own governments know.
And if a country like Botswana could have tipped the tide last year, why couldn't England this year? Why couldn't Wales this year?
Why couldn't Scotland this year?
Or Ireland or any other country? Of course we can.
And so we're trying to get to every person that we can here in the United States, even though Republicans aren't in charge, it's the Democrats that are in charge, but we still have a voice and we can still pray.
I'm a Christian, I believe in the God of the Bible, I pray, he's performed miracles when everything is impossible, there's a miracle.
And so I think there's always room for optimism, always room for joy and hope.
And we cry out to the God who created us and we ask him to deliver us.
It's a perfect end and I've seen miracles many times in my life, I attest to that, Michele, when God steps in and does what is impossible makes it possible. But thank you for, this is a huge subject and just happening next month in Geneva and the viewers need to be aware of it. So thank you for coming along and sharing what's happening. And I think it is a rallying call for people to act, to engage with their elected officials and encourage them to vote properly at that assembly. So thank you so much for your time, Michele.
You're welcome. And Peter, it's not over until it's over. A lot of people that evil designs before and they were foiled. This one could be foiled too.