by Carlo Freccero
London – An international agreement of fundamental importance is about to be approved to definitively deny us any future democratic choices regarding healthcare and personal freedom.
Not only.
Since it is an international treaty, which once approved, will escape any subsequent attempt at popular abrogation by referendum.
The World Health Organization has presented a draft global pandemic agreement.
I have not had time to examine the treaty directly, but only a summary of it.
I will definitely do that later.
But having taken note of the role played by the WHO in the recent pandemic, the mere hypothesis of strengthening its functions can only be judged inappropriate and aberrant.
According to the WHO, states should renounce their culture, and the human rights to which they have already adhered at the time, in the name of rights such as: “equity, inclusiveness and coherence“, which mean nothing if not blind obedience, to interests of the great economic powers.
After having turned the concept of pandemic and health upside down, the WHO turns human rights upside down.
There is a unique element of optimism in all this.
Following the economic sanctions on Russia, many states around the world are freeing themselves from dollar globalism to seek mutual support in the new economic and monetary reality of the BRICS and its nascent currency.
For the first time, Western will is being scaled back and we can see, at the very least, an escape from the de facto Colonial State of a large number of countries that until recently were considered Third World.
Globalization has paradoxically made them stronger and freer. They may not sign the Treaty.
But for us who live in Europe there are reasons for pessimism.
Globalization is narrowing to the so-called West, Europe and the Five Eyes.
And in Europe, Italy represents the weakest link in the chain.
We are strangled by public debt and rising interest rates and the government does nothing but reconfirm its absolute loyalty to Atlanticism, to NATO, to Europe and its fetishes: War and Vaccines.
The states that join will be bound to obey laws dictated by the WHO which will transform the world into a health dictation, equal to or more stringent than the one from which only now, after three years of confinement, harassment, denial of fundamental rights we thought we would emerge .
Precisely in recent days, the terrible side effects of vaccines were timidly beginning to be revealed and, at the same time, corruption, the interests of pharmaceutical companies, the systematic cover-up of the truth by the government.
But while we begin to organize ourselves to ask for compensation and a commission of inquiry, we do not realize that this whole scenario does not belong to the past, but risks becoming our future.
Why doesn’t anyone protest?
Why isn’t the public aware of the risk we run?
Because the media agenda is always out of sync with the present and is only willing to report a scandal when the desired result has been achieved anyway and there is nothing left to do.
Paradoxically, in the deafening silence of the media on the WHO problem, someone has spoken up.
Bill Gates declared that we are on the eve of a new pandemic that will be more virulent than the previous one and all this requires us to prevent the worst by studying rigid global intervention strategies and the creation of a permanent Talk Force.
In practice, an endorsement of the WHO draft, based on a dramatic hypothesis of imminent new diseases.
Will there be a new pandemic?
You can swear by it.
Gates is the largest private financier of the WHO and decides on everyone’s health worldwide. It is no coincidence that the WHO has dedicated the current decade to vaccination trials.
For the WHO, healthcare no longer means the fight against malnutrition, the lack of minimum hygienic conditions and the simple treatment of existing pathologies.
As the WHO itself declared, at the request of its main financier, the world health agenda has become a vaccination agenda.
And to promote vaccines, new pandemics are always essential. Who knows why in the history of humanity pandemics are remembered as epochal catastrophes, which manifest themselves centuries apart from each other and today instead they do nothing but manifest themselves without interruption and without even having time to record them: Avian flu, Zika , Swine, Monkeypox, of course Covid and its variants.
The only legal remedy permitted by governments around the world: vaccines. We are destined to become pincushions, new Saint Sebastian, to host the infinite inoculations to which we are and will be subject in the future.
Trust in science is required, but what qualifications does Bill Gates have to embody science? He was a computer scientist with no qualifications in computer engineering. He proclaims himself a philanthropist interested in the common good, but it is Philanthropy that has made him one of the richest men in the world.
He dictates the agenda for World Health, but he has no degree or specialization in medicine.
I would like to clarify that if I focus on the figure of Bill Gates, it is not because he considers him the strategist of everything.
On the contrary, the plan is the result of small but collective entities such as the WEF in Davos.
But to achieve globalization and the new World Order it was chosen to exploit healthcare, as any restriction resulting from healthcare can be justified with the common good, while fascism is naturally rebellion against the old war.
In this context, also given the proven eugenic faith of him and his family, Bill Gates somehow represents the perfect testimonial of the operation. In fact, in the healthcare field Gates is considered an undisputed authority by the mainstream.
Currently, as a representative of GAVI and Bill and Melinda Gates, he decides on the health fate of the planet.
But how was all this possible?
How did we get to the dystopia we are living in?
I report here a chronology that I recovered largely from the very interesting studies carried out by the lawyer Alessandra Devetag at the time of the Lorenzin law.
It was then necessary to stop this devastating project.
But let’s see its genesis:
1. 2000.- On the initiative of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, GAVI, the Global Alliance for Vaccination, was born, a private foundation under Swiss law founded on a public/private partnership. GAVI members are the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, WHO, World Bank, UNICEF, GAVI will subsequently purchase large stakes in the major pharmaceutical companies.
2. 2002 Italy joins GAVI.
3. 2009 The WHO changes the definition of pandemic. According to the WHO, there are three conditions for us to speak of a pandemic:
- a) Appearance of a new pathogen, for which there are no known official treatments.
- b) Capacity of this agent to affect human beings.
- c) Ability of this agent to spread by contagion. The severity specification is cleared. Therefore, even viruses with a very low mortality rate can be declared a pandemic. In practice, a new equivalent of a cold (the cold is not the product of a new pathogen) could be declared a pandemic and set the global prevention machine in motion.
4. 2010 At the DAVOS ECONOMIC FORUMS the Gates Foundation offers 10 billion dollars on condition that the “Vaccine Decade” is declared.
5. 2012 On 22/26 May, during the WHO General Assembly in Geneva and at the request of Gates, the director in charge proclaims the decade of vaccines.
6. 2014 Italy is awarded the role of Leader of global strategies by the Global Health Agenda in Washington on 29 September. Minister Lorenzin and Ranieri Guerra represent Italy.
7. 2016 On 8 July the FNOMCEO (portal of the National Federation of Orders of Surgical Doctors and Dentists) publishes the Document on Vaccines which lays the foundations for all subsequent censorship in the vaccination field for all the professional categories involved:
- a) For a doctor, advising against vaccination becomes an ethical violation
- b) The Judiciary in decisions on the cause/effect relationship between vaccines and damage to health must follow the Scientific Method. Dictates that the Constitutional Court seems to have implemented in its recent ruling, in which reference is made to Science rather than to the Constitution.
- c) Ministry of Health and competent authorities must challenge any ruling that recognizes a causal link between vaccines and autism.
8. 2017/18 Following the previous document, several doctors were struck off.
9. 2017 Lorenzin’s DL on the compulsory nature of 10 pediatric vaccines under penalty of sanctions and exclusion from school.
10. 2018 On 11 January, Law No. 3 was promulgated which in chapter 1 establishes that “the orders and the related National Federations:
- a) They are public and non-economic bodies and act as State Subsidiary Orders in order to protect the public interests, guaranteed by the Regulation, connected to the exercise of the profession.
11. 2018 In December, Minister Lorenzin concludes an agreement with the National Press Union, an agreement according to which the press will no longer be able to publish news that is not “scientifically validated”.
12. 2023 The last stage of this ideal path is constituted by the 2023/25 vaccination plan presented in recent days by the Meloni Government which reconfirms the government’s devotion to vaccines in full continuity with the line followed starting from the Lorenzin decree.
How can we talk about the “Ethical and Social Value” of vaccinations after the dramatic experience of disabling side effects and sudden deaths that we have experienced and are experiencing?
And what will the fight against “vaccination hesitancy” by all means be if not in a systematic war on the freedom of choice of minorities?
On the basis of all national and international agreements to which Italy has joined, the vaccine becomes the fulcrum of every initiative.
And, above all, any objection, investigation or information on vaccines is censored a priori. This distortion by which the vaccine becomes the center of international and national politics is, as we have seen, sanctioned by a series of laws that muzzle and preventively cancel any criticism.
A reassuring picture does not emerge.
Today public opinion is convinced by the unanimity of thought in favor of the vaccine.
If everyone agrees, from the judiciary to the press, to doctors, what reason can there be to doubt?
As for the public who follows television shows, I believe that if they had access to all the information we have reviewed, they would necessarily disagree and change their opinion.
What everyone judges to be the free expression of science is nothing more than a forced script, constructed around the table by large international philanthropic associations to reduce medicine to a simple expression of the vaccine.
And behind the vaccine there are colossal interests that suggest macroscopic conflicts of interest.
But above all, knowing the truth places a serious threat on the very concept of science.
For two years we have been hearing the mantra that we must obey in the name of science. But, the science in question is not the free expression of medicine, but a STATE SCIENCE as we have already known it in the worst authoritarian systems.
Other scientific visions such as Eugenics were the basis of Nazism’s aberrant policies.
And medical experiments conducted without authorization from the concentration camps were condemned and punished by the Nuremberg Tribunal.
Following this, to prevent the abjection of medical treatments imposed against the patient’s will from being renewed, the Nuremberg Judicial Committee was drawn up by the Nuremberg Code which prohibits any forced medical intervention, especially if it is experimental. Science is not always synonymous with truth and justice.
Every time we want to cancel democracy we resort to some transcendent and, as such, irrefutable principle.
The simulacrum of science represents the last idol on which to build an anti-democratic system.
The Overton window set in motion in 2000 made certainties natural that we would then have considered aberrant.
In particular the identification between science, vaccines and truth. But why did we allow all this to happen?
Because we didn’t understand the importance of these international regulations then.
Our attention was focused by the mainstream media only on the political dialectics within the country, with a continuous infotainment which, instead of going to the heart of the real problems, merely brought us a sort of gossip on the biography of the protagonists of the political theater and on their externalizations.
Decisions have been made in Europe for some time, and, before in Europe, in large international organizations. But the European Parliament is not a parliament capable of making real political choices.
These choices fall to the European Commission and the European Commission, in turn, is hostage to the global economic lobbies and corrupted by a macroscopic conflict of interests, as emerged, in part, with Qatargate.
Only at the internal level of the States did and does exist a semblance of democracy and the defenders of democracy itself have concentrated on this. I myself was misled into looking at the venue as the only theater in existence.
In the recent past and still in the present, everyone’s attention was and is focused on respect for a Constitution which is, in fact, weakened and surrounded by an insurmountable fence of international agreements.
At the time I fought the battle against Renzi’s constitutional reform, the positive outcome of which reassured Italians.
But while we intervened from within to save the Constitution, we were played from the outside by the large international bodies, with laws for which we are paying the price today.
We continued to think in terms of national states, of the sovereignty of the people, of the common good, while private bodies such as the WEF were set up capable of imposing the interests of multinationals on large international organizations and states. We have continued to consider large organizations such as the UN, UNESCO, WHO, IMF as devoted to the common good of humanity, while, more prosastically, they are expensive bandwagons willing to support the interests of whoever is able to finance them.
And at the local level we have closed our eyes to the fact that today, following the US model, even local politics depends on propaganda.
But propaganda is expensive and those who want to be elected must subsequently reward their financiers.
We have, at least in part, opened our eyes with the Covid operation, which seems to have been nothing more than the dress rehearsal of a subsequent and definitive healthcare dictatorship.
But we have short memories, and this brief healthcare truce, in which our attention is turned elsewhere, to new dramatic dangers, of which war seems the most urgent, perhaps deluded us that the danger of healthcare dictatorship was behind us.
The new WHO project tells us that the danger is not overcome and makes us understand that the inattention of public opinion represents the strength of globalist power.
Carlo Freccero
