Our political leaders of the West are a part of this WEF which plans to enslave the “common” citizens of the West via the climate scam and other man made programs such as the recent virus plandemic. Here two Aussies are visiting Davos just before the elite arrive to form plans that will affect your life!
‘Have you heard of the World Economic Forum? It’s a secret club where the world’s wealthiest oligarchs meet with globalist politicians to develop schemes to tell the rest of us how to live.
People like Bill Gates. Xi Jinping. Justin Trudeau. And Anthony Fauci.
The WEF’s founder, Klaus Schwab, resembles a cartoonish supervillain from a James Bond movie.
‘Thursday, February 10, 2022 at 1:30 PM in the Des Moines, Iowa Capitol Representative Jon Jacobsen held a subcommittee meeting to discuss The Medical Privacy & Freedom Act HSB 647 in which citizens provided testimonies with their stories of injury, discrimination, coercion, and job loss as a result of mandates. Speakers traveled from across the state and were set to speak in the capitol until midnight or later. 34th District Democratic Representative Bruce Hunter became very upset with the incontestable testimonies that did not fall in line with his agenda and stormed off. Representative Jacobsen claimed he would continue taking testimonies in the capitol until morning if necessary; however, his plan fell short as people in opposition to the bill were disturbed by the indisputable testimonies and forced everyone to leave around 8 PM. Determined to provide everyone with a voice, Jon Jacobsen continued to take recorded testimonies at a bar down the street up until around 11:30 PM. The recorded testimonies from the bar were entered into the Iowa Capitol archives by February 18, 2022.
Registered Nurse, Jennifer Scott, reflects on all the lost employees resulting in a shortage of medical professionals due to vaccine mandates. She also continues to mention that they are having to bring in out-of-state medical professionals as contractors sometimes at 3 times the cost who are not vaccinated anyways. This results in more taxpayer money leaving Iowa when the problem could have been easily averted, had mandates never been put in place.’https://rumble.com/vzmjlk-nurse-complains-about-staffing-shortages-due-to-vaccine-mandates.html?mref=6zof&mc=dgip3&ep=2
‘Dr. Jane Ruby is a medical professional and pharmaceutical drug development expert with over 20 years’ experience in regulatory processes for drug approval with the FDA and the EMA.
She joined me to show us shock images and footage given to her by an Embalmer, who says that he has never seen anything like this coming out of bodies in his entire career. He advised he started seeing it at the time of the “vaccine” rollout.
We’ve seen the unbelievable microscopy images of the experimental jabs from other investigators around the world, but we wanted to see it for ourselves! There are now 4 teams working on this in New Zealand and Dr Robin Wakeling has agreed to go public with his findings.
In the Australian state of New South Wales ‘The new commemorative birth certificates issued in NSW are missing one thing – and one NSW MP is not happy.
A new “genderless” commemorative birth certificate issued by the NSW Births Deaths and Marriages Registry — which removes information about the sex of a baby — has been slammed as “woke nonsense”.
The colourful certificate — featuring specially designed “genderless” cartoon animals — was launched to help “empower” LGBQIA people, the agency says.
NSW Registrar Amanda Ianna said the rainbow certificate was: a “special way for people to celebrate the birth a new family member”.
Anyone can apply for the certificate, which depicts “genderless native animals” to give “rainbow families the freedom to be seen as they wish to be”.
It comes amid a growing push by the transgender community to remove information about the sex of babies on official certificates, with the Tasmanian parliament recently passing a bill to make gender optional.
But One Nation MP Mark Latham — who asked questions about the new $41 NSW certificate in state parliament — says only 12 people have bothered to apply for one and questions why public servants are “wasting time” on “gender politics”.
The agency spent $9257 on commissioning the artwork, producing it and launching the certificates. The agency already has a number of commemorative birth certificates celebrating football teams but they can’t be used as official proof of identity.
“All this virtue signalling in the public sector ends up being a waste of time, a waste of money and for what?” Mr Latham said.
“Twelve people out of 7.5 million people in the state?
“We just want the public sector to do its day job.
“It defies what most people would regard as the point of a birth certificate, to identify the individual, their date of birth and gender.”
Binary spokeswoman Kirralie Smith raised concerns about harms to children over time with gender being erased.
“This is another step in the appropriation of sex and it will cause harm and confusion for our children,” she said.
“Gender ideology is being imposed in all areas of society and ultimately activists want birth certificates, official documents of identity that rely on facts, to be documents that express feelings rather than fact.
“Gender the way activists use the term, is more like personality expression. It has nothing to do with biological reality, it is grounded in a political ideology.”
‘The Qatari government has set up a multimillion-dollar plan to influence American public opinion by training a new generation of journalists who will legitimize antisemitic, anti-Israel and anti-American positions.
To achieve their goal, the Qatari government partnered with one of the United States’ top-ranking schools, Northwestern University, to establish a satellite campus in the Qatari capital, Doha. Northwestern University Qatar (NU-Q), is completely funded by the Qatari government through two state-run organizations, the Qatar Foundation and the Al Jazeera Media Network.’https://us10.campaign-archive.com/?u=97f5dcf7e199dea4dc3139b76&id=7cd8cdbe60&e=ada4677f66
‘The Online Safety Bill, the most far-reaching online censorship law to ever be proposed in the UK, has been presented to Parliament.
UK Digital, Culture, Media, and Sport (DCMS) Secretary of State Nadine Dorries, said her aim with the bill was to “make the internet, in the UK, the safest place in the world for children and vulnerable young people to go online.”
However, as with many bills that are positioned as a way to keep children safe, this Online Safety Bill contains sweeping speech restrictions that will affect all UK internet users.
The bill requires Big Tech companies to take action against “priority legal but harmful” content which will be decided by the government. The DCMS Secretary of State has the power to add more categories of priority legal but harmful content via secondary legislation in the future.
According to the Financial Times, this secondary legislation “requires less scrutiny from MPs [Members of Parliament] than the original bill.”
Companies are also required to report “emerging harms” to the UK’s communications regulator, the Office of Communications (Ofcom).
Additionally, the Online Safety Bill outlaws sending “knowingly false” communications that are sent “with the intention to cause non-trivial emotional, psychological or physical harm,” requires large social media companies to introduce identity verification tools, gives Ofcom the power to force companies to use “better and more effective” proactive content moderation technology, tasks Big Tech with determining which of its advertisers are pushing scams, mandates that any website hosting pornography put “robust checks in place to ensure that users are 18 years old or over,” and more.
UK citizens who are found guilty of offenses under the Online Safety Bill can be imprisoned or fined.
Not only does the Online Safety Bill contain numerous provisions that can be used to silence UK citizens and punish them for their online speech but powerful “recognised media outlets” are exempt from any regulation in the bill. Some of the outlets that will be getting special carveouts under this bill have even been praised by politicians for pushing for stronger “online safety” laws.
The punishments for companies that fail to censor enough under the Online Safety Bill include having their sites blocked and being hit with multi-billion dollar fines worth up to 10% of their annual turnover. Tech company executives can also be jailed if they fail to cooperate with Ofcom’s information requests.
Despite introducing strong punishments for tech companies that don’t remove enough harmful content, the Online Safety Bill has yet to reveal the categories of legal the harmful content that tech companies will have to target under this bill.
Earlier this week, Dorries said large platforms will be required to remove legal but harmful content “if it is already banned in their own terms and conditions.”
Yet today’s UK government press release for the Online Safety Bill says that the categories of legal but harmful content will be “set by the government and approved by Parliament.” The press release also lists “exposure to self-harm, harassment and eating disorders” as examples of harmful content that online platforms will be required to remove.
The introduction of the Online Safety Bill to Parliament is the first stage of its legislative journey.
Numerous UK rights groups have blasted the Online Safety Bill and warned that it will restrict free speech.
“The Online Safety Bill is set to rip up the rule book as far as traditional British free speech standards are concerned,” Mark Johnson, Legal and Policy Officer at civil liberties group Big Brother Watch, said. “This is a censor’s charter that will give state backing to big tech censorship on a scale that we have never seen before.”
Toby Young, General Secretary of the Free Speech Union, warned that the bill will have a “chilling effect on free speech.”
“We are particularly concerned that the government has said it will force social media platforms to remove ‘legal but harmful’ content, including ‘harassment,’” Young added. “That will enable political activists and interest groups claiming to speak on behalf of disadvantaged groups to silence their opponents by branding any views they disagree with as ‘harassment.’”
Matthew Lesh, Head of Public Policy at the think tank Institute of Economic Affairs said: “The UK threatening tech executives with jail time is eerily similar to how Russia and other authoritarian countries are currently behaving. It is an attack on free speech and entrepreneurialism.”
Before the bill was presented to Parliament, the UK’s main opposition party, the Labour Party, suggested that it would offer little obstruction to the Online Safety Bill and complained that it hadn’t been introduced fast enough.
Last October, Labour Leader Keir Starmer lamented that it has been “three years since the government promised an Online Safety Bill. Starmer also claimed that “the damage caused by harmful content online is worse than ever” and promised to support the bill if its second reading was brought forward to the end of 2021.
More recently, Labour Member of Parliament (MP) and Shadow Culture Secretary Lucy Powell said that Labour supports “the principles of the bill that is finally being published” and claimed that “delay up to this point has come with significant cost.”’https://reclaimthenet.org/uk-online-safety-bill-censorship-parliament/
‘“To prevent World War III and an attack on Russia with nuclear weapons, the Russian government decided to neutralize the threat and restore order in Ukraine” – former Ukrainian P.M. Azarov
A former Prime Minister of Ukraine, Nikolai Azarov, released a message on Facebook claiming that the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) was planning a nuclear attack on Russia. In response to their potential attack, Russia decided to stop the situation and restore order in Ukraine.
“NATO wanted to unleash a third world war by using nuclear weapons against Russia,” Azarov stated. “Since December 2021, Russia has been receiving information about NATO plans to deploy four military brigades (2 land, one navy, one air) on the territory of Ukraine.” One of those brigades could carry nuclear warheads.
Personally, it is very hard to believe the leaders in the West anymore. Putin is bad, no doubt, but is Biden and Australia’s Morrison trust worthy? Psalm 20:7 Some trust in chariots, and some in horses: but we will remember the name of the LORD our God.
whatyareckon 