La gran batalla que se avecina: los derechos humanos

10 de febrero de 2022

Fecha:10 de febrero de 2022

Secciones de contenido

  • Transgressions of human rights
  • Slippery slope: authoritarianism to transhumanism?
  • The authoritarians
  • Don’t put all your eggs in the natural law basket

Por Rob Verkerk PhD, fundador, director ejecutivo y científico

As co-chair of the Health & Humanities Committee of the World Council for Health, I experienced a reality check last night on our biweekly call as we received the latest reports from our Canadian colleagues. 

A Canadian dentist had her clinic raided the previous day — without any justification, perhaps other than she had spoken out about the benefits of ivermectin for early treatment of covid-19.

Dr Mark Trozzi, an emergency medicine doctor walked away from his secure job a year ago when he was being forced to follow orders that didn’t align with the medical oath to which he had sworn some 3 decades ago. He’s been working full-time as a campaigner since, through his website drtrozzi.org. He’s been among the leader of Canada’s resistance movement to Trudeau’s increasingly tyrannical regime.

Mark had the latest detail direct from the frontlines of the truckers’ Freedom Convoy in Ottawa. Other doctors and scientists we know well were among those holed up in a cabin on the frontline. Police still answering to Trudeau’s corrupt regime are now apparently fining people trying to get food to them. The mainstream media describe the Freedom Convoy demonstrators as “domestic terrorists” or worse, yet Mark described nothing but kindness, compassion and peacefulness – all in the name of defending human rights.

 

 

 

 

 

Dr Mark Trozzi, drtrozzi.org

>>> Dr Mark Trozzi report from the front lines in Ottawa, Feb 3, 2022

>>> Listen to Dr Mark Trozzi’s powerful, 8 minute, “30,000 foot view” of the last two years, urging people to help uphold the rule of law, Feb 9, 2022

Transgressions of human rights

What’s happened under the auspices of the so-called Covid-19 ‘pandemic’ is likely the most widespread transgression of international law meted out to the people of our planet. It eclipses the numbers, while not as yet the severity, of the atrocities and genocide committed illegally during the Second World War.

Many will be asking the question: why can’t the courts stop these transgressions? Will those responsible be held accountable? Will there be a Nuremberg 2? The simple answer is: possibly, in time. But right now, substantial parts of the legal system, like the medical system, the food system, the energy system, the banking system and every other instrument controlled by the planet’s current power brokers, is corrupted. Deliberately so.

As I’ve alluded, this corruption is a generality and there are exceptions. Exceptions that hold the key to the restoration of natural order. Through this fog of corruption, are thousands of court cases in different states of progress, many challenging abuses by governments, political leaders, pharmaceutical and tech companies, of some of the most fundamental and unalienable tenets long associated with civilised society.

A remarkable project that will be collating, among other relevant laws and treaties, the legal actions during the covid era is being developed by a team of lawyers from over 12 countries (the ‘BFA Team’). They are closely linked to the Law and Activism Committee of the World Council for Health, of which I am also a member. The project is entitled the Bio-Freedom Accords (BFA) Initiative.

The project will launch in March – but a beta-test that is showing the unfolding database of relevant treaties and cases can be found here.

Slippery slope: authoritarianism to transhumanism?

Many of the problems we now face in terms of the restrictions to our civil and human rights are linked to the authoritarian and totalitarian regimes around us, many of which are linked to central control mechanisms operating through organisations like the World Health Organization, the International Monetary Fund, and the World Economic Forum. 

Such authoritarianism has ended in horrific ways before, e.g. Holocaust, Stalin, Khmer Rouge, Rwanda. But these devastating acts of genocide were all preceded by a slippery slope that was ignored by what genocide specialist and psychologist Dr Ervin Staub calls ‘passive bystanders’.   

Authoritarian regimes typically emerge during crises that are used to generate fear in populations. The silent, fear-filled majority suck up false ideologies like a starving anteater, having disengaged the rational and reasoning parts of their minds (frontal cortex), reverting to their primitive brains. Scapegoats are manufactured by the ‘in-group’ and those who oppose the ideology become ever more marginalised and fragmented. Sound familiar?

Only when the out-group becomes sufficiently coherent in its arguments, as well as organised, exposing in the process the flawed ideologies, can the regime be up-ended. This requires revolution, not sitting on your sofa clicking buttons on your phone or television. Historically, revolutions have often, but not always, been bloody. We don’t yet know how the system we’re living through will be up-ended but more and more of us are confident the dominant regimes that are restricting freedoms presently and force-injecting billions of people with experimental genetic products without consent, injections that have unknown long-term consequences on humanity, will be toppled. There are enough emerging data of cover-ups and under-reporting to be deeply concerned, as well as clear evidence for lack of justifiable medical need to indiscriminately inject populations of all ages and health status. There has to be another driver.

Gene-edited human beings is not fanciful science fiction; this transhuman agenda is out there in the open; see the World Economic Forum (WEF) website and this UK Ministry of Defence report published last May for example. Or WEF founder Klaus Schwab’s 2017 book, the Fourth Industrial Revolution, or ex-Health Minister Matt Hancock’s launch of a UK All-Party Parliamentary Group on the Fourth Industrial Revolution in the same year.

If you need a little reprieve and balance from all of this, dive into a short critique on transhumanism, as linked to capitalism, by world leading social scientist, Professor Steve Fuller, author of some 25 books, including Humanity 2.0.

The authoritarians

In 10 days time, I’m going to interview, for our Speaking Naturally series, leading US constitutional lawyer Jonathan Emord, whom I am lucky enough to call a friend and colleague. Shortly after, we’ll release the interview, and I have to say, it’s one I am particularly excited about given Jonathan’s virtuosic grasp of constitutional law. Jonathan is sometimes referred to as the ‘FDA dragon slayer’ as he is the only lawyer to have successfully challenged the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). More than this, he’s done it 8 times, 3 times on behalf of our sister organisation, ANH-USA.

I urge you to read his remarkable book, published last year and entitled ‘Their Assault on Individual Liberty, the Constitution, and Free Enterprise from the 19th Century to the Present’ (Morgan James Publishing llc, 2021). It is incredibly timely and a veritable feast.  

Jonathan Emord, Esq., President, Emord & Associates

The book sets the historical scene internationally, that alone is fascinating. It then zones in on the US and the critical importance of the US Constitution. It details the emergence of the administrative state, the battle between individual rights and collectivism, the rise of tyranny and the erosion of democracy – all processes that had been ongoing long before the events of early 2020 unfolded and the WHO declared a pandemic. It even deals with the issue of covid-19 injection mandates, confidently classifying them as unconstitutional and therefore illegal. It also very helpfully details the many actions we, the people, can take to restore our unalienable rights. But that won’t happen unless we speak up, hold the line and fight for what we believe in. 

Many of us dissenting scientists, medics and campaigners are looking very closely at legal frameworks given our mutual interest in progressing legal action that holds certain individuals and companies accountable.

Some are so disillusioned with the corrupted legal system they have disbanded any notion of engaging with it. They revert instead to other legal frameworks, that are in essence only theoretical and conceptual, rather than valid legally, such as natural law or positive law. These frameworks may provide vital guidance for our moral and ethical compasses, but they offer little traction if we’re to hold the perpetrators of human rights abuses accountable. They are also often interpreted very differently in different parts of the world.

The reality is that complex networks and systems always have both backbones and some kind of hierarchy. That includes the human body.  Such hierarchies don’t need to be oppressive. Quite the reverse, when done right, they facilitate the function of the whole network and system.

Lawful systems are also hierarchical – constitutions typically sit on the second rung from the top, with treaties, where they are relevant, occupying top spot. This is expounded in some detail in Dinah Shelton’s 2006 article, ‘Normative Hierarchy in International Law’. 

This means that legal systems will always revert to the highest level of the hierarchy (i.e. evoke the principle of legal primacy) when lower levels fail to deliver a clear perspective or verdict. 

Countries like the UK, which after all pioneered legal frameworks for much of what is now the industrialised, Western world, are hampered somewhat by not having a written constitution. It is a good thing that people like Robert Blackburn (professor of Constitutional Law, King’s College London) are pushing hard through a parliamentary select committee to establish a written constitution – a Magna Carta II if you will. Many of the ideas Prof Blackburn and his team propose draw from the most effective elements of the US Constitution, a constitution that is being roundly flouted by Biden’s administration, probably most visibly in the area of injection mandates.     

Don’t put all your eggs in the natural law basket

So, here’s my take home. It’s too early to escape into the realms of natural and positive law. They are mere concepts, theories or philosophies that are as useful as a chocolate fireguard when it comes to wrestling back civil rights stolen from us, or holding perpetrators accountable.

>>> Read the 2012 article by John Finnis (Notre Dame Law School) on ‘Natural Law Theory: Its Past and Its Present’

I’ll agree that ‘natural law’ has a lovely ring about it, and, in every other realm, anything with the word ‘natural’ in it gets my vote. But in this context, failing to engage with the badly wounded legal system and reverting to natural law alone is a passport to being cast as irrelevant. Not a good way to win a revolution. Even common law (either the its legal form,  comprised of case law and precedents, or the common law of the land), might be supplanted by statutes, constitutions (where they exist) or even treaties.

To win this battle, least of all for the current generations alive today, much more so for the many that are to follow, we need to be able to sway the silent 40% who know something is wrong but have yet to become active in their revolt. They are unlikely to disengage from the dominant and prevailing legal frameworks around them.

Natural law will, however, always provide us with a weathervane to help us make sense of events. Take GoFundMe’s effort to try to divert the around Canadian $10million collected for the Freedom Convoy. Natural law has ensured that GoFundMe is exposed for its wrongdoing and the people who had donated have demonstrated their capacity to hold the company to ransom.

In the area of health care, that has been so heavily infiltrated by authoritarian administrations fuelled by the perennially greedy and power-hungry pharma industry, we will have even less traction using philosophies of law as our primary battleground when they have no substantive legal basis. And as hard as these wins will be (I gather from my colleagues in the Law and Activism Committee of the World Council for Health, there have been some 140 court wins since the covid era began), it is these that will be vital to the de-corruption of existing and continually evolving legal systems.

One final call: Let’s drop any residual fears over this now relatively innocuous virus, re-engage our frontal cortices, and get ready for a much bigger battle ahead for humanity: the one that involves the restoration of our unalienable human rights.

The cost of losing the battle will likely include global governance, a centralised digital currency, transhumanism and everything in between. It’s just not worth us losing if we care for humanity.

NOTE: A UK government consultation is currently open, and closes at one minute to midnight on 8 March, asking for public views on its planned reform of the Human Rights Act. There are many problems with the planned reform, some of which substantially limit existing civil rights. Within the next two weeks, we will be issuing some guidance to help draw attention to the limitations of the proposed reform, as well as providing wording and ideas that could be used to create robust responses to the consultation. Please stay tuned.

If you’re not already signed up  to our weekly newsletter, you can do so for free of charge from our homepage, or you can become a Pathfinder member for a nominal monthly fee: see below).  

>>> Has this article generated questions for you? Did you know our ANH Pathfinder Members get a free monthly Q&A as part of their annual membership? Why not Join us!

>>> For extensive covid-19 curated content please visit covidzone.org

>>> Volver a la página de inicio

 

Orgullosamente afiliado a: Enough Movement Coalition socio de: Consejo Mundial de la Salud