Login
What should we expect next in the move to advance global governance, control the masses and restrict freedoms and fundamental rights?
Experts — including Dr. Meryl Nass and attorneys W. Scott McCollough and Greg Glaser — weighed in on that question and discussed strategies for fighting back in last week’s episode of CHD.TV’s “Friday Roundtable.”
Glaser told host Aimee Villella McBride that Amazon Sidewalk — a “community network” that allows anyone with an Amazon smart device to connect to other Amazon users’ wireless networks over large distances — is a paradigmatic example of new forms of surveillance. It offers convenience in exchange for collecting and aggregating user data.
In Los Angeles, Glaser said, the Smart City Initiative is rolling out plans to install listening devices, cameras and localized wifi networks like Amazon Sidewalk all across the city. It will use the data it collects from citizens to govern, said Glaser, who is investigating the LA Smart City Initiative for Children’s Health Defense (CHD).
Glaser said:
“CCTV [closed-circuit television] cameras [will be] watching you, listening. That means that if, for example, there’s a gunshot in your neighborhood, the police will automatically get called …
“[But] this AI [artificial intelligence] technology can also pick up conversations. So imagine you’re having a conversation with your child or with a friend, and you happen to mention something that the government doesn’t like.”
“Every single thing the city does is now being turned into a smart program,” Glaser added. “Smart just means that they are engaged in very advanced surveillance using the latest technology.”
Glaser discovered documents outlining city proposals to put facial recognition inside people’s homes to track them.
“If, for example, the facial recognition technology observes that you are dehydrated, they will send you a notice, like a text message. And if you don’t respond to the notice, then they will potentially call social services out to check on you,” he said.
CHD is fighting back, Glaser said, by exposing the plans, litigating to protect people’s rights to privacy and organizing long-term solutions, such as laws requiring that people must “opt-in” rather than “opt-out” of sharing their data.
McBride asked McCollough how all this data can be used against people.
McCollough said the next steps are already in motion. After the vaccine passport, implemented in some places during the COVID-19 pandemic, the next step is the biometric digital ID.
A digital ID will connect all information collected about people, including medical, financial, consumer, geographical and even verbal data, McCollough said.
“This is all collected up into a profile for you that will be tied to this digital biometric ID. And then it will be used ultimately to control what you can do, where you can go, how you can go there, you know, whether you can buy certain foods.”
He added that it can even monitor how you manage your children. “Alexa can pick up some conversation you have with your child,” he said. “It goes into your profile.”
The WHO’s so-called ‘One Health’
McBride noted that the World Health Organization (WHO) last week announced the launch of the Global Digital Health Certification Network to promote a global interoperable digital vaccine passport.
McCollough said the “so-called ‘One Health’” plan being negotiated is a way to regulate animals, ecosystems and people and will be directed to “regulate our health in order to obtain higher social goals, including the Great Reset.”
He added that the proposed amendments to the 2005 International Health Regulations would give the WHO’s director-general the power to declare a “public health emergency of international concern” and control the global response. Both state and non-state actors would be forced to comply with measures dictated by the WHO.
McCollough said the kind of smart city technologies Glaser described can then be used to monitor and control people.
According to Nass, One Health has been so broadly defined as “to include everything in the world as part of the concept of One Health, which then gives the director-general of the WHO jurisdiction over everything in the world.” It would allow him to determine how people can move, what medication they can access and more, she said.
“And they have specifically said climate change may be one of the emergencies,” she said.
Nass added the newest justification for top-down control is reducing excess methane, a greenhouse gas that is released into the environment during oil and gas extraction, through natural processes, and is also given off by cows.
“And so suddenly the globalists are going after cows,” Nass said. Ireland is using it to justify killing off 200,000 cows, she said, despite the fact that there are other ways to reduce methane produced by livestock.
“But obviously the problem isn’t methane,” she said, “The problem is control.”
Opting out?
Nass cautioned against the idea that people can simply “opt out” of these digital control programs because there are a lot of “fake opt-outs” for things, such as sharing medical records, where people think they are opting out, but their data is still collected.
McBride asked McCollough, who heads up litigation for CHD’s Electromagnetic Radiation program, to comment on the health impacts that exist in addition to privacy concerns.
McCollough said the WHO classified radio frequency in electromagnetic fields as possibly carcinogenic to humans in 2011, but that now he anticipates there will be a move to lift these emission standards to expand surveillance capacities.
“So the World Health Organization, on the one hand, is requiring surveillance, and on the other hand has charge of setting the standards for the wireless aspect of the networks that will be conducting the surveillance,” he said.
If they do that, he said, people won’t have the opportunity “to opt out of irradiation” because it will be the basis for total surveillance.
“With this digital ID and with the rollout of all these technologies, we need to have the right to say no,” Glaser said, pointing to the Fourth Amendment — which protects against unreasonable search and seizure — as the key safeguard. It is important to keep these surveillance interests out of the home, he said.
McCollough said people are being conditioned to accept these surveillance technologies through facial recognition, QR codes and other smartphone functions.
People’s smart devices are proxies for people themselves, he said, adding:
“To the network, your device is you. And whenever you interact with the network, whether it be to look at one of these menus … or any other purpose, your device is you interacting with the network.
“Not only is it receiving information, it is sending information, it identifies the device, it is able to correlate that information with what they already have about you. And again, if there is ever a biometric digital ID, it will all be stored in that …
“Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. Don’t waive your Fourth Amendment.”
How can people rise up, resist and stand firm?
McBride closed out the roundtable asking the panelists for their thoughts on how people can rise up, resist and stand firm in the face of these systemic challenges.
Nass said there are laws that protect and enshrine informed consent and people should demand their legislators to protect them.
McCollough emphasized that states have “immense power” and suggested people appeal to their state representatives to refuse to go along with the WHO mandates.
He also said people need to be willing to sacrifice some of the conveniences of contemporary surveillance technologies to protect their privacy.
“It is going to be necessary to not only say no, but to live the consequences that follow from it. You’re gonna have to give up some of these so-called conveniences if you want to protect your rights. Frankly, it’s not that hard …
“In other words, get a life that’s not digital.”
Nass added that it might be more difficult than people think to resist at the state level, because the WHO proposals are set up to take over all jurisdictions during an emergency.
The WHO also established a mechanism to circumvent the necessary treaty ratification by proposing the treaty be activated on a preliminary basis without ratification, she said. That’s why 48 congressmen signed a bill to exit the WHO.
Glaser emphasized the legal importance of switching from a situation where we “opt out” of technologies and rules that violate our privacy to having to “opt in” to give up our data. He also said it is important to build allies.
McBride agreed, saying, “Connect locally with your community … Know your farm, know your food sources, know people who can help you to homeschool, know every which way that you can become less reliant on the government and the systems that they want us to become enslaved in.”
McBride also encouraged people to get involved with CHD’s Great Freeset campaign.
“This is one of the most important campaigns we’ve done to date here at CHD,” she said. “We need everyone taking part in and sharing this,” she said.
Watch here:
