WHO Pandemic Treaty Debate [Senator Gerard Rennick]

IN Rigged-MEDIA
  • Updated:11 months ago
  • Reading Time:9Minutes
  • Post Words:2091Words
Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Senator Gerard Rennick supporting the Senate Inquiry into the WHO Pandemic Treaty (Debate) Livestreamed 27th March 2023.

WHO Pandemic Treaty Debate [Senator Gerard Rennick]

Livestreamed today 27 March 2023 Full Debate on YouTube | Rumble-Clip | Telegram-Clip

Senator Rennick, acting Deputy President, and I rise today to speak in support of this motion because this motion goes to the essence of democracy. It goes to what our forefathers fought for for the last 250 years. Now, hark back to that great year, 1776, and the great Patriots of the USA fought against a foreign oppression, and I know many of you on the other side like to laugh at that, but that was the flame that lit the light of democracy. That was followed up with the French Revolution, and what makes Western civilization so great is that it is founded on grassroots movements, not unelected elite bureaucrats out there in Switzerland who make these decisions and then use globally controlled media to influence decisions.

I agree with Senator Brown on the fact that I don’t think that we are going to give up our sovereignty to the WHO. In terms of what’s binding and non-binding, I do think that we do risk being influenced by the so-called Vibe, and we saw that in the COVID pandemic where we would religiously slab, the orders or the proclamations from the WHO without any questioning.

We had great big organizations called big organizations under the umbrella of The Trusted News Initiative, giving these commands, and you weren’t allowed to actually question anything, and if you did, you were censored.

We’ve seen that come out recently with the Twitter files where the White House, for example, was influencing social media companies, and anyone that tried to put a story out there about, questioning the safety of the vaccines was immediately barred from social media, and that is not right.

That was a globally coordinated effort.

Now, there were no laws in place to say that any of that was legal, but what was in place was a system of influence that’s been brought about by the centralization of wealth.

I just want to give a bit of a prologue here in this country. I know as I grew up, my first memory of politics was in 1983 when Bob Hawke was elected, and within months of him being elected, he went off to the High Court in order to overthrow a state government that wanted to build a dam. Now, put aside the environmental issues of Franklin Dam. The fact of the matter is that the Labor Party used the Constitution to argue that foreign treaties ought to override state powers, and that undermined democracy. It undermined our own Constitution. The two great protectionists of this party, the founding the founder first two prime ministers of this country when they helped formulate the Constitution, said that the federal government should have powers over foreign powers. That meant that foreign treaties could override domestic law, and that’s exactly what the Franklin Dam decision did, and it was a start of unwinding our sovereignty in this country. [missed the rest of this section due to the livestream audio failing] (01) (02)

In 1985, Paul Keating let foreign banks into this country without any capital controls, and that mattered because for the next 30 years, we sort of go out on a borrowing spree. We went from 8 billion they had eight billion in debt in 1985 to 800 billion debt in 2007, and all of that money went into housing. There were no controls over how much we needed manufacturing or industry. If I had my way, for every dollar that we borrow offshore for housing, another dollar has to go into industry. We have to cap down on this foreign debt because it is another form of influence. (03) (04) (05) (06) (07) (08)

  • I can’t locate anything that correlates to his Australian debt figures. It seems he is misspoke about the World figures here because the world was in debt $800 billion in that year. I’ll wait for Hansard transcript and see if there’s a correction, or a reliable source of what he’s talking about because I can’t find it.

Then we had the Button plan, which ultimately destroyed manufacturing in this country. It destroyed the great state of Victoria, and that was followed up by the Dawkins plan, which then brought in and empowered universities. So we’ve basically got rid of our manufacturing industry, we’ve replaced it and empowered it with these Marxists in universities that go around and undermine the working population. (09) (10) (11)

And to cap it all off, then, we had superannuation, which basically funded the sale of our infrastructure to unelected officials in superannuation, along with foreign ownership, and that superannuation has centralized all the battlers’ wealth in this country, so that we’ve got now, for example, the industry funds, they use one proxy manager, they own over 20% of all the major top 50 companies in Australia, and they vote together with that one proxy vote.

And what’s happened in Australia has also happened overseas. We have wealth managers like BlackRock, Vanguard, who have controlling interests in NBC, controlling interests in Pfizer. These people, the people that sit on the boards, they also sit on the NIH, and there are massive conflicts of interest. And that is where we get the problem with these treaties because, while and with the World Health Organization, and as Senator Roberts rightly pointed out before, Bill Gates, I think – and I’ll stand to be corrected on this – is a massive donor to the World Health Organization. I think it might be the second-biggest owner. He has enormous influence. He’s not accountable to anyone. He himself has backflipped on how effective the vaccines were, but yet again, there is no level of accountability. (12) (13) (14) (15) (16) (17) (18) (19)

And that is the problem with organizations like the World Health Organization. And look, I think that they serve the purpose after World War II. I think that the United Nations was created with the good intentions of trying to resolve, find a peaceful solution between countries going to war.

But, of course, as we know, with the famous Nuland-Pyatt leaked conversation back in 2014, where Ban Ki-moon (the former Secretary-General of the United Nations) actually condoned the overthrow of democratically elected government in Ukraine. (20)

So you’ve got to ask yourself, [live-stream audio failing again] It’s the difference. I’ve got no problems with seeking cooperation between countries. That is very important. We do not want conflicts going on, but, at the same time, we have to respect a nation’s sovereignty, and that means that the people and the government must listen to its people, and this is particularly relevant because section 4771c of the biosecurity ACT actually empowers the health minister to declare an emergency on a recommendation by the World Health Organization. (21)

Now, that is actually already in legislation, and that is very, very scary, the fact that we’ve already legislated the fact that the health minister can make a unilateral decision based on the recommendation of the World Health Organization, and that is why this inquiry is so important because we need to shine a light on the actual dealings of the bureaucrats, and let’s face it, it’s the bureaucrats who are a shadow government in this country.

It’s not us. We turn up here 19 weeks of the year, and we just run across the chamber to the bells, like, monkeys on a tin can or whatever. No, no, it’s the bureaucrats who have permanent jobs. They get to go on the junket side of Switzerland occasionally, the other side might get to go, and I think I picked up before that there are actually permanent bureaucrats that live in Switzerland doing the deals. So, you can imagine how much influence, how easily influenced they’re going to be by their colleagues in Switzerland when they’re going out wining and dining and after a day down the slopes, and I must admit, maybe I should try and bag a job. Thinking about it like that, I mean, what a cushy job that would be. But the point is, is you can imagine just how easy it would be for these bureaucrats to be influenced by these people that the people in Australia would never even know. (22) (23) (24) (25) (26)

So much money was spent throughout COVID. We saw the World Health Organization flip-flop. They flip-flopped on masks, they flip-flopped on Remdesivir and you have to ask yourself why did they flip-flop? Was it political pressure? Was it the wheelings and dealings of, for example, these wealthy fund managers like BlackRock, Vanguard, the Gates’ of the world who had conflicts of interest trying to push their drugs onto people when they weren’t properly tested?

So, I can, think that it’s a fantastic idea that we do shine a light on the wheeling’s and dealings of these treaties, and, I ask everyone to support this motion.

See all posts about the WHO Pandemic Treaty

References[+]

Penny (PennyButler.com)
Penny (PennyButler.com)

Truth-seeker, ever-questioning, ever-learning, ever-researching, ever delving further and deeper, ever trying to 'figure it out'. This site is a legacy of sorts, a place to collect thoughts, notes, book summaries, & random points of interests.