The Highwire with Del Bigtree - BIO WARFARE EXPERT EXPOSES W.H.O. PANDEMIC TREATY THREAT

Episode Date: September 13, 2023

BIO WARFARE EXPERT EXPOSES W.H.O. PANDEMIC TREATY THREATBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-highwire-with-del-bigtree--3620606/support.

My next guest is one of those superheroes that has put it on the line. She has stood in front of the European Union, our own government. She's been on news programs doing nothing but speaking her truth. I'm talking about Dr. Merrill Nass. And this is what she looks like in front of a camera. Hello. My name is Dr. Meryl Nass. Dr. Nass.

Dr. Nass. Dr. Meryl Nass. Dr. Meryl Nass, a physician of internal medicine. I tended to work for hospitals, at first in the ER, and then as a hospitalist, 25, 30 years. On the side, I had become interested in biological warfare and trying to prevent it. We have many opportunities using repurposed drugs, herbs, supplements, vitamins, to treat most conditions, and certainly to treat COVID. The drugs are available.

You're just not being able to access them in most cases, because of the drugs. of suppression. The new boosters that FDA has told manufacturers to start producing and testing are likely to have twice as much messenger RNA in them as the original shots. It's very likely that the side effects will be significantly higher. Nowadays we know that the vaccinated are developing COVID at higher rates than the unvaccinated. Nobody's really talking about in public, but the scientists are talking about it behind closed doors. There's absolutely no reason to get this vaccine.

This information has been suppressed, deliberately suppressed, and people like me who try to get the information out are labeled as misinformation spedders. Everything I said has turned out to be absolutely accurate, but they didn't like it. You're a noted physician. You have testified all over the world. Rulers of many countries have been wantonly breaking the law over the last three years. Somebody above the level of our governments is giving me the orders. The WHO has become a trap to entrap the nations such that they lose sovereignty over health.

We're undergoing a soft coup and the idea is to create a whole new set of laws and ignore the existing human rights laws. And everybody else now has to start understanding that the globalists seem to be playing for all the marbles. Dr. Merrill Nass wrote an incredible article about the WHO. And, you know, this is the title. W.H.O's proposed amendments will increase man-made pandemics. This is a tour to force this article. It's really outstanding.

And it gets into a lot of some of the things we've even covered today. What's really behind it? Where is this all going? It's my honor and pleasure to be joined right now by Dr. Merrill Nass. Okay. Thank you so much. It's really great to see you. I get to see you out on the speaking circuit, if you will, a lot.

It's the first time we've really gotten you in studios. So I want to thank you for making the effort being here. Yeah, well, I appreciate greatly the fact that you've invited me because even though I've been working on biological warfare and pandemics for 35 years, this issue of the WHO is the most important issue I've ever worked on. And it has import for everybody in the world. So I'm glad you've given me your work. audience. Before we get into that, I just want to so people have a sense of what it's like to,

you know, do the work that you do. Your license is currently suspended. Suspended. In what state? Maine. In Maine. And what is the, I mean, this sort of the usual reason? What are the reasons that they've given you? So the original reason, the reason what was suspended was spreading misinformation and also prescribing ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine. Oh man, why'd you go and do that? We can't have things that work out there. That's right. You know, I took an oath to take care of patients, and they seemed to think I was supposed to break that oath.

But in any event, sprinting misinformation, I want everybody to know this. Misinformation is not a crime. Misinformation is mistaken things. I actually was telling the truth, so there wasn't any misinformation. But the federal government and the states are trying to make everybody think. Misinformation is a crime. Right.

And you should be reporting doctors and professionals who are spreading misinformation. So strangers reported me to the board. Oh, she was spreading misinformation on the internet. We have something called the First Amendment. Free speech as well as freedom of religion and the press and assembly. And it's against the law for governments to suppress your free speech. And the Board of Medicine of the state government agency. So they were actually breaking the law.

And now we are suing them for our... a malicious prosecution in which they used their role, you know, under cover of law as a state agency. Here's one of the headlines, docs that's spending for COVID-mis info sues, cites freedom of speech. You're actually suing the medical board. And is my understanding also each individual on the board? Every individual and their personal capacity. I love you.

Can I just say that? I love that. You know, it's time to turn the tables here and go after the people that are suppressing free speech, especially when people that watch this show, I mean, say you've got the FDA already basically saying when they're under oath, we never stopped anyone from using ivermectin. In fact, we said you can use it whenever you want. So how is it a medical board is even allowed to say that it's misinformation? And to be taking someone's license without scientific studies, peer reviewed, double-blind, you know, whatever, randomized controlled trials

that show in the beginning that ivermectin is dangerous, which would be difficult to do since millions and millions of people take it every, you know, every, was almost every day for lupus and things like that. And then you've got hydroxy chloroquine. Similarly, all of these things are being taken all the time. And yet, if it's not dangerous and everyone's using it for all sorts of different things off-label, why would you lose your license? So exactly right. So it isn't illegal. It's perfectly legal to prescribe those drugs.

And the board should have known that. lawyers on the board and a doctor on the staff and then they had about eight doctors on the on the members so they all knew they were writing off later or maybe they didn't know a lot of doctors don't know very much about the legal underpinnings of medicine yeah but in any event by the time it came to a hearing they dropped all of those charges they did not want to litigate against the first amendment they did not want to litigate against off label prescribing and they said the last you know we We don't want to talk about the vaccine either. Take the vaccine out of this case, even though they had been

plain, yes, that I'd been saying terrible things about the vaccine. But they knew, you know, they knew what the law was. So they were heavying me, you know, and I was supposed to roll over and give them, you know, a win that they could put in the national news, which my case went into the national news. And I think they were shocked that I actually fought back. That wasn't part of their equation. I was 70 years old. Clearly, it was going to cost me more money than I'd ever be able to make in the rest of my career to compensate.

And children's health defense said they would fund my defense. And that was what allowed me to do this. That's great. So taking it back at them, we'll continue to track that. Now let's get into your research and the work that you've done. This is an incredible article. And it's really, for me, you know, we're always trying to connect the dots. in the high wire. What is really going on? Who's behind it? What's the goal? What does gain of

function mean? First of all, why write this particular article? So I've been begging other people to write articles that connect the dots because so many things are happening to us now, not just the pandemic, but we've got this transhumanism, we've got the gender identity issue, the CBDCs, you know, getting rid of money. I mean, there's so many things happening. And is it all part of the same thing or is it all these things by chance just happening together? So I've had that in my mind. And I also am very interested in how the WHO has been used to try to gain sovereignty over the nations of the world through public health. Right. So a new version of a proposed pandemic treaty that the WHO is managing came out.

out two months ago and I read it line by line and pondered it and I said oh my gosh this is unbelievably terrible I'm going to have to write about it and so I started writing about it and then I realized oh my goodness no this is too important now I have to add the background and I have to add the links and I have to explain the details and it wound up to be this very long article but I did connect a ton of dots You did. And I'm hoping people will read it because it takes 20 or 30 minutes to read. But it gives you a ton of information on the history of biological warfare, gain of function,

and how things are going now and what the plan is for the future, what the globalists are trying to do with the WHO, with vaccines, and other things. What are they trying to do? Well, I think the globalists, as we saw with COVID, already have control of most, if not all, of the developed countries' governments. And they have control of the bureaucratic structure of the WHO. And so the WHO is 85% funded through voluntary contributions, most of which are earmarked. They're only getting 15% of their budget from the nations as assessments. So the WHO is already owned by private interests, and some of that money comes from nations,

but still it's the nation's special interests. What is happening is there's a pandemic, so the WHO and its nations claimed that there has been a terrible catastrophe of the pandemic. and it's due to nations not cooperating with each other and we have to do better. So we're going to make a treaty and it is not going to be like anything we've had before where the WHO gives nations recommendations. This is going to be binding. So the WHO will give orders and every nation has to carry out the orders. So no Sweden allowed to sit there as an outlier and then just sort of laugh at all of us when they didn't lock down and end up having lower death rates than Europe and the

the nations around them or forget Africa, which just sailed through this thing almost unscathed, didn't get vaccines, you know, barely at all across, you know, Africa and have one of the best outcomes. They don't want to have that. We got to have uniformity. If we're all going to die, we're going to die together. And they're particularly interested in Africa, by the way. Yeah. So in fact, the idea is, so everyone's going to get vaccinated, of course. The vaccines are going to be developed in only 100 days instead of the 10 to 15 years they normally take. And factories are being set up in Africa everywhere, local factories to make vaccines. So Bioentec has already sent a factory in, I think, 12 containers to Africa to start making

MRNA vaccines. There will be enforced surveillance. So nations will have to swab their people and animals to see whether. there are any viruses around that might be dangerous, which they call potential pandemic pathogens. They'll have to swab the animals, check the wastewater, but they also have to perform surveillance of our social media, of our electronics, and they're required to censor us. They must only put out the WHO narrative on public health. Which is like YouTube and all of these social media we've been reporting on or literally writing in there,

we're going to follow whatever, the WHO and everything else is misinformation. It doesn't matter that almost everything the WHO said throughout COVID proved to be wrong, which ultimately is misinformation now. That doesn't change it. We're still sticking with the WHO. And this would potentially supersede the First Amendment, which is a complicated issue. Yeah. But my organization, Door to Freedom.org, has a poster that explains the legal underpinnings

of how this pandemic treaty and new amendments to the existing WHO international health regulations could supersede the Constitution and U.S. law. So, you know, that's... Well, let me think about it. If you're going to homogenize a response across all nations and it involves the the civil liberties of every people in every single nation, we being having one of the strongest constitutions that's out there compared to somewhere else that's got a dictatorship,

how are you gonna get that homogenization where we're all acting the same if this treaty doesn't, you know. Right, provide it. Provide it, right? If it doesn't break through, we can't have whatever documents your country's founded on getting in the way if we're gonna have everybody act in the same way.

Exactly. So Tadros is going to be your doctor. He will tell you what vaccines you must have, what drugs you must have if there's a pandemic, and what drugs you are not allowed to have. So you can forget ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine next time. Right. There's a lot more to it than that. It's the way they're going to push the 100-day vaccines is by shaving time off of every part of vaccine development.

Like safety and efficacy. Well, they're doing right now. Every single new, I mean, we just reported today. You have a new booster. It's being tried on mice. There's no human studies being done. These are brand new forms of the virus, right? If we're looking at, some people would even argue that Armacron wasn't the original virus to begin with.

So it's a different virus. And so whatever, it doesn't matter how much it changed it if it's totally different. We're just going to try it on mice because, hey, our human trials went so well. We don't ever have to do that again, right? Well, precisely. You don't want to test it on humans because you might find out it's not safe. Right. It doesn't work.

What I want the audience to know is that you cannot do safety trials in animals. It's impossible. Animals behave very differently than humans. You must vaccinate or give a drug to humans and then you have to watch them. And you have to watch them for a period of time. Like at least six months to find out what are the long-term side effects for vaccines? You often get autoimmune effects and they can take a considerable time to develop. So testing on mice is like not testing at all.

So if we want to be bound by these new amendments and a new treaty, basically we can say goodbye to democracy and freedom. Now the amendments require that the head of WHO, which would be Tedros, has to declare a public health emergency of international concern before he can then issue orders. Okay. But with the current draft, there's no standards for him to do. that. So he can just... They just did it with a virus of the death rate of 0.35%. They did it for monkeypox. Right.

He's right. Monkeypox. I didn't even know anybody that had that issue. Yeah. No, he's declared three in the six years he's been in office. Wow. But for the pandemic treaty, he doesn't have to declare anything. It is going to be in force all the time during pandemics and between pandemics.

Really? I know. It's extraordinary. Why would you do that? Wow. Yeah. Now, both these documents will be voted on by the members of the WHO next May. And it's very likely that we will not see a final draft because they're already up to like the third or fourth draft on the documents. They're worked on by committees behind closed doors. And last

year, the WHO members voted in amendments that had not been made public before. They have, so an original version has to be shown to the members and made public at least four months ahead of time. But then when they change it, you don't have to see the changes. So we are likely to find out what's in these documents next May after they are voted in. This is what's amazing when people feel like they can just sort of, oh, we made it through COVID. When I look back at it, you watch the president of the United States of America wipe away any, you know, body autonomy or right to privacy. that you have forced everyone he could to get the vaccine, everyone he felt like he had reach into, whether it was large businesses over 100 people, working in the health care system.

So your government has now shown you they are fully down with forcing to take a product. Now, what I find concerning is something you talked about in some research. We're doing, this isn't just, you know, and you have to imagine the next vaccine, whenever they think they really got something they want us all to get. But the technologies they're working on, they're working on vaccines that they can give to one person, but they spread it to everybody else, right? Yes. So we know for a fact that Pfizer was working on self-spreading vaccines. We know that self-spreading vaccines have been placed in bait to vaccinate wild animals against rabies. So they've already done that.

It's been done, I think probably for a couple of decades maybe. Wow. So the technology exists. And the polio vaccine technically that they use, right, that they're using in the Middle East and the third world is designed. They know they can't get to everybody, so they expect some shedding to be going on. Well, yes and no. So the oral polio vaccines, which are cheaper to make and are being used in poorer countries, in some people they set, these are live vaccines. So they are attenuated, weakened strains of polio. And in some people, they set up a permanent infection in your gut, and you are releasing that virus in your stool.

It could be for a week or month, a year, or for your lifetime. Most people don't do that, but some do. So those live attenuated viruses get into the wastewater, and sometimes they mutate back to be virulent. And so the majority of polio cases in the world are from mutated, vaccine strain polio viruses. There's a much smaller number of cases that are actually the naturally occurring polio. Right.

Now we had those cases in the United States until 1999 when finally our public health agency said, look, the only polio we're seeing is the vaccine strains, let's get rid of them and bring back the injected, killed polio virus. Turns out that one doesn't work as well. as the lives. So now there's a question, how many Americans who have been vaccinated with the injected vaccine are in fact susceptible to polio? So that's another issue. It is. All these

issues, people don't. And I think it's interesting because they'll talk about polio, running people. We eradicated polio. No, you haven't. That story is not over yet. I mean, not that I'm wishing, you know, a fate on the world. Right. But they are claiming victory when they haven't actually achieved the victory. And now we're seeing, I think, you know, I saw some articles saying that they're seeing polio and wastewater in New York, which means there may be trouble ahead on these issues. There's so much in this article, but one of the things that really stood out to me that I kind of freaked me out a little bit was you talk about Nixon and that when, you know,

Nixon basically was the first one to sort of put a ban on biological weapons and things. And the reason you gave is essentially because they're easy to make. and he wanted, we had this advancement, and we were in nuclear, we had nuclear weapons down, and not everybody could afford it knew how to do that, but he wanted to stop this new technology was coming. That would be easy for countries that didn't have money. So that's why he set the ban. Tell me a little bit about it because I never heard that. Yes. So you have to remember that Kissinger was his advisor. Right. So, you know, very strategic guy. And he's in the, he's, you know, come into this war that he didn't start and he doesn't know how to get out of it.

And he's getting a lot of pushback. And so he wants to look good and came up with this idea that we could ban biological weapons. And we're going to be so, you know, we're wonderful. We're going to ban a whole class of weapons of mass destruction. We'll never have to worry about them. Again. So the idea was behind that that biological weapons were called the poor man's atomic bomb and almost anybody could make them. They were used in World War I actually against horses.

They were developed and they were used in China by Japan in World War II and before World War II. And so they've been around, you know, more than 100 years biological weapons and any country or even small groups could potentially make them. So this would enable us to just get rid of of that problem. So the poorer countries, people without a lot of money, would no longer have access to biological weapons. That was the idea. But in order to make it work, you had to have what they call challenge inspections. So one country has to be able to challenge another, say, I think you're making biological weapons at this facility and we want to go in and look. And that's what is done with a chemical weapons treaty.

Yeah. So that was supposed to be put into the biological Weapons treaty, but it never was. And so all these countries said, we're not, we agree, we're not gonna make biological weapons anymore, but the way the treaty stands, it was a question of intent. So you're still allowed to do research on biological agents, you know,

you weren't supposed to make quantities of weapons, your intention was supposed to be peaceful, you know, I'm working on vaccines. Right, but. Like I'm working on nuclear power, we're just kind of power our country right now. So, so that's what happened. And then genetic engineering was developed right after Nixon came up with this idea, like the next year.

And all of a sudden, we had this biotechnology industry that was way advanced from everybody else. And so now we could actually potentially make better biological weapons. And so the United States blocked the addition of provisions to that treaty that would have added the challenge inspections and other mechanisms to actually make it work, make it solid. And they've never been added, even though there are conferences every five years and their job of the conference is to add these things and strengthen the treaty. So we're stuck with a non-workable treaty that we know the U.S. and Russia have broken in the past.

what we need right now to end biological warfare and end deliberate, because deliberate pandemics, pandemics from labs are biological warfare. Right. And, you know, we call them gain of function, you know, research, so we don't have to say biological warfare or germ warfare research. Right. But it's the same thing. So this is a biological warfare pandemic we've been living through for the last three and a half

years. So we have Nixon is saying, let's outlaw. because we're better at nuclear weapons. We'll hold on to our arsenal control of the world. Then all of a sudden we get really good at it a year later. Like, wait a minute, we can start doing things with this where we'll be able to beat the world here too. So let's not sort of ban it anymore.

But we've come full circle because you talk about now in the WHO, whereas we lived at a time where every nation was saying, we are not going to make biologics. We won't do gain of function essentially. We won't mess with these viruses and bacteria because it would just be dangerous. Now you're saying that in this treaty, the WHO is basically sort of mandating every nation is going to make the, and we're all going to agree we're going to just keep making biological weapons and look at each other as long as we're all honest about it, it's going to be okay. Yeah, this is, you know, one of the totally crazy things in this treaty.

And, you know, most people who don't have the background don't really see what they're doing. So what the treaty says, well, if your country is doing gain of function research, you should be sure to do it safely, you know, and do your best to prevent pandemics. But at the same time, get rid of these administrative impediments to the gain of function research. They also say, you know, go out and surveil things all the time to find potential pandemic pathogens. and when you find them, share them globally with the WHO and all the other governments. What that is is proliferation of biological weapons. It's literally like open source gain of function research, right? Exactly.

We're all just going to share. It's going to be okay as long as we all share what we just found and what we've just created so you can get into this game too. And we'll all do it together. And since we're all doing it, that's... going to make us safer. And when another pandemic happens, we shared the pathogen. We don't know who spread it. Who do you blame? Every lab's got it and every lab around the world. Every country is working with it. I mean, it's absolute madness. It's insane. It's insanity. There are a few other crazy, there are many other crazy provisions in this treaty.

So the draft that's now available. It's called the Bureau Draft, the WHO staff put this draft together. They want advanced commitments. So let me tell you, they started this thing with advanced purchase commitments around 2004 and the WHO brought countries and vaccine manufacturers together and said, look, there's gonna be future pandemics and you're gonna need vaccines.

So sign on the dotted line, how many doses you want and what you'll pay for them, and commit to buying them, and then we can make sure these companies will be able to do it. develop the vaccines you need for you in a hurry when we have pandemics in the future. And all we have to do is have the WHO Director General declare a pandemic of a certain level. And that will be the trigger to make these contracts go into effect.

So that's what happened in 2009. All these countries signed on the dotted line. We had this, what turned out to be a very mild flu, but they were very worried about it, called it, you know, another swine flu. And countries had to buy billions and billions of dollars of vaccines. And the corporations got to make them very quickly, you know, in about six months or less. And they had no liability. The contracts took away all liability.

And so that worked so well for the companies and the WHO who is sponsored by them. Yeah. That they decided and the U.S. government also, well, why don't we just keep doing that? We have people agree to things when we don't know what the things are going to be in the future. Just agree to the future. You're buying a spot in the future. Yes. So we're going to create a committee called COP, and they're going to make their own rules,

and they're going to decide what the provisions of this treaty are going to be. So just sign here, and we're going to make a third section of the WHO. We're going to build its own directorate. We don't know what that's going to look like. we don't know what rules are going to make. That's just part of the treaty. You know, it'll all work out. Now, the U.S. government did the same thing.

In the National Defense Authorization Act, which funds the Defense Department, last December, they wrote in a provision saying it is the sense of Congress, we're going to go along with the global biosecurity agenda, One Health, and, you know, whatever they come up with, basically we're going to support. WHO. So the Congress, you know, in a 2,000 page, 1,700 page bill, who read it, probably no one,

has already made U.S. law that we're going to follow the WHO's biosecurity agenda. You know, basically we're going to follow the pandemic treaty and the international health regulations that aren't even, you know, finished yet. Yeah, it's crazy. Let me tell you something else. Yeah. This is another method by which the masks and the vaccine mandates got imposed on us. So remember, the federal government put out contracts in the CARES Act and in other acts to schools, to doctors, organizations, etc. Sign on the dotted line.

We're going to tell you in steps what you'll need to do for the pandemic and we'll give you this money. But if you don't comply with the terms of the contract, you're going to have to give it all back to us. So the schools took all this money, started remodeling, you know, buying tents and whatnot. And then in the second and third tranche is like, now you have to impose the mask mandate. Now you have to make sure all your kids are vaccinated. And they did. They just stopped that step.

They would have to give everything back. They had to give back the money they got at the front. Exactly. Wow. And the doctor's group's the same. This reminds me a little bit, you know, confessions of an economic. hitman where we send in people into third world nations say we're going to build you a whole electrical infrastructure you know water power and all of this and we tell them you know you'll be able

afford it we build it for them they can't afford it when they can't afford it now they owe us and we can take whatever resources we want and in this case resources are our children and the education and our freedom and it's not only third world countries i mean that happened to greece you know they had to give away their airports their ports their infrastructure because Germany wanted it. Germany had loaned the money. This is a paradigm. And yes, it's happening to us right now. How many people have lost their homes to hedge funds, you know, and vulture capitalism? Yeah, huge, huge problem. I mean, the fact that I think they're saying that, you know, Black Rock, Vanguard, State Street will own something like 60-something percent of our homes by 2040. They're going in making cash offers, beating us all out of it. And so the WEF is right.

If they get their way, we're all going to be renting and we're going to like it. We won't own anything. Only the giant corporate monoliths. When you look at these things, and I think one of the things that, and I have a question about this, when we've looked at the World Health Organization in this treaty, it looks like our health agencies here in America are part of writing it. Yes. Right? So it's absolutely. In some ways, it's not like it's being done to us.

We're doing it, but what's weird about is it doesn't look like we're writing. in control of it or are we I mean what do you think is we the head of it or are we just a cog in this thing because I think in America we always think surely we're in charge of all of this right no matter what happens we're America right so as far as these WHO documents go the United States has been central in pushing them yeah but they've lassoed the other countries they've corralled them and and most most of the developed ones and many of the third world ones are cooperating. Now, it's like who are we?

I mean, are we Rochelle Wilansky and Tony Fauci and Joe Biden? No, these people have been bought, you know, Rochelle's husband got an NIAID contract for $16 million, you know, in the months before they hired her to be the CDC director. So this, I was told Tony Fauci is getting... I wonder she was told you'll have to give it all back if you don't follow through on all the stages. You're right. He didn't get it all at once. It was over time. So, yeah, she had to go along with it.

And, you know, we do not know what the mechanisms are for controlling these people at the top, but we know they're controlled. Now, question, so we probably have the best apparatchiks, you know, the best whatever. The people who we have these PR firms who decide on the message. but this has been going on a long time. You know, people were probably thinking about this after Nixon was president. You know, 20 years ago, when the anthrax letters were sent, those anthrax letters were a ruse to bring on a lot of this biosecurity agenda.

The PEP Act and the Bioshield Act in 2004 and 2005 came in on the heels of the anthrax letters. There were no EU. E.A.s in the United States before 2005. You either had a licensed drug that had gone through a full FDA review, or you had an experiment. No gray area. How can there be a gray area? But 2005 EUAs and no standards. For people that may be listening, emergency use authorization, meaning this ability to rush a product to market before it's finished at safety trials because there's such an emergency, we just need to get it out. to you? It doesn't have to start a safety trial or an efficacy trial. The law, the PEP Act, has no standards. The only standard is that the FDA needs to think it's

likelier than not in an emergency that this product will help you. That's it. Likelier than not. You don't have to inject it into one mouse. All the world hangs on likelier or not. Yes, exactly. All right. So I want people to read your article. We could get into all the details. It's really deep. How do you you have hope? How do you have hope? Because I think this is one of the things I struggle with. Everywhere I go, people like really, you know, love what you're saying, love what's going on, but the government looks owned. The UN looks like it looks like the world is being taken over by globalists. What power do we have as individuals? Okay, so the globalists and their operatics have identified the nodes of power in the world. What is operatic? I'll be honest,

sorry, that's a Russian word. It means they're henchmen. Okay. So the henchmen are clever, right? They've designed this program for whoever the globalists are. You know, nobody's naming any names. We're not sure, but we think we know some of them. And they know how to do things. You know, they know how to legally get, you know, they know the games to play. They know how to get things through Congress. They know how to get the right people elected. They probably control the bell, the electronic voting machines, and all that. But there are 8 billion people that want to say no. I mean, we don't want forced injections. We don't want to be damaged. We don't want to be mutated. And we want our kids to grow up with healthy food, clean water, you know, no mumbo-jumbo in their education, et cetera.

And so to me, you know, they can't really control us if everybody understands what's going on. And the further along this path we go, as the news tightens, more and more people becoming aware. Right now, you know, you can, I mean, people are waking up. If they really impose masks on us again, if they mandate, you know, this vaccine that hasn't been tested, the new one coming out next month, people will say no. But we have to talk to everyone we know. We have to make clear, we have to do much better education.

and you and I are working as hard as we can to educate the public. But I think it's this noose tightening along with the educate, and we have to do it better. I mean, it's complicated to explain the WHO and two documents, and they have overlapping provisions, you know, and they're managed separately. They're voted in different ways. The Senate may or may not ratify them, you know, blah, blah. It's a lot of detail, and most people can't take in the detail. Yeah.

But I think they understand what's being done to their children. They understand what's been done to our food and our water and our air. We don't know exactly who's doing it. We don't know for sure why. But we know they're damaging us. And we all, we just need to drop our little minor disagreements and realize it's us against this globalist cabal. It's the eight billion rest of us. Right.

And we will win once we realize it and take our power. So I'm real hopeful. I just want to stop the damage before it gets any worse. Yeah. You're doing incredible work, so brilliant. The research is phenomenal. It's just, it's great to know that you're out there so many like you. I mean, I will say at this point, what gives me hope is it used to feel like, you know, you've been there for a long time.

There's you and Sherry Tenpenny. There's this handful of doctors and been putting it on the line for a long time. But you're being joined now by Oxford and Harvard. and Stanford signed. When I look at the amount of studies that have been done on this vaccine alone and all of the side effects of it, worldwide, Japan, Korea, everyone saying,

I don't know. Houston, we got a problem here. I don't think you can stop that. The floodgate is open. Science is turning on this vaccine program. I actually think the minority is these sick, you know, Kabbalists. They're just trying to take up the world,

but they're losing all faiths from people that are still thinking and talented around them. I think you sort of, you cut that trail, you cut that path. There's a lot of scientists following you down it now. It's really exciting. So keep up the good work. Thank you.

Thank you for joining us today. Really amazing. All right. How do we follow your work? Oh, yes. So I have a substack, merrill nass.substack.com. And there is a new organization, which is doortof freedom.org. Door to freedom.org.

We are working on primarily the WHO and all the things that are happening and trying to connect dots. And we are growing. We are joined by Children's Health Defense, of course, in this effort, the Sovereignty Coalition. Great. And stand for freedom. So all of us are working together, and we will be growing the network of organizations. Beautiful. The Highwire will join us.

And then we will push. will push out international actions against this globalist plan. Thank you. Fantastic. Keep up the great work. Really amazing.