the old 1st republics, 84 offices, and remaining deposits. now under the control of j. p. morgan 1st republic had been teetering on the brink and recent weeks, despite a $30000000.00 lifeline from several major financial institutions. a worried savings pulled more than $100000000000.00 and deposits from the firm, ultimately causing its market value to collapse by 97 percent. now the 1st republic is the 2nd largest buying to implode and recent months behind that of silicon valley bank. both based in california and other lender signature bank also collapse . that's raised for years. even more lenders are at risk score that are wider crisis could engulf that of the global economy. lead time president biden. and the us treasury secretary have repeatedly given assurances to the people that your money is safe. washington said efforts are under way to avert a potentially broad amount down. not entirely unlike what happened in 2000 and been

thanks to the quick actually my ministration. over the past few days, americans can have confidence. the banking system is safe. your deposit will be there when you need them. small businesses across the country, the deposit accounts or the banks can breathe easier and knowing they'll be able to pay their workers and pay their bills. the situation, the stabilizer and the u. s. banking system remain sound the steps we took, we're not focused on eating specific banks or classes, have banks our intervention with necessary to protect the broader us banking system, or the 5 or john yellen just said author and financial comment had a jim rogers. he says there are choppy financial waters in the future of both for america and that of the wider war america's largest economy in the world. why now and the largest economy, the world starts having economic problems, going to have a snowball effect and everybody in the world will be affected. we've had recession

every few years since the beginning of the year. we're going to have more, don't worry, you'll have a lot to report. we've had a long period of good times in the us throughout the world. when that happens, bankers get sloppy, bad loans. and then the bad loans come home to roof. so, i mean, this is just the beginning, normally when the thing is working right is, you know, it's been 14 years since we had a bad i'm in the us after 14 years problem started building up, you're going to see more of these in the next couple of years when joe biden says, don't worry, let me tell you, you should worry. and you wonder why so many countries right now we're getting the dollar and embracing national currencies for trade or the bricks countries the global south b, s. c o. the asked the and they're all making move to secure their future of peace and prosperity. more details online dot com.

ah, ah, hello, i'm manila chan you're tuned. in to modus operandi. the sar covey to outbreak are better known as coded, was declared a global pandemic by the w h. o. on march 11th of 2020, which sent governments around the world into a panic. but by december of 2021, the organisation had a new concept to pitch to it's 194 nation members, a so called pandemic treaty. that should have civilians around the world in a panic. will tell you all about that with a former w. h o doctor. all right, let's get into the m l. me

the lockdown. the masking the pressure to vaccinate the vax passes to travel or even eat at a restaurant. we all remember that, right? it was just 3 years ago that people were fighting over the toilet paper at stores in the u. s. in the meantime, the world health organization has been diligently putting together plans for the next pandemic in lieu of the great debacle in handling. colbert 19 the w. h. o wants to lift that burden from local governments and sovereign states, and have your country sign on to a pandemic treaty, which would remove any and all powers your own country has in handling a pandemic. as it sees bit a trade for a universal process as directed by the director general at the w h o in geneva. oh, and the best part about this treaty,

it doesn't even need your country's president or prime minister or head of state to agree on the declared status. no. once your country signs this treaty, your country relinquishes all health sovereignty over to the w h o. and it specifically states that your elected leader of your democratically elected system is powerless to object. you don't have to believe me. they have it right there on the w h o website. they're not even trying to hide it. it's out in the open. to discuss this shockingly undemocratic health treaty is a brave doctor who has spent years of his career at the w h o in geneva. now he's told me he has spent the last couple of years trying desperately to get the word out to no avail. because the mainstream media won't discuss it. so this brave doctor is talking exclusively to us. doctor david bell is a former

w h o doctor and scientist and has a background in epidemiology. he's joining us now from texas. now dr. bell, the cobit pandemic seems to have offended the medical community writ large. the uniformity in which doctors were treating cobit patients across the u. s. is that normal for physicians, or like in pre cove id times the doctors treat patients more on an individual basis and the where do treatment directives or protocols usually come from? is it the cdc, the and i h that w h. whoa. it's come. it's very unusual what has happened. it's common to have protocols or guidance on what to do that they are expected to be taking. you're supposed to take into account the clinical situation patient. so normally they're

a guide and you look at the patient and then take the history and then you decide on the treatment based on that situation. it's streaming unusual for restrict you bars, for instance. and guidelines can suggest you certain drugs use other drugs. but the idea of banding safe, so the maintenance and whether or not they're effective. the idea for speech e tract infection is complete young patients before and so the guidelines will come from cdc from show et cetera. as i said, that they are intended as a guide and not intended you follow to. and in the, in the doctor patient relationship and the doctor's assessment of that patient.

that should be the final picture on what management is recommended. now, as the world was in the grips of cove, it in 2021, the w h o quietly pitch an idea to it's 194 member states so called pandemic treaty. that would not only give this organisation legally binding authority over its members decision making abilities on how to handle the future pandemic, but it would include a digital passport and digital id system. with this effectively dissolve national sovereignty. when it comes to people's health care, there's actually 2 things in progress from that of the treaty and is amendments to the instructional regulations. and they both do essentially the same thing in trying to different directions. so the central health regulations, there's a vision already in place,

updates that break in 2005. and it's already use more house to the wi fi than people realize, but they amendment and they reflected in the treaty demand, that's where she goes to cindy, which is a company party in may of this year. and they any because they have for somebody special. ready already see illustrated agency and so the amendments only need to be accepted. 50 percent of the treaty will go next to the company we're health assembly. but if the hill regulation amendments a pass that they were to do what the treat during the so they, they work on a number of levels. they explicitly remove human rights. i found them in the human rights from consideration. so explicit be the

amendments cross out phrases around the they have to be instituted in the on the basis of the autonomy to him and rise that are affected in the un human rights from after the 2nd world war. and their place that was worrying about diversity iniquity, and they say that these human rights, that these diversity equity, whatever they need coherence based on economic and social status of the person. so they start off by taking away the idea that you're going to equal and putting the right person based on economy can social situation. so that's a huge fundamental change to the whole way that people,

human rights. so then they use a about pandemic or about any health emergency and they state that are health emergency can be solely by the director general. so a single person in charge of that nature and it can be on they doesn't have to be even an outbreak that needs to be a potential or what the director considers a potential for an upgrade. so that can be almost any help and and when the director general and he doesn't have transferred to an emergency committee or consideration, you can make this decision on then he, it gives very wide ranging powers. so. so say it's in countries, the decrease of this are agreeing that recommendations are binding to the country. they say that they undertake to follow recommendations. so they're not

recommendations anymore. their orders and they cover a whole range of things. so they basically they cover things like consignment of people in quarantine, stopping people, travelling, injecting or medicating people and medical insisting on medical examination. so they even take away the role of government in i think very wrongly forcing that. and they allow so innovation based in geneva to force anyone in the world. and this is in the way that the amendments, the w h o says, going this route would level the playing field for poor nations when it comes to future vaccines or treatment for diseases like cancer. and i'm going to paraphrase, but when it comes to sharing medicines or treatments, pandemic or not,

don't allied nations already have mechanisms in place already to share. why would this particular measure be necessary? so nations do already had these mechanisms and there's also international mechanism such as the global fund, through the pool resources from different countries and on the basis and the so there are good mechanisms to do this already much more in control of functions. so it won't live all the time. yeah, i mean that's a fallacy. this. so you think everyone will each well, here's the level the playing field at the society there. so we can see from what has happened. so we have had a group of people in europe, essentially the wor, pushing for loc downs and metrics,

nations true subsaharan, africa, and asia, where more sellers cove is extremely and large because a lot downs into mortality is growing up. malaria tv usage. these other large disease, so they have it coming up. so what has happened is that we've seen the central authority move, the emphasis on hell away from what individual populations need and what they up to. something that they see is more important, even though it's a very large these nations in these populations so that this will continue to happen. and it don't happen because underline this, there's a lot of changes in the way the debate is funded is increased funding, increased corporate funding, industry directed, and corporate and private interests were direct funding. so during the w h o to work they wanted to where it's not where it's necessary the best for the. ringback

the district apartments. another issue on national sovereignty in this proposed treaty, which they expect to be ready in 2024 article 9 point one of that treaty states that the w h o would no longer need to consult with the state or even attempt to obtain verification from the member state where this, what they call reported event of concern is allegedly occurring before taking action. if unclear what those actions might be, what limitations to them if any, whereby the w h o director general determines the status independent of what the elected leaders of that country has to say. now you've expressed valid concerns as a scientist, but what are your views on this as a citizen? yeah, obviously there's

a reason why we have suffered nation states in this because they understand the needs of people. so again, you know, the teacher will have power directly if the tree is red, but they also have, even if you don't, if they can influence other countries to stop travel self trade to stop, you know, supply lines, et cetera. so particularly the smaller countries is going to have a huge impact. so it very much puts them at the mercy of the people in geneva. and by those who found those people, dr. david bell is going to stay with us. coming up next to bill gates, pfizer, the united states, china, just to name a few. are the major donors to the w h. o. does this influence their decision

making in geneva? we're going to discuss it when we return to tight m. i will be right back. i ah, ah, canada is outsourced, its foreign policy to washington. and washington's agenda is one of the global hegemony. washington will not tolerate. and i think that they're not even not even subtle about this. they will not tolerate a global rival a

a ah, the me welcome back to the ammo. i'm manila chan. dr. david bell, a former w h o scientist is sounding the alarm over this proposed w. h o. pandemic treaty. now dr. bell, renowned professor of international law. dr. francis boyle. he's a j d, and ph. d at the university of illinois has been quoted by r of k juniors children's defense publication called the defender calling this

potentially illegal saying, quote, the proposed w h o treaty violates the vienna convention on the law of treaties ratified in 1969 criticizing this new treaty as insidious and even medical totalitarianism. he says this will put nations into a scientific police state under the control of effectively, the cdc bill gates and china, who pay a significant portion of their bills. what are your thoughts on that? i can't comment on the vienna convention to spoil the risk of what you say. certainly true. you we, we've seen the codes response and people are trying to pretend now they're locked down to normal. i in 2019 the debate. sure releases,

pandemic influenza guidelines. and they essentially say, but isn't it mentioned was locked down, it was never a puppy hopes term before it's a, it's a lot of things that they specifically said you should or should not currency of the people. you should not restrict cheda cetera because it's just it's hands. it's greg from the benefit and it is proportionately low income. so those released just a few months before they can change direction, introduce this term called lockdown, and pretended there was no response. it's nothing more response that hasn't been done before. there's an experiment in the fall or outbreak in west africa where they did it for a few days and it was shown to be fully effective. and that each energy for the population, china supposedly locked down the, in the south,

almost tearing society that locked in populations, frequent nice reasons. so the, it's a huge, it's a new idea in public health. and the idea that, you know, as we saw, you can stop people from visiting the funerals at the time the pub is being present at the birth of the you wrote the playground so the children's can no longer play these extraordinary nations. they don't have any irrational public or with a virus sauce, kirby to the coven virus, where we knew from the start of 2020, that it was almost 15. see, it's a via the very old people and people with to be significant medical conditions such as diabetes so that it wasn't rational

response. it was a very irrational one. and it is clear that there's no looking back and saying this was a bad idea. and the evidence, if you look at the pen, the push for the penn treaty. so the change in the international health regulations are there's a very strong push to make this much faster and more intense in the future. so is that was essentially a please say that we went through this role by emergency to create and it was, can, it was using terms and actual actions that we normally use in prison for civilian populations, confounding. and so that is what is envisioned, people need to sort of grasp this. it's not normal and it's not anything to do with what democratic societies are supposed to be about. the w h l got coded wrong,

the cdc and, and i h got it wrong, doctor found she, bill gates, pfizer mode turner. the lot of them got it wrong. why then should the public trust these entities with their personal health care decisions going forward? i don't think most thing got it wrong. i think that the various virus was published in the lancet. it's highly disproportionately affects all people except for the children and young adults or how the video affected that. so they didn't get around the new one. the virus was like a basic, they know and published into 19 if you do this sort of thing, it will just, fortunately, people and costs more health problems than you know, low income people cause more health problems. and so they knew that. so you have to

assume that there are other motors, so there was a, you know, it was successful in instigating a non presidential shift in well, from low to high income people. it was successful in showing that you can even in western populations and populations used to democracy that you can instill fear into people subsidy, they will sort of fascist, to tell us here indic types. so if that was the purpose of doing this, i think i think both of those were important part of it then. so these entity was very successful. it wasn't successful from a public health. it is hard to believe that the people are doing it and you that this was a very poor public response. it's hard to believe that was are the w h ho really as,

as noble and benevolent as they appear or as the mainstream media would present them to be. i mean, where does that money come from? where does that go and does it influence behaviors at the w h? ho? so the organization is offices in geneva, 6 regional offices, and country offices in a lot of companies. it's a large mix of people. it does a lot of useful things in a lot of countries. it brings to new expertise, the countries lacking in certain expertise. it gives a lot of advice that brings people together with a need to talk. so it does some very useful functions. and i think there is a need for international hills coordination and guidance and support countries that need us and ask for either change or these are is increasing private and

corporate money, which is part of the budget and it's very directed. so you have to double try that still functioning properties that should in a country level that you have the clearly less the whole idea of community based public health and move to s a corporate model. so it, during the response, i think it was probably a net harm to the world. it doesn't mean everything that child is doing is a bad idea or that you having some sort of entity with much rules on concept interest. and it's what they can actually do. it doesn't mean that that in itself is a bad idea. dr. david bell. thank you so much for your fearless honesty and insight. today, the mainstream media will tell you this treaty will create

a fairer system and more equal outcomes when it comes to health care. but fail to admit that when it comes to diseases, be it co bid, or cancer. no 2 bodies will ever respond the same when in fact it. but what this treaty will guarantee is that you no longer have medical sovereignty or dominion over your own body. that's going to do it for this weeks episode of modus operandi the show that digs deep into foreign policy. i'm your host manila chan. thank you so much for tuning and we'll see you again next week to figure out the ammo ah

november 22nd 2022 outraged orthodox christians confronted ukrainian security service offices looking entrances and exits. the keys are yours in the right ah. headlines off each national as to civilians are killed and 14 wounded off for a russian order region comes under ukrainian. shelling local officials say that probing whether on all the incident could be a war crime. scenes from power, labor day celebrations, defendant to violence, police using tear gas and water can. and again, the protest also in the program for you new delhi colds out here for posting

the depiction of a hindu goddess, rising from a fire that erupt during a ukrainian drug, an attack on crimea with local.