The Rise of the Global Police State: What’s Really Behind UN’s Sustainable Development Goals?

Your identity encompasses everything that makes you unique, and that’s what the globalist cabal is really after. Step out of line, and every social media interaction, every penny spent and every move you’ve ever made can be used against you.

Indeed, having access to everyone’s digital identity is the key to successful manipulation and control of the global population. The graphic below, from the WEF, illustrates their idea of how your digital identity will interact with the world.

Everything you can think of is to be connected to your digital identity, and your behavior, beliefs and opinions will dictate what you can and cannot do within society. It will unlock doors where someone like you is welcome, and lock the ones where you’re not.

If you think the idea of vaccine passports is insane, wait until your access to critical infrastructure and services is dependent not just on your vaccination status, but also what books you’ve bought, what ideas you’ve shared, and who you’ve given money or emotional support to.

Interoperability will link disparate systems together

As people are coming to understand the threat of a one world government, resistance against digital ID and the social credit score that comes with it has started to mount. The G3P’s answer to that dilemma is the construction of an interoperable system that can link disparate digital ID systems together.

As explained by Davis and Webb:

“This ‘modular platform’ approach is designed to avoid the political problems that the official issuance of a national digital ID card would otherwise elicit.

“Establishing SDG16.9 global digital ID is crucial for eight of the seventeen UN SDGs. It is the linchpin at the center of a global digital panopticon that is being devised under the auspices of the UN’s global public-private partnership ‘regime.’”

You have no rights, only permits, under the new world order

You may be wondering where human rights enter into all of this. If your digital ID records every move you make, which can then be used against you, won’t that violate some of your basic rights as a free human being? Well, that depends on how human rights are defined — and who defines them.

Davis and Webb explain:

“The Universal Declaration of Human Rights … was first accepted by all members of the United Nations on December 10, 1948.

“The preamble of the Declaration recognizes that the ‘equal and inalienable rights’ of all human beings are the ‘foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world.’ After that, ‘inalienable rights’ are never again mentioned in the entire Declaration.

“‘Human rights’ are nothing like ‘inalienable rights.’

“Inalienable rights, unlike human rights, are not bestowed upon us by any governing authority. Rather, they are innate to each of us. They are immutable. They are ours in equal measure. The only source of inalienable rights is Natural Law, or God’s Law.

“No one — no government, no intergovernmental organization, no human institution or human ruler — can ever legitimately claim the right to grant or deny our inalienable rights. Humanity can claim no collective authority to grant or deny the inalienable rights of any individual human being.

“Beyond the preamble, the UN’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) concerns itself exclusively with ‘human rights.’ But asserting, as it does, that human rights are some sort of expression of inalienable rights is a fabrication — a lie.

“Human rights, according to the UDHR, are created by certain human beings and are bestowed by those human beings upon other human beings. They are not inalienable rights or anything close to inalienable rights.

“Article 6 of the UDHR and Article 16 of the UN’s 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights … both decree:

“‘Everyone has the [human] right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law.’

“Note: We put ‘[human]’ in brackets … to alert readers that these documents are NOT referring to inalienable rights.

“While the respective Articles 6 and 16 sound appealing, the underlying implications are not. Both articles mean that ‘without legal existence those rights may not be asserted by a person within the domestic legal order.’

“As we shall see, the ability to prove one’s identity will become a prerequisite for ‘legal existence.’ Thus, in a post-SDG16 world, persons without UN-approved identification will be unable to assert their ‘human rights.’ …

“Article 29.3 of the UDHR states:

“‘These [human] rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.’

“In plain English: We are only allowed to exercise our alleged human ‘rights’ subject to the diktats of governments, intergovernmental organizations and other UN ‘stakeholders.’

“The bottom line, then, is that what the UN calls ‘human rights’ are … government and intergovernmental permits by which our behavior is controlled.”

COVID was an opportunity to reset the playing field

Our behavior is also controlled through censorship and control of information. In its “COVID-19 and Human Rights” document, published in April 2020, the U.N. presents human rights as policy tools and openly admits that “securing compliance” with health measures that severely restrict (or outright eliminate) human rights will depend on “building trust,” and that includes censoring that which might undermine trust in authorities.

Censorship of “misinformation” and “disinformation” is also required under the proposed International Treaty on Pandemic Prevention, Preparedness and Response, which places the World Health Organization (WHO) at the center of all pandemic-related agendas, and in the proposed amendments to the International Health Regulations (IHRs).

Importantly, both of these instruments will be binding.

As noted by Davis and Webb:

“The current proposed amendments to the IHR illustrate how ‘crises’ provide unique opportunities for the UN and its partners to control populations — through purported ‘human rights’ — by exploiting those ‘rights’ as ‘a powerful set of tools.’

“Here is one example of the proposals being put forth: The WHO wishes to remove the following language from IHR Article 3.1:

“‘The implementation of these Regulations shall be with full respect for the dignity, human rights and fundamental freedoms of persons.’

“It intends to replace that regulatory principle with:

“‘The implementation of these Regulations shall be based on the principles of equity, inclusivity, coherence and in accordance with the common but differentiated responsibilities of their States Parties, taking into consideration their social and economic development.’

“This proposed amendment signifies that the UN and its partners wish to completely ignore the UN’s own Universal Declaration of Human Rights whenever any of these agencies declares a new ‘crisis’ or identifies a new ‘international threat.’ This exemplifies the ‘course-correction’ the UN envisioned would arise from the ‘unique opportunity’ presented by the COVID-19 crisis.”

The UN has already assumed authority; no one granted it

Right now, the WHO appears to be set up to become the de facto global government, but the U.N. is also a contender, and it has openly assumed this authority.

For example, in its “UN System Task Team on the Post-2015 UN Development Agenda” document, published in 2013, it states that “A global governance regime, under the auspices of the U.N., will have to ensure that the global commons will be preserved for future generations.”

As noted by Davis and Webb:

“The UN calls itself a ‘global governance regime.’ It is arbitrarily assuming the authority to seize control of everything (‘the global commons’), including humans, both by enforcing its Charter — citing its misnamed ‘Human Rights’ declaration — and by fulfilling its ‘Sustainable Development’ agenda.

“Note that the ‘global governance regime’ will ultimately ‘translate into better national and regional governance.’ This means that the role of each national government is merely to ‘translate’ global governance into national policy. Electing one political party or another to undertake the translation makes no material difference. The policy is not set by the governments we elect.

“As nation-states one by one implement SDG-based policies, the regime further consolidates its global governance. And since the ‘global governance regime will be critical to achieve sustainable development,’ the two mechanisms — global governance and sustainable development — are symbiotic.

“Again, by the UN’s own admission, inalienable rights are the ‘foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world.’ Yet the UN’s entire Charter-based human rights framework comprehensively rejects the principle of inalienable and immutable rights.

“The UN Charter is, therefore, an international treaty that establishes a global governance regime which stands firmly against ‘freedom, justice and peace in the world.’ All of the UN’s ‘sustainable development’ projects should be understood in this context. …

“You may wonder what Sustainable Development Goal 16 … has to do with protecting the planet and its inhabitants from the predicted ‘climate disaster.’ The answer is: nothing at all. But then, ‘climate change’ is merely the proffered rationale that purportedly legitimizes and lends urgency to sustainable development.

“Establishing firm global governance — in effect, a world dictatorship — through the implementation of SDGs is the United Nations’ real objective. ‘Climate change’ is just the excuse.”

‘One Health’ — The global takeover of everything

The pandemic treaty and IHR amendments, once enacted, will form the foundation for the WHO’s legal authority to act as a global governing body.

Both are broadly focused on pandemic preparedness, planning and response, but there are built-in loopholes that can easily be invoked by the WHO to turn it into a de facto global dictatorship.

The central instrument that will allow for the vast expansion of the WHO’s power is something called the One Health Joint Plan of Action, officially launched in October 2022 by the WHO, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, the United Nations Environment Program and the World Organization for Animal Health.

This initiative amounts to multiple globalist organizations synchronizing their plans, while at the same time combining their resources and power.

The “One Health” agenda recognizes that a broad range of human and environmental aspects can impact health and therefore fall under the “potential” to cause harm. For example, this is how the WHO will be able to declare climate change as a health emergency and subsequently require climate lockdowns.

The graphic below illustrates how the WHO’s scope of control is expanded under the One Health agenda to cover vast aspects of everyday life.

On paper, the One Health Joint Plan of Action “seeks to improve the health of humans, animals, plants and the environment, while contributing to sustainable development.”

Its five-year plan, which spans 2022 to 2026, intends to expand capacities in six key areas, including healthcare systems, the environment and food safety.

The plan includes a technical document that covers a set of actions intended to advance One Health at global, regional and national levels.

As reported by the WHO:

“These actions notably include the development of an upcoming implementation guidance for countries, international partners, and non-state actors such as civil society organizations, professional associations, academia and research institutions.”

In other words, the goal is to create health, environmental and food safety rules to be followed on a global scale.

The endgame and how to stop it

In an April 16 Substack article, Jessica Rose, a postdoctoral researcher in biology, tried to make sense of the last three years. Starting at the end, she believes the endgame is the “conversion of the majority of human beings into workers … like ants.”

To get there, the globalists must dehumanize us, systematically chip away at the human spirit, render us infertile and destroy all notions of bodily autonomy and national sovereignty.

The plan has worked well so far, but cracks are beginning to show. More and more people are starting to put the puzzle pieces together, as Rose attempts to do in her article.

The COVID-19 pandemic was the set-up, Rose suggests. It was geared to “test compliance levels” and set the scene for the next act, which was to normalize all things abnormal.

The trans movement, which completely overwhelmed the social consciousness in a single year, is a continuation and expansion of that “normalization of the abnormal” phase.

It’s also a major component of the agenda to dehumanize and sterilize the population.

After all, trans youth — who are also among the most brainwashed individuals in society right now — are the future of humanity. A brand-new report by legal experts backed by the U.N. is also seeking to normalize pedophilia, which would further dehumanize and de-spirit our youth for generations to come.

Adding insult to injury, the report was published on March 8, “in recognition” of International Women’s Day. Never mind the fact that young girls and women are the primary victims of this sick mindset.

The “manmade climate change” hysteria and subsequent war on carbon is another fabricated “emergency” that is unhinged from science and reality.

And the U.N. SDGs are perfectly tailored to enable the endgame. Under these goals, human freedom, human health and quality of life are sacrificed to “protect the environment and save the planet.”

As Rose notes, if the WHO pandemic treaty goes through, we can expect to be locked down indefinitely under the guise of “some climate catastrophe, likely linked to some ‘deadly pathogen’ passed to humans via some insect vector like mosquitoes.”

By then, central bank digital currencies (CBDC) will also be in place, which will enable the unelected totalitarian regime to enforce whatever restrictions the WHO and its funders dream up, be it related to the food you’re allowed to eat based on your carbon footprint, the drugs you’re forced to take, what causes you’re allowed to fund, what businesses you’re allowed to buy from, when and how far you’re allowed to travel or anything else.

“A practical way I can think of to stop the endgame from being realized is to stop the CBDC,” Rose writes. “Use cash. Insist upon it. Do not give business to stores that only use cashless systems. Supply equals demand, so demand the use of CASH.”

Other strategies to reclaim our freedoms

Other ways to prevent the WHO’s power grab, include the following:

• Call your congressman or congresswoman and urge them to sponsor H.R.79 — The WHO Withdrawal Act, introduced by Rep. Andy Biggs (R-AZ), which calls for defunding and exiting the WHO. The Sovereignty Coalition’s Help the House Defund the WHO page will allow you to contact all of your elected representatives with just a few clicks. Simply fill out the required field, click submit, and your contact information will be used to match you with your elected representatives.
• Also, urge your congressman or congresswoman to sponsor H.R.1425, which would require the pandemic treaty to be approved by the Senate.
• Call your senators and urge them to sponsor the Senate version of H.R.1425, which is S.444, the No WHO Pandemic Preparedness Treaty Without Senate Approval Act.
• Share Door To Freedom’s educational poster, which explains how the IHR amendments will destroy national sovereignty, and increase surveillance and censorship. See doortofreedom.org for more information.