"If they can get people really angry with their own governments, they can get people interested in the idea that maybe the technocrats at the UN can do a better job"

"Preemption Doctrine," an American legal principle where higher levels of government can supersede each lower level.  . . . It's when a company, any corporation, wants to come into a community and do something that the local community thinks will be bad for them or bad for their water or bad for their air.  The local communities would try to pass laws at the local level to stop it, and they would quickly find out that the state could preempt that and tell them no you have to accept this thing that you do not want and that's dangerous for your population.   --Katherine Watt

they want to orchestrate constitutional crises worldwide because that will help them consolidate more power with the globalist organizations.  If they can get people really angry with their own governments, they can get people interested in [the prospect that, hey], maybe the technocrats at the UN can do a better job . . .  --Katherine Watt

Intentional killing: Legal frameworks for State-sponsored biochemical warfare. https://t.co/kXrmm3S0zy

— St. Michael, the Archangel (@aveng_angel) November 9, 2023

Here is a direct link to Katherine Watt's presentation in Iceland. 

2:30. So I'm a writer and a paralegal and I got involved in these things starting from a background I was raised as a traditional Roman Catholic and that's relevant to the work that I've done since becauFridaysRa to Vatican II in the 1960s, the Catholic church had very clear teachings about the difference between truth and error, the nature of man, his final ends in relations between man and Society, and because I was raised in that traditional Catholic upbringing that was kind of the stuff that was going on in my house.  I drifted away from my Catholic faith as a teenager and then I came back to it during COVID-19 because as it dawned on me how evil the big picture was, it also dawned on me that for that coordinated of an evil to be getting so far, there must be something even more good against which it was fighting.

And that brought me back into the faith.  In my young adult [years], I went to Penn State and studied philosophy and Natural Sciences. I worked as a reporter after that for small newspapers and then I got a paralegal certificate, and I understand you don't have those [paralegals] in Iceland but in the United States, a paralegal is a legal assistant who works for lawyers.  The things they can't do are sign documents and appear in court on behalf of people, but pretty much they can do everything else.  We learn how to do legal research.  We learn how to do legal writing.  We learn how to look at the facts of the case when the client brings them in and apply the law that we have researched to the facts of that case.  So when COVID began in the beginning of 2020 that was the skill set with which I had to try to understand what was happening.  And I'm here because Sasha located my work.  I was writing on my website, which is Bailiwick News on Substack, and also during my adult life I started several blogs.  And I did investigator reporting on other issues that turned out to be related, primarily one called "Preemption Doctrine," which is an American legal principle where higher levels of government can supersede each lower level.  And I learned about it in the context of concentrated agricultural feed operations, called CAFOs in the United States.  It's when a company, any corporation, wants to come into a community and do something that the local community thinks will be bad for them or bad for their water or bad for their air.  The local communities would try to pass laws at the local level to stop it, and they would quickly find out that the state could preempt that and tell them no you have to accept this thing that you do not want and that's dangerous for your population. So that was what I had been doing for 15 years at the end of 2019. 

So I was looking at I live in Pennsylvania in the United States and I was watching the lockdowns and the mask mandates, and I had familiarity with constitutional law and civil rights law and a little bit with criminal law and I couldn't figure out why the cases that were being brought by businesses especially . . . they were suing the state government, particularly the governor, to say we have a right to our property; we have a right to our business to be open.  You can't come in with these executive orders and just shut things down.  And the governor said, yes, I can.  And the one case that was most powerful was one called Butler vs. Yates because it was business owners plus a County Government suing the governor, or [County of] Butler vs. Wolf, who was our governor at the time.  The federal judge [William S. Stickman, IV] got the case in May of 2020, and in September of 2020 issued a really good ruling that said "These business owners are correct.  There may be an emergency but the Constitution is designed to be strong enough to withstand emergencies and still protect individual liberties."  Three weeks later, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals, which is the next level up, put a hold on that Federal decision and allowed the executive orders that were shutting down businesses and closing schools and all that to stand.  And it was that pattern that I saw over and over again where cases would come up and then something would come out.  I couldn't tell where it was coming from, from the side, and knock it out before it could do the Constitutional function that the courts are meant to do.  I have since found out just in the last few weeks a reader referred me to the work of Niki Raapana and Nordica Friedrich [Our Common Destiny and the Definitive Anti-Communitarian Manifesto, 2020; other options] on something called communitarian law and that is one of the names for this blanket of other globally driven law that comes into countries and smothers their constitutional law, their criminal codes, everything else under these kinds of circumstances, like what Sasha was talking about with the public health emergency which is how I tracked it through in 2021 and 2022.  All these findings can be replicated.  You can go to the legal system, and the main post that I did about it is called "The American Domestic Bioterrorism Program."  It's a timeline of the laws that are specific to the United States, but the exact same thing is in place in these countries all around the world, because it's driven from higher than the nation-state level.  So, I was watching these cases and I was really confused. 21 got to the beginning of 2022 and I heard a podcast by attorney American attorney Todd Callender in January of 2022 and he talked about the World Health Organization's International Health Regulations 2005 amendments as being the thing that tied these things together it comes in from outside of a nation-state and supersedes or manipulates its law.  And so I did a first report at the end of February 2022, called "Legal Walls of the COVID-19 Kill Box" and that report was more on the global level, bigger picture, and then I kept digging into the specific American laws that implement the IRH 2005 amendments.  I know that there going through another round of revisions right now, and James Roguski is reporting on it and Meryl Nass is reporting on it and lots and lots of people are reporting on it the 2005 ones or the ones that I did the most research on because that's what was in place already at the time that COVID-19 hit. What I found was that things seem to have gotten really underway in 1944 with the Congressional passage of the Public Health Service Act, which established a new branch of the military that was the Public Health Service.  And from that foundation, all of these other things got added on to each other, like Legos, you put the bricks on brick by brick by brick, and then you end up with this wall that sort of surrounds us now.  

10:40. Another key turning point was a 1983 Public Health Emergencies Program [through Project Bioshield Act, 2004, PREP Act, 2005] which was added Again by an act of Congress and Sasha mentioned that too and then the two there's hundreds of pages of these laws they are in lots and lots of different titles which is sections of U.S. law like they're in the Homeland Security section; they're in the Food, Drug, and Cosmetics Act section, and they interweave with each other and Sasha was talking about that too.  

11:14. The especially bad ones that really put the last pieces into place worthy project BioBioShield Act in 2004 and the PrEP Act in 2005. And the way that the International Health Regulations, IHR, work is that it's not a treaty; it's called a legally binding instrument of international law, so it's like a treaty.  Once it is passed through these insane procedures that the World Health Assembly does with negotiators that are . . . this is more than James Roguski covers.  By default, if the World Health Assembly representatives pass something at their annual meeting in May, according to the law of the World Health Organization and the IHR, those things automatically go into effect 18 months later, unless the political body of the member states explicitly rejects those amendments and says, "We are not going to accept them."  And that's what's going on right now.  There was a set of amendments adopted by the World Health Assembly in May 2022, which will automatically go into effect in December 2023, unless the legislators and executives of the member states reject them.  None of them appear to be interested in doing that at this time, but they should be.  Point is that it forces member states to adopt implementing legislation because they are a member state and because they've signed this treaty.  And that's what happened.  All of the laws that are in place in the United States were done to comply with this, and it's ongoing every few months they add more.   

My core findings were that public health amendments are a pretext for power consolidation and legalized mass murder, using state-sponsored biochemical warfare and weapons camouflaged as vaccines and countermeasures.  countermeasures.  This is what Sasha was talking about too.  But I also think that a secondary goal, almost as important if not more important, is that they want to orchestrate constitutional crises worldwide because that will help them consolidate more power with the globalist organizations.  organizations.  If they can get people really angry with their own governments, they can get people interested in, well, and maybe the technocrats at the UN are going to do a better job, so that makes it very tricky for navigating through those two things because the governments are not doing what they're supposed to do to protect their populations, but it's even worse if those governments collapse and the UN moves in.

14:19. The global mechanisms are treaties and treaty-like international instruments.  And then the domestic mechanisms are statutes, regulations, executive orders, contracts, scientific research, and development guidance, legal interpretation documents, and it's mirrored at all levels.  So it's not just that the national government has to do these things.