UN Pact of the Future Dont Call It Conspiracy But It Is | The David Knight Show

The Pact of the Future. Have you heard about this? This is from The Last American of Agabond. This is the first I’ve heard of the Pact of the Future, P-A-C-T. What would be another name for a pact? Oh, a conspiracy? The conspiracy of the future? And of course they also make no bones. They’re not talking about the soy bones either. They make no bones about talking about their agenda for the future as well. Well, if you’ve got an agenda for the future, isn’t that a conspiracy or a pact for the future? Isn’t that a conspiracy? Well, like I said, this is from The Last American of Agabond.

It’s picked up by Technocracy News. Patrick businesses and individuals. It’ll be game over for liberty. The forces behind this push include the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the Rockefeller family, the Open Society of Soros, members of the Club of Rome, the WHO drives the UN, unelected and unaccountable technocrats. Yes, that’s absolutely the case. And of course, that is the key reason for why they have to have a global pandemic or global warming. If you’ve got global warming and that gives you a problem that has to be solved globally, except that the Paris Climate Accord doesn’t apply to China or India.

So that’s part of the fraud right there. And some environmentalists have pointed out that big contradiction. You’re going to take the two most populous countries on earth and you’re going to exclude them. You’re going to say they can build as many power plants and they can be as dirty as they wish and you don’t care about it. But you’re going to call this a global issue. Well, obviously it isn’t. And so, but they have to have a global issue so they can have global taxes because you can’t have a global government if you don’t have global taxes.

In September, the UN’s 79th General Assembly will host the highly anticipated Summit of the Future. Should have some echo for that. Where the nations will sign the Pact of the Future, a major step toward the creation of a world government. The 79th session of the UN General Assembly at the summit where member states are expected to declare, quote, a planetary emergency as part of the so-called Pact of the Future. Well, as Pact of the Future is going to be a document that I won’t be able to find my signature on. So I think I’m not going to be paying any attention to it.

It’s going to affect us in other ways though. And it reveals what their plans really are. The summit has been in the making since at least 2022 after repeated calls by UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres to shift financial resources to rapidly complete the agenda 2030 goals set by the UN in 2015. They’ve got a deadline of 2030. They’re running out of time. So we’re going to have to risk people figuring out what we’re really about because we got to get this thing done and we don’t have too much more time. In September 2021, Secretary General released his report, Our Common Agenda.

It’s a common agenda. Oh, but it’s not a conspiracy. It’s just a common agenda. It’s just a pact. It’s just a pact. Which called for accelerating the implementation of the sustainable development goals. And that’s what they put together in 2015. When they rolled it out in the 80s and 90s, they were calling it Agenda 21. And you could see what the agenda was. They wanted to push everybody into a few gigantic cities and have the rest of the country vacant under their control. But it was going to happen sometime in the 21st century.

And then in 2015, they got very specific about the date that they wanted all this stuff to happen. And then those big concentrated cities that you could see on their agenda 21 maps, they then named them smart cities. And they started telling us details about how they wanted to imprison us and them. And, but it all had to be done, you know, the 2015, that’s when they came out with the sustainable development goals and the end period of 2030. And again, it all aligns with this cycle of human history that Strauss and Howe and the fourth turning identified going back 500 years and looking at every four generations, you have a major restructuring of all the institutions.

It’s always accompanied by major economic unrest, usually accompanied by wars. The previous fourth turning was the depression and world war two. Prior to that, the civil war and civil war is not just an American phenomenon. It was part of the industrial revolution and the creation of the nation States. And you can see it happening in a lot of different industrialized countries or countries are moving towards industrialization. Italy, for example, had a civil war over this very thing to create the nation state of Italy. And their dates were exactly the same 1861, 1865.

The civil war was about the creation of the nation state as part of the industrial revolution. And we’re at a similar situation right now. What these guys calls the first industrial revolution, right? Of course, Klaus says it as force instead of fourth, he calls it force. It’ll be a forced industrial revolution if they can pull it off. And then prior to that, we had the American revolution. And at that point in time, everybody really wasn’t synchronized. But now the whole world is synchronized in the same 80 year cycle. So they know that.

And the people Strauss and Howe did it. They said, when they did in the early nineties, they said, sometime in the mid 2000s, there’s going to be a global financial crisis. And that was the great recession that happened. And then it’ll, that’ll kick off the fourth turning and it’ll culminate probably around 2029, they said. And so these people have set 2030 as their date for when they want to have all this new society. And during the summit of the future, you and member States are also likely to vote to radically alter the UN itself.

Some of them are calling it UN 2.0. So this should have been killed. Instead, Trump sent this reprehensible character, Nikki Haley, to be our ambassador to the UN. It coals to Newcastle, isn’t it? People like John Bolton, people like Nikki Haley are our ambassadors to the UN instead of getting rid of it, which is what a genuine conservative would do or a libertarian. They get rid of our support of the UN. The very nature of how nation States make decisions regarding the future of the planet is on, is on at stake here.

And as a matter of fact, we go back to, I think it was 2014. I think the Pope got in 2013. It was like within the first year, he does his climate encyclical. That was his number one focus, strangely. And if you’re Catholic, you should find that strange. But when I started looking at that, I saw the guy that was writing most of this stuff for him, John Schellenhuber, was the chief Vatican scientist. But he was also a lackey, a key lackey, for King Charles. And King Charles had this thing he called the Earth League.

And he had pictures of John Schellenhuber and other grifters like that in this really ornate room. It reminded me of the League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, thank you, except they’re not really extraordinary. They’re pretty ordinary. But they were calling for the Earth League, and they wanted, I forget what they call it, World Constitution or something. They had a planetary council, which is going to be like some legislative body that was, and they had a global court, a global constitution, a global legislative body. All of this stuff was there. And the Pope and King Charles even had the same little Fauci-like character, John Schellenhuber, that was working with both of them.

The state of purpose of the global digital compact at the summit of the future. So you got the UN. The UN has a summit of the future. Then they have the global digital compact as part of that as well. And everything that you see is all global, global, global. State of purpose of this is to quote, establish an inclusive global framework essential for multi-stakeholder. There’s that word again. But I tell you, when you see stakeholder, you should think of vampire killer. We need more stakeholders like that. We got to somehow drive the stake through the heart of these vampires.

Now I’m using that as an allegory, as a metaphor for all of you sensors that are out there. Stakeholder action required to overcome digital data and innovation divides. Now here’s something that I found very interesting about this. You would expect that they’re going to continue to have more and more of these conferences and programs and that all of these different globalist organizations are going to be interlocked on all this stuff, which is the case. And he goes through this article talking about a great deal of that. But the thing I thought was most interesting is the fact that economist Jeffrey Sachs has gone all in on this.

Now, if you’ve seen Jeffrey Sachs, you’ve probably seen him celebrated by alternative media, like Jimmy door or like Russell brand as somebody who was questioning what was going on with the pandemic. And as part of that, he was focused on gain of function and lab leak. Now that’s supposed to tell you that this person was opposing the pandemic. Is that what we’re supposed to believe now? I’ve been saying for the longest time, and I think Jeffrey Sachs is a good example of this, that the people who are pushing the lab leak gain of function nonsense are Buck Owen and USA says David needs to hire me to consultant his homes that I probably would do much better with advice from Buck Owens, even from junior samples would probably help us a great deal.

But again, getting back to this, okay, so you’ve got the alternative media out there. And from the very beginning, as I said, and I called it a grift when it was happening, I said these people are pushing gain of function out of China to scare people who watch alternative media. The people who are watching and believing mainstream media, they were told that this, they, Oh yeah, okay. I believe it because Fauci told me these other people are like, I don’t know. I don’t know. And that’s okay. You know, Trump’s got this.

It’s 40 chess. And we know that it’s actually coming from the Chinese, our enemies, and it’s came out of the lab and it came from people like Fauci. And they latched onto this gain of function stuff, which is very dangerous and should be shut down and had been shut down, had been shut down during the Obama administration. When it blew up, we had USA Today series of articles that was done by a reporter there and, and Congress got involved and they shut down the funding, but Francis Collins and Fauci continued it.

They continued it at some universities in America. The most notable of those was UNC Chapel Hill, but they also continued it abroad in China at Wuhan and Defiance. And then in 2017, when Trump became president, he removed the restrictions on gain of function stuff. But now we’re supposed to believe that this is real and that this is something that was done by the Chinese to get Trump, even though he’s the one that removed the funding for the gain of function in Wuhan and all the rest of the stuff. And so they use that and people were censored off of social media.

Don’t say that you see. And I’ve said, and I continue to say it, I believe that the gain of function from the very beginning was a grift. It was to make money for people like Alex and Mike Adams who were selling storeable food and all that kind of stuff, but it was also to give fear and credibility to the people who would doubt Fauci, who would doubt the CDC. And so it was like, well, these are people that I trust for my information. They’re saying this is real. So I believe that it’s real.

And to make it more real, they censored people who said that because now those people have not only been brought back, but they’ve been promoted as heroes. They’ve been elevated. And now this is the official story. And now the mainstream media has jumped on board with this and even Fauci to a little bit of an extent, but, you know, pushing it away. But everybody has been on this gain of function Wuhan lab stuff. And so Jeffrey Sachs was going around, um, in March of 2023, he was really kind of the pivot point where based on what he was saying, he kind of legitimized it for the mainstream media to do an 180 and to pivot to say, well, you know, uh, as this whole narrative of a virus was falling apart, they revive it with the gain of function, out of control, mad scientist lab.

I was working in the lab late one night, you know, that type of thing. So, you know, that is, uh, and he was key in terms of turning that around March 2023. That’s about when they were doing this stuff. And so he goes on with Jimmy door and he goes on Russell, Russell brand. So this guy is with alternative media and he’s going to tell us the truth about all this stuff. No, anybody that’s pushing you the gain of function stuff and the Wuhan lab is part of the system folks. They’re lying, whether it’s intentional or not, they’re lying about that.

And here’s what he’s doing now. Now, Jeffrey Sachs, and they say in this article here, however, Sachs has long been a proponent for the UN. So from this, well, he was going on with alternative media, telling everybody about the lab leak before it was cool. Well, no, actually he was the pivot. Um, and, um, uh, he was chairing the Lancet’s COVID commission between 2020 and 2022. He was at the epicenter of the establishment in the UK. The Lancet is like their, uh, journal of the American medical association JAMA. So he’s at the center of it chairing it.

And then in 2023, he pivots and starts talking about the lab leak as their COVID virus narrative is falling to pieces. And people are realizing that there was no virus. There was no pandemic. He comes out and says, Oh, it came from the lab. Okay. And now they say, however, no, it’s not a however, it’s because, because of who he is, because he is a key figure in switching the narrative. They said, uh, Sachs has long been a proponent for the UN and their sustainable development goals. Not only was he chairing the Lancet COVID-19 commission between 2020 and 2022, but he is the director of the center for sustainable development at Columbia university.

Columbia university, by the way, says the last American bag of on is the home of the original technocracy movement. Sachs is also president of the UN sustainable development solutions network. So wait a minute, Jeffrey Sachs is like the MacGuffin master. He runs the COVID MacGuffin and then he runs the climate MacGuffin as well. Yeah, that same guy. And that same guy who was running the climate MacGuffin, um, uh, the COVID MacGuffin and now wants to run the climate MacGuffin. And he always has been running the climate MacGuffin. He’s always been there with a sustainable development stuff, but he’s also the guy who in 2023 pivoted and said, yeah, um, it really did come from a lab as everybody was catching on to the virus being a hoax.

According to Sachs and the technocrats at the UN, the poly crisis or multiple simultaneous crises cannot be solved by any one country alone. In fact, Sachs makes it perfectly clear that from his position, he’s advocating for giving the UN more power to implement policies for the entire world. And here’s what he says, quote, on the goal of reforming the UN system, the key is to give more power to UN institutions and to make them more representative. This is the guy who said, yeah, yeah, we’re gonna, it was coming from a lab and, and was instrumental in the pivot.

But I’m telling you, the people who did it at the very beginning, whether they did it for the UN or where they did it to line their pockets and fleece their viewers, they were given credibility to something that was never an epidemic, never a pandemic, never an isolated virus, and they were doing it for their own good. But the end result of that was that they were pushing people to take the Trump shot as well, even telling you it was sugar water. Sachs also echoes previous calls for new financial instruments. Here’s where we move into CBDC and a complete restructuring of the financial system, new financial instruments to fund the transformation of the world, including a new system of international taxes, of course, on CO2 emissions, on shipping, on aviation, on financial transactions, put a international tax.

This is one of the things we haven’t talked about before. When they get a global CBDC, oh well, you know, we got to pay somehow for the people who are doing this. So they’ll put a tax on each and every transaction. Not only will they record and watch each and every transaction, not only will they look and see if you’re buying meat, have you had too much meat already this month? Sorry, you can’t buy that. But if they allow you to buy it, they’ll put a special global tax on it, a processing fee.

So you can’t have a world government without a global tax, and they’re going to be applying that to everything. The goal of reforming the international financial system to fund the sustainable development goals, to fund agenda 2030, mimics recent statements made by Antonio Gutierrez of the UN, where he called for a new Bretton Woods moment. This is extremely dangerous to our democracy. Break free from the usual script with a David Knight show, a fresh perspective, bringing you genuine insights on current events. But if the show is going to stay on the air, we’ll need your continued support.

Sharing the show, subscribing, and even just hitting the like button all help. And if you found our show helpful, please consider donating and becoming a part of a community that values the truth. Because independent listener funded news, untouched by corporate globalist agendas, is extremely important to our liberties. [tr:trw].

See more of The David Knight Show on their Public Channel and the MPN The David Knight Show channel.