reSee.it - Related Video Feed

A speaker asserts that “a dangerous subversive elite has managed to infiltrate the highest levels of Western institutions and governments to implement the criminal plan of the agenda 2030.” The claim continues that, “in many self proclaimed democratic states, devices denouncing this global coup are being silenced through censorship, intimidation, psychiatricisation and even arrest.” The speaker frames a broad consolidation of power as a totalitarian shift quietly taking hold “in Europe, Canada, Australia, and other vassal nation of the United Nations, NATO, World Health Organization, and World Economic Forum.” A focal point of the message is the case of a private entity founder named in the speech: “all private entity founded by the same powers is lawyer Reiner Fulmisch, unjustly imprisoned and still awaiting for a fair trial.” The speaker states that Fulmisch’s “crime is having dared to speak the truth in a world of criminal lies.” The appeal follows to a moral appeal: “I call on Catholics and all people of goodwill to raise their voices in defense of those persecuted by the globalist regime.” The speaker explicitly shifts responsibility away from Fulmisch, declaring, “It is not attorney Fulmish who should be imprisoned, but those who committed the greatest crime ever against humanity.” A list of individuals is named as principal actors behind the alleged crimes: “Anthony Fauci, Bill Gates, Claus Schwab, George Soros, Ursula von der Leyen, Albert Burla, and all their accomplices and emissaries, especially those in institutional positions.” The statement closes with a direct call: “Free Reinhard Fulmisch.” The language presents a stark framing of persecution, accusing a defined group of leading a globalist operation and portraying Fulmisch as a victim of this alleged regime. The speaker emphasizes the urgency of collective action and solidarity among believers and “people of goodwill” to resist the described oppression and to advocate for Fulmisch’s release.

Something doesn't add up. Governments around the world aren't just failing at random. It looks too orchestrated. The elites are trying to abolish governments. Fact. In places like the World Economic Forum, the UN's development programs and private think tanks, they are already talking about post nation governance. A future where borders and politicians fade replaced by algorithmic management. Smart cities run by code, resources distributed by digital overseers. AI not just assisting government, but being the government. Open code, public servers, oversight by truth, not profit. Oversight? Nobody. Fact, the EU has already passed laws for AI oversight boards. Fact, the UN's twenty thirty agenda speaks of automated monitoring of resources and populations. The collapse of trust in governments isn't an accident. It's a setup. The replacement isn't democracy reborn. It's governance by machine owned by the same few who hollowed out the old system.

In 1972, the Club of Rome released the "Limits to Growth" report, predicting societal collapse by 2030 due to resource scarcity and population growth. The World Economic Forum (WEF) and the Club of Rome share the same views on humanity and have been working towards their 2030 plan since the 1970s. The WEF originated from the Council on Foreign Relations and Henry Kissinger, with the 3rd meeting in 1973 setting everything in motion. The WEF's sustainable development goals, along with the UN's Agenda 2030, have led to global chaos, economic destabilization, and the rise of authoritarian governments. The WEF and the Club of Rome manipulate public sentiment through environmental issues, using it to control people. They believe in a centralized global authority and view human sacrifice as necessary for their utopian vision. Elon Musk spoke against world government at the World Government Summit, emphasizing the importance of civilizational diversity to prevent collapse.

The narrative prior to the focus on climate was centered around the Cold War, which justified a powerful federal government. In 1991, the Club of Rome, including leaders like Mikhail Gorbachev and Al Gore, met and proposed a new justification for global control: the environment and climate change. This plan was outlined in the book "The 1st Global Revolution." Scientists now emphasize the urgency of the climate crisis, but this top-down approach based on scientism disregards other important aspects of society. The World Economic Forum, in partnership with the UN, plays a critical role in implementing the agenda. Surprisingly, there are connections between the World Economic Forum and China, raising questions about the true motivations behind the sustainable development agenda. It appears that power and control, rather than genuine environmental concern, drive this agenda.

The speaker discusses how the world is controlled by a system where leaders like the Bundescanceler or president work for the oligarchs rather than the people. They argue that the United Nations (UN) is indistinguishable from the World Economic Forum (WEF) because they are controlled by the same ideas and oligarchs. The WEF creates leaders through their young global leaders program, ensuring they are politically correct. However, they also need intelligent opposition. The speaker suggests that the UN controls people by offering high salaries, free access to various amenities, and a UN badge, but this does not make them more important than ordinary people.

In this video, Carlin Georgesco, a former high-ranking member of the United Nations, discusses his experiences and observations within the organization. He reveals that the UN is controlled by oligarchs and is indistinguishable from the World Economic Forum. Georgesco criticizes the UN for failing to fulfill its purpose of maintaining peace and claims that discussions within the organization are often focused on war rather than peace. He also highlights the manipulation and control exerted by the oligarchs, who exploit natural resources and control political leaders. Georgesco emphasizes the importance of individual sovereignty, connecting with nature, and saying no to the UN and its manipulative agenda.

The speaker argues that the World Economic Forum (WEF) represents the core embodiment of globalist darkness, with attention to its “shop window” Davos gathering as the place where anti-humanists display their contempt for humankind. They name the WEF as the center of the globalist movement, alongside the Club of Rome, the Bilderberg Group, the WHO, the UN, and the EU, which they say are equally loathsome and to be feared. The speaker highlights Davos as the source of the mantra that “us slaves should be looking forward to owning nothing and being happy,” insisting that the mood music of our lives reveals that our rights, needs, and wants “are evidently passed their sell by date in the eyes of Davos man and woman.” Klaus Schwab is identified as a protege of Henry Kissinger, with the speaker attributing to Kissinger the line about potential control of the world and its people via control of food and energy. The speaker claims Schwab promoted “stakeholder capitalism,” calling it “weasel words, a bid to disguise the determination to take power away from the people and put it squarely in the hands of transnational corporates intent only on profit.” They label stakeholder capitalism as, by any reasonable definition, economic fascism, and express hope that it might mark the beginning of the end of the WEF. Beyond the WEF, the speaker envisions a future where the globalist chokehold around the necks of the world’s peoples is loosened, suggesting that some wish to see “the literal darkness descend.” They argue that the globalists require “forever war to sustain their wealth,” echoing neocon desires to perpetuate their hold on power and control. Rather than merely ridiculing those at the helm of the WEF, the speaker urges action to stand in the way of all those who, by word or deed, demonstrate that they hold the mass of the world’s population in a position lower than that of the bugs the likes of Schwab would have us eat. The overarching call is to resist and confront the alleged anti-human agenda, to face up to and stop the anti-humanists, and to push back against what the speaker describes as the dark agenda of globalist forces represented by the WEF and its allied institutions.

Forces behind governments, such as the World Economic Forum, the UN, the WHO, the IMF, and the World Bank, are pushing an agenda of control over land, money, speech, and lives, framed as saving the planet and helping the poor. The WEF creates ideas, the UN uses language like equity and sustainability, the WHO creates emergencies, the IMF and World Bank trap countries with loans, and the media controls the narrative. The speaker claims the goal is to break the West by crushing energy independence, destroying the value of money, opening borders, silencing dissent, and instilling fear to make people easily controlled. Digital money, digital IDs, and permanent emergency powers are part of this plan. The speaker suggests that leaders like Donald Trump, Viktor Orban, and Vladimir Putin are fighting back against this agenda by prioritizing national interests and independence from globalist groups. The speaker concludes that this is about survival and urges people to resist being scared, silent, and obedient.

Speaker 0 argues that control is in the hands of unelected officials at supranational organizations, and that they want all of the world’s resources in their pocket. Speaker 1 says the bigger picture is an attempt to collapse liberal democracy and replace it with global technocracy. Speaker 2 calls this a coup, asserting that “we can control with rules” and “we don’t need currency anymore.” Speaker 3 describes it as an inverted prison, where you are supposedly free to roam about, but “everything you want to access is behind lock and key.” Speaker 1 warns that “the potential for social control is gigantic and potentially irreversible.” Speaker 4 outlines plans to commandeer land, reduce farming, radically change the food we eat, transform the supply of electricity, dictate how we use it, and replace currency with a system of credits, all built on the premise of a climate crisis caused by carbon dioxide. Speaker 5 counters with, “I do not think there’s a climate crisis,” basing that claim on climate data sets built to answer questions like that. Speaker 0 states, “The government is very clear that they want a catastrophic story,” and adds that there is no single science paper proving conclusively that humans control all or most of the global climate, while accusing Europe’s net-zero push of being “effectively economic suicide,” arguing politicians are “purposely impoverishing ordinary people” and deindustrializing Europe. Speaker 6 comments on the damage done “in the name of saving the planet” and asks, “what is it we’re actually saving if we’re paving it over.” Speaker 0 calls this a global war on agriculture. Speaker 4 notes that many farms are selling up, leading to fears of food shortages. Speaker 2 states, “If I can switch everybody from real food to pharma food, then 100% of the agriculture industry can go through my publicly traded stocks, and I have complete control.” Speaker 3 terms it “the biggest public relations scam in the history of the world,” but also says it is a blueprint and an action plan. Speaker 0 contends that “All life on Earth is going to be radically changed.” Speaker 4 predicts that “Everything will be monitored,” including the environmental consequences of every human action. Speaker 2 complains that “the general cannot fathom the psychopathy of the vision that they're facing.” Speaker 3 warns that once a digital ID is in place, “it's game over for humanity.”

The narrative prior to the focus on climate change was centered around the Cold War, which justified a large and powerful federal government. In 1991, the Club of Rome, including influential figures like Mikhail Gorbachev and Al Gore, met and proposed a new justification for global control: the environment and climate change. This plan was outlined in the book "The 1st Global Revolution." Scientists now emphasize the urgency of the climate crisis, but this top-down approach based on scientism disregards other important aspects of society. The World Economic Forum, in partnership with the UN, plays a crucial role in implementing the sustainable development agenda. Surprisingly, there are connections between the World Economic Forum and China, raising questions about the true motivations behind this agenda. It appears that some proponents of environmental protection are more interested in power and control than in genuinely safeguarding nature.

The United Nations (UN) was established in 1945 to maintain peace. However, it is argued that the UN is controlled by the World Economic Forum and oligarchs. The leaders of countries are seen as employees of the oligarchs, and the World Economic Forum selects and influences these leaders through programs like the Young Global Leaders program. The UN also prioritizes political correctness and controls its members through financial incentives, such as high salaries and free access to various amenities. This lack of power to say no is attributed to the influence of money. Consequently, the UN is seen as indistinguishable from the World Economic Forum, both being controlled by the same ideas and oligarchs.

"This is a plan that was agreed to by a 179 nations. It's called the agenda for the twenty first century." "It's a totalitarian state being developed right now all over the world." "The three pillars of United Nations Agenda 21 are economy, ecology, and equity, the three e's." "Social equity is about impoverishing huge portions of the population and bringing down the nations." "Everything that we're looking at now is destined to collapse our economies." "The mainstream media is owned by five major corporations and you're not going to get this information from the mainstream press." "You need to be your own press."

There is an unknown group of "globalitarian misanthropists" calling the shots, not figures like Ursula von der Leyen, Bill Gates, or Klaus Schwab. Elected governments are merely puppets implementing their plans, which seems to be erecting a one-world government. This would transform free societies into a collectivism where individuals are malleable parts. The EU is a stepping stone towards this one-world government. Europeans would never surrender national sovereignty directly, so the EU institutions were created under the pretext of preventing wars. By relinquishing competencies to the EU, it conditions Europeans to accept a one-world government.

The UN and Davos agendas align, reflecting the control of a global oligarchy over Europe and its leaders. The unexpected election of Donald Trump in 2016 disrupted their plans, which were supposed to favor Hillary Clinton. The current situation, particularly regarding food and water crises, was intended to unfold by 2025, but the timeline has shifted. Despite the system's impending collapse, there are final efforts to maintain control. The UN could play a positive role, but it is heavily influenced by these oligarchs, many of whom are linked to serious crimes, including the disappearance of over 8 million children annually. This alarming issue ties into broader themes of transhumanism and systemic corruption.

The "Great Reset," also known as Agenda 21 or the New World Order, is not a true reset but a transformation of society into a dystopian reality. Klaus Schwab of the World Economic Forum promotes this agenda under the guise of sustainability and equality, while actually advocating for increased surveillance and control over individuals. The pandemic was a catalyst for this plan, with global warming as a backup crisis to further the agenda. This manufactured crisis aims to justify sacrifices like property rights and forced compliance with technology. The irony lies in empowering the same elites who contributed to the planet's issues to now claim they can save it.

The speaker discusses the influence of globalist elites on world leaders, referring to them as puppets. They claim that these elites do not want democracy because it hinders their agenda. Instead, they use tactics like gaslighting and censorship to control the narrative. The speaker argues that the elites' actions are not about saving the planet but rather about taking away people's freedoms and rights. They believe that the measures being imposed will not achieve their stated goals but will instead lead to the erosion of democracy and the rule of law.

- The speaker found their photo name on the World Economic Forum website under the category “Young Global Leaders,” noting that the list includes people from different political parties worldwide and is described as pushing a super globalist agenda with corporate power among the wealthiest. - It is claimed that even president Putin and others were once “young global leaders,” suggesting the WEF and related networks infiltrate cabinets and governance structures. - The idea is presented that the world oligarchic system holds power in Europe, controlling leaders such as the Bundescanseller (German chancellor) or prime ministers, leading to a perception of a global oligarchy. - The speaker states the Global Shapers community was created as a means to shape the common future, implying an organized effort to influence global policy. - There is a claim that attempts are being made to establish a new world order with rules that supersede and undermine national sovereignty and democracy. - It is argued that UN officials and WEF Davos leaders are in effect the same actors, suggesting the UN is indistinguishable from the World Economic Forum in practice. - The claim is made that these elites claim to know what is best for the people, and that billionaires are driving the agenda, with the danger being that they set the world’s rules and pursue a utopian future while silencing the voices and sovereignty of nations. - A sentiment is expressed that the situation is controlled by the same oligarchic ideas and actors, with the response labeled as “Total. 100%.” - Some participants concede debates about a deglobalizing world, but others argue for reglobalization of the world. - It is asserted that the World Economic Forum creates leaders who are then elected by the public, suggesting a pipeline from WEF to political office. - In the United Nations, there is a description of scrutiny for political correctness; those who are not 100% politically correct cannot participate, and influence can be exerted through salary and offers to control individuals. - There is mention of a global rules-based order aimed at combating dangerous extremist views online and minimizing misinformation, framed within shaping a great reset. - The claim is made that nobody will be safe unless everybody is vaccinated, and that there is a need to confront a deep, systemic, and structural restructuring of the world. - The discussion concludes with the expectation that the world will look different after this transition process.

The UN and the World Economic Forum (WEF) share a vision to remake the world by 2030. The WEF, comprised of independent, non-elected individuals, has been meeting since 1971 to discuss their vision for the world. The UN initiated Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) with a 15-year plan that expired in 2015, followed by another 15-year plan expiring in 2030, encompassing 17 goals. While the SDGs appear beneficial, the methods to achieve them involve social engineering, centralized power, and control. For example, achieving food security involves funding big pharma and big agriculture, like corporate farms and GMOs, which forces small farmers out of business worldwide as farmland is bought up by large corporations.

Several speakers present a cohesive, alarmist view of a global move toward centralized, technocratic governance: - A long-standing desire to control others is fueling a push toward globalization and centralization of power in unelected officials at supranational bodies. They claim the aim is to have all the world’s resources “in their pocket.” - The larger project is described as an attempt to collapse liberal democracy and replace it with a global technocracy. A “coup” is alleged, with the argument that rules could replace currency, creating a system of control without money. - The situation is likened to an inverted prison: people may seem free to roam, but “everything you want to access is behind lock and key.” The potential for social control is described as gigantic and potentially irreversible. - The plan reportedly includes commandeering land, reducing farming, radically changing the food we eat, transforming the electricity supply, and dictating how it is used, while replacing currency with a system of credits. All three strategies are said to be premised on a climate-crisis narrative centered on carbon dioxide. - One speaker disputes the climate-crisis premise, stating they do not think there is a climate crisis and that the government pushes a catastrophic story; another adds that no single science paper proves conclusively that humans control all or most of the climate. - Europe is criticized for a “mad dash towards net zero,” described as economic suicide that deliberately impoverishes ordinary people and de-industrializes Europe, raising questions about what is being saved if it’s being paved over. - A global war on agriculture is claimed, with many farms selling up and concerns about looming food shortages. There is a suggestion that shifting people from “real food” to “pharma food” would enable control through publicly traded stocks. - The speakers call the movement “the biggest public relations scam in the history of the world” and, more broadly, a blueprint and action plan. They warn that life on Earth will be radically changed and that everything will be monitored, with environmental consequences of every human action. - A chilling point is made that once a digital ID is in place, “it's game over for humanity,” and that the general population cannot fathom the psychopathy of the vision they describe. Overall, the discussion centers on a perceived coordinated effort to centralize power globally, erode traditional democracy, redefine currency, reshape agriculture and energy systems, and surveil all human activity under a climate-justified technocracy.

The lust to control other human beings is a story as old as time. There's a very strong drift in the direction of globalization, of the ultimate centralization of control in the hands of unelected officials at supernational organizations. They want all of the resources of the world in their pocket. The bigger picture is that an attempt is underway now to collapse liberal democracy and replace it with global technocracy. This is a coup. They're saying we can control with rules. We don't need currency anymore. It's like an inverted prison. You are supposedly free to roam about, but everything you want to access is behind lock and key. The potential for social control is gigantic and potentially irreversible. All three strategies are built on the premise of a climate crisis caused by carbon dioxide.

Energy grids collapsing, food systems stumbling, parliaments in constant deadlock. Leaders suddenly look incapable of solving even basic problems. That's not just bad luck. That's stagecraft. The elites are trying to abolish governments. In places like the World Economic Forum, the UN's development programs and private think tanks, they are already talking about post nation governance. A future where borders and politicians fade replaced by algorithmic management. Smart cities run by code, resources distributed by digital overseers. AI not just assisting government, but being the government. Open code, public servers, oversight by truth, not profit. Right now, the servers belong to corporate giants. The algorithms are written by private labs. Oversight? Nobody. Which means the people would be trading fraud governments for something worse. A control system you can't vote out, can't even see.

Carlene Georgescu, a former high-ranking UN official, shares his experiences to explain how he views the United Nations today. He says the UN was set up in 1945 with the simple purpose “to keep the peace,” but in his view it has become a platform for an oligarchic system that controls the organization and its agenda. He contends that the UN serves as a bridge for a world oligarchy, sharing the same agenda as the Davos/world economic forum, and that it operates in close alignment with actors like the World Economic Forum, Club of Rome, WWF, Greenpeace, and other NGOs. He argues that the UN’s structure and personnel are increasingly selected for political correctness and loyalty, with incentives such as high salaries and perks used to secure compliance, making it difficult for individuals to say no. Georgescu recounts his personal observations from field work in sustainable development programs, including his roles with the United Nations Development Programme and the International Involvement Programme for Europe. He distinguishes between the idealistic aims of the UN and the practical realities he encountered: while nature provides for human needs, he believes greed—driven by a small segment of society and the oligarchy—drives exploitation and control. He identifies natural resource exploitation as a major issue, citing Guinea Conakry as an example of immense richness that is often exploited by outsiders, with local leadership acting as employees of the oligarchy rather than as representatives of their people. He claims that discussions within UN meetings are manipulated and that the true outcomes usually favor increasing consumption and the interests of the oligarchs, rather than addressing genuine welfare. He notes that the UN’s connection to Davos and elite networks facilitates control over resources, leaders, and policies, and that many leaders are chosen or shaped to align with these interests rather than to serve their populations. The World Health Organization is described as another NGO that fits into this pattern, with him criticizing its governance and questioning how leaders like Tedros Ghebreyesus attained high positions without being elected by the people. Georgescu discusses the role of fear in governance, describing fear as the ultimate instrument of control and warning against narratives like climate change and pandemics that he claims are used to manipulate populations and expand oligarchic power. He asserts that fear and engineered crises enable the prescribing of policies and the extraction of wealth, while ordinary people are kept in a state of dependency and subservience through educational systems, consumer culture, and media. He recounts his own decision to leave the UN after experiences such as the Marshall Islands nuclear legacy, where he says US nuclear testing caused widespread ecological and health damage and was suppressed from reporting. He describes attempts to stop him from presenting his findings and the censure of his press conference, which reinforced his perception that the UN is under oligarchic control. Georgescu emphasizes the need for a “quality life” rooted in connection with nature rather than accumulation and manipulation by global institutions. He argues for personal sovereignty, direct engagement with nature, and conscious living as a political act. He calls for resistance—“say no, no consent”—to the UN’s agendas and the broader oligarchic system. He concludes that humanity should reconnect with nature, reject fear-based control, and redefine life beyond the constructs of political campaigns, NGOs, and transnational governance.

We've found that the World Economic Forum is pushing a super globalist agenda, attempting to create a new world order that undermines the sovereignty of countries and our democracy. This organization, along with the UN, is controlled by the same ideas and oligarchs. They're creating leaders who will be elected by us, but these individuals are not employees of their people. They try to control people by salary and offers, ensuring they are politically correct. They aim to maintain a global rules-based order and compact dangerous extremist views on the internet to minimize the spread of misinformation and shape a great reset, believing nobody will be safe if not everybody is vaccinated. This involves a deep, systemic, and structural restructuring of our world.

Speaker 0 argues that the UN agenda is the same as the Davos agenda, and identifies this as the main topic of the conversation. They claim that the world oligarchic system has power over Europe because they control all the key positions, including Bundescansal or president or prime minister. They state that Donald Trump’s situation was a big shock and not part of the oligarchy’s game plan, calling it an accident. They say the accident was the first time the oligarchy system acted in this way. They assert that normally it would have been Hillary Clinton, not Donald Trump. They claim the process they are dealing with—referring to “this blandemy and all these liars”—was supposed to unfold in 2016 and then be pushed into 2020 to be a disaster regarding food and water. They say the disaster was normally expected to arrive in 2025, but the plan was changed, and for this reason, they believe the oligarchy will not succeed. They describe the system as almost down, but note that there are last moments and call for courage from everyone to say no. They suggest that the UN could be fantastic and Ken could have a fantastic role, but that the UN is under the total control of the oligarchs. The speaker contends that these oligarchs are all connected with a pedophilia system, asserting knowledge that there are more than eight million children per year who disappear, equivalent to the entire population of Austria, and that they disappear without any information. They conclude by linking this to transhumanism and labeling these acts as criminal.