Andrew Johnson – ad.johnson@ntlworld….
Mar 2016
Based on this presentation:
Introduction
In this long article, I will try to bring together quite a few threads of research to illustrate how various methods have been used to cajole and goad people into a certain way of thinking about the future of urbanised/industry-based civilisation. Whilst it might seem like I am disagreeing with the idea of having a more peaceful, equitable world where resources of all kinds are used responsibly, this is not the case. I am questioning the entire basis on which it is claimed that we would achieve such a state. This is because I now know and can prove the falsity of most or all the main assumptions which underlie what the “ruling consensus” wants to promote.
The Purpose / Goal of this Article
The purpose of this article is to contribute to a reversal of something called Agenda 21 (you will find out what this is in reading this article). I hope that by the 22nd century, all humans will be free and sovereign. I hope there will be no slavery and no exploitation and that all people will have access to responsible use of free energy, cheap non toxic health treatments and even star travel, if they wish. I hope there will be no advantage for anyone believing a particular set of ideas and that they will be free to believe or not believe what they like, with no penalties or restrictions. I hope they will understand the difference between belief and knowledge. I hope that no group will be able to influence beliefs for their own gain and that no group or individual will be controlled by any other, unless they wish to be controlled. I hope to see self-determination in a way not seen on Earth before.
So let me say that I have an agenda – let’s call it “Agenda 22” (an interesting number, if ever there was one…). It is to expose the basis of lies and incomplete evidence on which Agenda 21 – and similar programmes are based. This exposition is a very slow process – so perhaps my agenda will take more than 100 years to implement. It might be complete by the 22nd Century, but that depends on you, dear reader and whether you would like to invest the time in reviewing any of the links and information herein…
The Myth of Cassandra
In Greek mythology, Cassandra was one of the princesses of Troy – daughter of Priam and Hecuba. Not only was she incredibly beautiful, she could foretell the future. At the same time, she was cursed – no one believed what she said. It was Cassandra that foretold the destruction of Troy in the Trojan War – she is also said to have predicted many of the events of the War. In another part of the myth, she warned her brother, Priam’s son Paris, against taking a trip to Sparta. Her warnings ignored, Paris travelled to Sparta, where he kidnapped Helen, and this started the war with Greece. Cassandra predicting Troy’s defeat, warned the Trojans not to accept the Greek gift of the giant wooden horse – but she was ignored again and Greek troops, hidden inside the horse, captured the city.
Perhaps what John Lennon realised before the age of 20 made him feel like the mythical Cassandra.
“I think our society is run by insane people for insane objectives. And I think that’s what I sussed when I was sixteen and twelve, way down the line. … I think we’re being run by maniacs for maniacal ends, you know. If anybody can put on paper what our government, and the American government, and the Russian, Chinese… what they are actually trying to do, and how and what they think they’re doing, I’d be very pleased to know what they think they’re doing. I think they’re all insane. But I am liable to be put away as insane for expressing that, you know. That’s what is insane about it.”
“Becoming Cassandra”
Over the last 12-13 years, I have learned a great deal about the way in which the world is ruled by secrecy and vested interests. I can’t say that, at any single point, I was shocked by this realisation, because it was a process which was slow and incremental. I have come to understand that all major political parties, large organisations, governments and even big charities and other large NGO’s have “two faces.” They have a public face, with stated goals, objectives and ideology and they have a hidden face, which somehow, communicates or interacts with a hidden power structure. This hidden power structure seems to primarily use fear and deception to maintain itself. It has widespread influence in all fields of human affairs – banking, medicine, science and academia, national government, local government and what might now be called “international government.” These statements can seem paranoid, delusional or crazy to those who have not studied the same evidence that I have and/or not had the experience that I have. So now, let’s get started on “Agenda 22” and expose some of the global deception…
Global Warming/Climate Change
I have already written, at length, about this global scam, which has gained popularity since approximately the end of the 1980’s – up to which time thinking was that a new Ice Age was about to begin. Since the early 1990’s, a relentless campaign of propaganda has been in operation, employing vast resources to cajole and convince the general population that we must “change our errant ways” to reduce our “carbon footprint” (one of the most meaningless phrases ever coined) or face extinction. This campaign has employed many so-called scientists and even Hollywood stars and other artists and it has been a huge success. Perhaps because people aren’t able to distinguish between environmental destruction and pollution, environmentalists can manipulate them – almost at will. The bottom line is that most people “do the best with what they are given.” Unfortunately, as I have written about and discussed elsewhere, the most important and comprehensive options for mitigating environmental destruction have been kept hidden in black projects and any hints of discovery of profoundly world-changing technologies or techniques have been swiftly and effectively suppressed, crushed or otherwise prevented from coming into general usage.
It is this suppression, I would argue, that has therefore enabled the “hidden power structure” to control people’s lives – because they claim that the standard technologies and processes in use are too destructive, dirty or dangerous and so we all need to be told what we can and can’t do.
Global Warming and the Club of Rome.
I have heard it said that much of this thinking originally came out of a think tank called “The Club of Rome” – which “advises” the United Nations (more about them later) on various issues.
A blueprint for the 21st century, this report by the Club of Rome sets forth a strategy for world survival at the onset of the first global revolution on a small planet we seem hellbent to destroy. With conclusions that are even more far-reaching that those of its Limits to Growth report 20 years ago, this new global revolution comes into being amid social, economic, technological, and cultural upheavals, and calls for an all-out attack on world crises.
In common with all similar documents, it completely omits any mention of free energy technologies and the suppression of them.
Of course, the paragraph above could easily have come from the Agenda 21 document itself, which we will discuss later. For now, let’s consider how Pope Francis himself (also associated with Rome, of course!) has fuelled the propaganda / lie machine as recently as September 2015:
“Mr President, I find it encouraging that you are proposing an initiative for reducing air pollution. Accepting the urgency, it seems clear to me Climate change is a problem which can no longer be left to a future generation.”
So, either the Pope himself has knowingly become a propagandist, or he has just not studied the available evidence which shows how bogus the “air pollution” story is.
And of course it’s not only the Club of Rome that pushes the propaganda – it is pushed by both left and right wing political parties, NGO’s and most if not all environmental groups like “Friends of the Earth” and so on.
Agenda 21 – “Saving the Planet” – Underlying Assumptions
The underlying assumptions behind Agenda 21 and similar or related initiatives can be said to be as follows:
· There are too many consumers.
· Consumption is damaging the environment.
· Human activity is producing “greenhouse gases” (we hear incessantly about Carbon Dioxide and “carbon footprints”)
· Steps need to be taken to “change habits” and stop or reduce environmental damage.
· We humans need to live in a “sustainable way.”
Of course, the ideas of carbon footprints, carbon credits etc have been written into government policies and EU directives, even though there is no real evidence that anthropogenic CO2 has affected global temperature in any way. (See “Climate Gate” and, for example, my document called “Re-Investigating Climate Change”.)
Who’s Who in Global Warming
One of the main figures who was responsible for starting the pattern of thought that there was such a thing as anthropogenic (human-made) global warming was James Lovelock. His invention of the electron capture detector in 1957 gave scientists a way of more accurately measuring levels of atmospheric pollution – such as CFCs (chlorofluorocarbons). Later, he theorised that the Earth operates as a single, living organism and reacts to those other life forms damaging or infecting it. This was called the Gaia theory (and was a big part of the plot line in a 1985 BBC Thriller series called “Edge of Darkness”)
However, in April 2012, even Lovelock said in an interview to msnbc.com that he had been unduly ‘alarmist’ about climate change.
A small note is that Lovelock, in 1954, did receive some funding from the Rockefeller Travelling Fellowship in Medicine. (Rockefeller is a name that seems to come up quite frequently when studying environmentalism.)
Another of the names which comes up in researching the beginnings of the global warming scam is Maurice Strong who was a Canadian multimillionaire. In 1947, he started work as a clerk at the UN Offices in New York, where he first met none other than David Rockefeller. By the 1960’s, Maurice Strong had become wealthy from Canada’s oil industry. According to an article in the Daily Telegraph, “
Strong came to see that the key to his vision was ‘environmentalism’, the one cause the UN could harness to make itself a truly powerful world government.
In an article on Maurice Strong’s own website by Ruud Lubbers, former Prime Minister of the Netherlands Lubbers writes:
Indeed, China represents the need and possibility to create a truly multi-polar world. The challenge for climate change and sustainable development is very much about China. Maurice Strong, Mikhail Gorbachev, Steven Rockefeller and myself, we invested enormously in the Earth Charter Initiative
It should come as no surprise that it was essentially Strong who was responsible for setting up the 1992 Rio Summit – where Agenda 21 was first tabled. It is essentially a set of “guidelines” referencing all walks of life – and even education… more on this later…
Who wouldn’t want to protect the environment and make it “Sustainable”?
By the early 1990’s, global warming propaganda had been underway for several years (in the 1970’s, the fashion was that an Ice Age was on the way). It was easy to promulgate this propaganda – showing pictures and videos of factories belching smoke, polluted lakes and rainforest being chopped down, starving children in Africa and wasteland created by drought. “This has to stop!” we all cried (whilst having no idea what had been kept from us).
Of course, as humans were “destroying the environment,” it was time to make human activities “sustainable” and a detailed “plan” of how to do this was presented at the United Nations Conference on Environment & Development in Rio de Janerio, Brazil, 3 to 14 June 1992. A document called “AGENDA 21 – The United Nations Programme of Action from Rio” was published. The title presumably was meant to be an “Agenda for the 21st century…” This document is 351 pages long. The logo looks to me like a globe held in a stylised hand, symbolising Global control?
A look at the contents page might make you think that it seems like a sensible, benign plan – encouraging careful and responsible use of resources. This, I would agree, is always needed. Later, we will look at why this cannot be the primary goal of the plan.
For now, we shall note that even the contents pages contain the word “sustainable” or “sustainability” a total of 8 times. Another key section seems to be “4. Changing consumption patterns.” Section 4.25 says:
Some progress has begun in the use of appropriate economic instruments to influence consumer behaviour. These instruments include environmental charges and taxes, deposit/refund systems, etc. This process should be encouraged in the light of country-specific conditions.
Since 1992, certainly here in the UK, we have seen a steady increase in systems of “penalties” and “rewards” related to activities which are deemed to have an environmental impact. However, how much environmental damage have these saved? For example, we have solar panels to heat water and generate some electricity. Though this may have saved the “burning of fuels,” how much fuel and resources were actually consumed in the manufacture, construction and transport of the solar panels themselves? This would be difficult to quantify accurately.
Section 10 is called “Integrated approach to the planning and management of land resources”. In some areas of the USA, this is being strictly enforced – and there are now some examples of people being charged or arrested for growing food on their own property.
Also of note is section 27 “Strengthening the role of non-governmental organizations: partners for sustainable development.” One thing about NGO’s is that the general public has, in theory, less control over these than government organisations. There are some cases where their funding is less transparent and their connections seem to be dubious. To give an example, Greenpeace can be scrutinized regarding their scale and sources of funding. An article on the “Big Green Radicals” Website notes:
Undercover reporting by a French journalist under the pen name Olivier Vermont uncovered numerous revealing facts when secretly working at Greenpeace. Vermont spent 10 months working at Greenpeace after presenting himself as an unemployed photographer willing to serve as a volunteer. He ended up serving as an unpaid secretary giving him widespread access to confidential information.
In addition to uncovering Greenpeace’s collusion with government and industry, his access to secret financial accounts found that a meager six percent of revenue went to field operations while 11 percent went to legal expenses to attack the organization’s critics and defend members who had run afoul with the law.
Of course, the website that this came from mentions nothing about the suppression of things like free energy and ongoing geoengineering activities, which we will discuss later.
Agenda 21 – Random Observations…
Having glanced through the document, I made the following observations
· No authors are listed…
· There is limited referencing.
· Not much reference to Carbon Footprints specifically (perhaps that buzz phrase came later).
· There is 1 reference to global warming P193, Section 17.125
· There are no graphs, charts or images.
The style is persuasive and the language and arguments fairly simplistic. However, I was alerted to what is behind this by listening to Rosa Koire.
In Agenda 21 derived materials, you will find certain key phrases and “initiatives.” You will find that these are quite common parlance now in Local Government Literature, Business and Environmental Literature and so on. Phrases include:
· Sustainable Development
· Smart Cities
· Smart Growth
· Mega Regions
· Regional Development / Regional Planning
· Environmental justice
· Beyond Traffic
· “Ecology, Equity, Economy”
· Smart Meter
· Smart Motorway
Rosa Koire and “Behind the Green Mask”
Rosa Koire is a forensic commercial real estate appraiser who worked for the California Department of Transportation and her work ultimately brought her into contact with Agenda 21 related documents and procedures, her twenty-eight year career in litigation support on land use has culminated in exposing the impacts of Sustainable Development on private property rights and individual liberty in parts of the USA.
In 2005 she was elected to a citizens’ oversight committee in Santa Rosa, Northern California, to review a proposed 1,300 acre redevelopment project in which 10,000 people live and work. She, with her partner Kay Tokerud, challenged the fraudulent basis for this huge project (which was in the area she lived). That case has been ongoing.
She has worked diligently to raise awareness of the true goals of Agenda 21 and she has been illustrating to people how it is based onCommunitarianism – “a social and political philosophy that emphasizes the importance of community in the functioning of political life.” Essentially, Agenda 21 encourages or promotes a form of global communism. In this way of thinking, the rights of the community, in general, outweigh the rights of the individual. With a basis which assumes all our everyday activities may damage the environment in some way, “permission” is then given to impose restrictions on almost everything we do and how we live. Rosa points out that this form of thinking has gained more acceptance in the corridors of bureaucracy using “the Delphi Technique” where “The goal is to reduce the range of responses and arrive at something closer to expert consensus.” This can be done through making people feel awkward if they stand up for a different way of thinking or doing something.
Implemented fairly and equitably, Agenda 21 type policies may improve the quality of life for certain people. As Rosa Koire describes in her book, in some detail, though it is claimed that changes are made with public consultation, this is not really the case. The way that planning meetings are organised – to essentially give the illusion of public approval for a pre-determined plan, seems to represent a form of global corporatized fascism – with unelected officials and large corporations “calling the shots.”
Rosa Koire, like many others who try to reveal truths damaging to those seeking to further the global fascism agenda, has been marginalised, smeared and ridiculed – and just ignored. One example of this can be seen in a Huffington Post interview by Andrew Reinbach. This reporter, (who says he is Jewish in the same interview) tried to link her to “crazy people talking about zionists.” Instead of accurately reporting what Rosa Koire had said to him, he wrote an article which is essentially uncritical of Agenda 21 and, like everyone else who writes about, he ignores all the reasons why it must be a scam.
Rosa Koire says, ‘It is the blueprint, it is the action plan, to inventory and control all land, all water, all plants, all minerals, all construction, all animals, all means of production, all energy, all information and all the human beings in the world. It is a completely comprehensive plan, it’s global and it’s implemented locally… It is in every single town all across the United States and across the world.’
In her book “Behind the Green Mask,” she walks the reader through various real-world scenarios (based in the USA) of people wishing to use their land in certain ways. She describes how they have been penalised for, or restricted in their plans by Agenda 21 policies which have now “filtered down” to the local level. She points out that “regionalisation” is merely a step to a form of global government.
ICLEI
Rosa has been trying to tell people that Agenda 21 is implemented at the local level via an NGO (Non Government Organization) called ‘International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives’, commonly known as ICLEI (pronounced Ik-lee), “Local Governments for Sustainability.”
Rosa explains that, “this is paid for by you, the taxpayer, without your consent – because you have not had a vote on its implementation.”
On their website, we read:
Who We Are
“By 2050, two-thirds of all humans will be living in cities”
ICLEI-Local Governments for Sustainability is the world’s leading network of over 1,000 cities, towns and metropolises committed to building a sustainable future.
By helping our Members to make their cities and regions sustainable, low-carbon, resilient, ecomobile, biodiverse, resource-efficient and productive, healthy and happy, with a green economy and smart infrastructure, we impact over 20% of the world’s urban population.
So who is “helping” ICLEI…? Well, they have posted an article about the Rockefeller Foundation. I wonder why.
Strong Cities, Smart Cities?
These are promoted as being desirable in Agenda 21 / sustainable ways of thinking. Sure, for those of us that live in cities, we want efficient, safe transportation systems and to feel safe walking around these places. However, it seems that Smart and Strong Cities have one thing in common – keeping the citizens in check – under control. Smart Cities are being promoted in a number of ways – one organisation promoting them (itself worthy of further investigation) is Common Purpose
“At Common Purpose we believe that cities need to act as magnets. Drawing people in – citizens, leaders and young talent.”
WHO believes? Why should anyone care what they believe? We don’t even know who “Common Purpose” are!!
Strong Cities are being promoted globally, it seems.
Launch of Strong Cities Network to Strengthen Community Resilience Against Violent Extremism
Cities are vital partners in international efforts to build social cohesion and resilience to violent extremism. Local communities and authorities are the most credible and persuasive voices to challenge violent extremism in all of its forms and manifestations in their local contexts. While many cities and local authorities are developing innovative responses to address this challenge, no systematic efforts are in place to share experiences, pool resources and build a community of cities to inspire local action on a global scale.
“The Strong Cities Network will serve as a vital tool to strengthen capacity-building and improve collaboration,” said Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch. “As we continue to counter a range of domestic and global terror threats, this innovative platform will enable cities to learn from one another, to develop best practices and to build social cohesion and community resilience here at home and around the world.”
They also have a dedicated website:
“The Strong Cities Network is the first global network of cities and other sub-national entities working together to build social cohesion and resilience to prevent violent extremism in all its forms.”
“The SCN has issued public statements of support and solidarity for its member cities Beirut, Paris and Kano in light of the recent horrific attacks.”
TESTIMONIALS – "I look forward to Aarhus joining the Strong Cities Network steering committee and to speaking about the Aarhus model here in New York. Although radicalization can result from a variety of different causes and be expressed in a variety of different ways, there are a range of trigger factors that are identical all over the world.” –
Jacob Bundsgaard MAYOR OF AARHUSMAYOR OF AARHUS
It seems the “Strong City” agenda is also interlinked with the Green/Agenda 21…
“Strong city mayors advance the green agenda”
Is it a coincidence that cities with successful green strategies also have strong and successful leadership? Probably not.
London, Bristol, New York and Copenhagen all have both. And while strong leadership might not be the only factor driving the green agenda, it is certainly an important one.
In December last year, we published our low carbon cities report, which provides examples of how cities in the UK and around the world are going green while supporting economic growth. We found that by providing the vision, strategy and commitment for reducing carbon emissions, mayors such as Bristol’s George Ferguson, New York’s former mayor Michael Bloomberg and London’s Boris Johnson are playing a vital role in advancing this agenda, often ahead of their respective national governments.
What is the United Nations?
As we mentioned earlier, Agenda 21 was tabled through the United Nations – a name coined by United States President Franklin D. Roosevelt – first used in a declaration on 1 January 1942, during the World War II, when representatives of 26 nations pledged their Governments to continue fighting together against the Axis Powers.
On 24 October 1945 – representatives of 50 countries met in San Francisco at the United Nations Conference on International Organization to draw up the United Nations Charter. Those delegates deliberated on the basis of proposals worked out by the representatives of China, the Soviet Union, the United Kingdom and the United States at Dumbarton Oaks, United States in August-October 1944.
The UN headquarters is in New York City (neutral territory, right?) According to the New York City Website,
The United Nations General Assembly selected New York City as the permanent home of its headquarters in 1946. John D. Rockefeller, Jr. offered $8.5 million to purchase a six-block tract of land along the East River.
Of course we need an organisation promoting World Peace, do we not? So let’s have a look at the ideology of this organisation.
Examining the UN’s Ideology
One assumes that the UN is a benign organisation, secular and focused on bringing peace and security to the world – it certainly gives that impression. Remember that thing called “The UN Security Council?”
However, how many people know of its connection to the Lucis Trust?
“The Lucis Trust is dedicated to the establishment of a new and better way of life for everyone in the world based on the fulfillment of the divine plan for humanity. Its educational activities promote recognition and practice of the spiritual principles and values upon which a stable and interdependent world society may be based. The esoteric philosophy of its founder, Alice Bailey, informs its activities which are offered freely throughout the world in eight languages.”
Many people have observed the “Eye in the Triangle” symbology and how it seems to be
associated with a kind of occult belief system. One eye, pyramid and triangle symbology seems to be present in the logos of a number of organisations and in various buildings and monuments around the world. (One particularly brazen example is the tomb of Charles Taze Russell in Philadelphia – what has this got to do with a Christian-type burial, I ask). Arguably, we can see a similar symbology in the Lucis Trust logo (consider where the lines seem to cross over, for example).
Again, the Lucis Trust’s tagline sounds wonderful “Let the Plan of Love and Light work out”. What could be wrong with that?
Reading from their own history page:
The Lucis Trust was established by Alice and Foster Bailey as a vehicle to foster recognition of the universal spiritual principles at the heart of all work to build right relations.…
A publishing company, initially named Lucifer Publishing Company, was established by Alice and Foster Bailey in the State of New Jersey, USA, in May 1922 to publish the book, Initiation Human and Solar. The ancient myth of Lucifer refers to the angel who brought light to the world, and it is assumed that the name was applied to the publishing company in honour of a journal, which had been edited for a number of years by theosophical founder, HP Blavatsky. It soon became clear to the Bailey’s that some Christian groups have traditionally mistakenly identified Lucifer with Satan, and for this reason the company’s name was changed in 1924 to Lucis Publishing Company.
The Arcane School started in 1923, World Goodwill was established in 1932 and Triangles in 1937.
Over the years headquarters offices in New York, London and Geneva have moved locations a number of times. Currently the New York office is located at the southern end of Wall Street in the financial district. In London the office is close to Trafalgar Square in one of the city’s most architecturally distinctive buildings, Whitehall Court. And after many years in a building close to the United Nations, the Geneva Headquarters is now located on Rue Stand in the business district, close to the lake.
A few years after the formation of the UN, Eleanor Roosevelt on June 2, 1952 – World Invocation Day – read a short “prayer” called the Great Invocation.
The Great Invocation
From the point of Light within the Mind of God
Let light stream forth into the minds of men.
Let Light descend on Earth.
From the point of Love within the Heart of God
Let love stream forth into the hearts of men.
May Christ* return to Earth.
From the centre where the Will of God is known
Let purpose guide the little wills of men –
The purpose which the Masters know and serve.
From the centre which we call the race of men
Let the Plan of Love and Light work out
And may it seal the door where evil dwells.
Let Light and Love and Power restore the Plan on Earth.
And who are the “Masters” mentioned here? The “prayer” or “invocation” is accompanied by a kind of “disclaimer” which reads as follows: "Many religions believe in a World Teacher, a “Coming One”, knowing him under such names as the Lord Maitreya, the Imam Mahdi, the Kalki Avatar and the Bodhisattva. These terms are sometimes used in versions of the Great Invocation for people of specific faiths.”
Lucis Trust and… Astrology… in 2015?
Again from the Trust’s own website…
Sustainable Development Goals, the United Nations and the Libra Full Moon
A significant event in the heavens occurred during the period of the Sustainable Development Summit at UN Headquarters in New York. The full moon (with the sun in Libra) was late in the evening of Sunday, the final day of the Summit. And it was not just any full moon – popularly called a ‘Supermoon’ the moon was especially close to earth so it appeared much larger in the night sky than usual. And there was a full lunar eclipse producing a red effect on the moon. There have been only 4 full eclipses during a supermoon since 1900 – so this was an unusual astronomical event. It should not surprise us that a significant alignment in the heavens was accompanied by such a significant gathering at the UN.
So now they’re mixing in Astrology too… and remember this is an organisation connected to a body which is supposedly helping to run the planet…
UN Hymn
Until recently, I’d never heard of the UN Hymn. An unofficial anthem of the UN had words by W. H. Auden and music by Pau Casals. On 24 October 1971, the Orchestra of the Festival Casals, with Casals as conductor, presented the hymn in a première performance at UN headquarters.
|
Eagerly, musician. Sweep your string, So we may sing. Elated, optative, Our several voices Interblending, Playfully contending, Not interfering But co-inhering, For all within The cincture of the sound, Is holy ground Where all are brothers, None faceless Others, |
Let mortals beware Of words, for With words we lie, Can say peace When we mean war, Foul thought speak- fair And promise falsely, But song is true: Let music for peace Be the paradigm, For peace means to change At the right time, as the World-Clock Goes Tick- and Tock. |
So may the story Of our human city Presently move Like music, when Begotten notes New notes beget Making the flowing Of time a growing Till what it could be, |
At last it is, Where even sadness Is a form of gladness, Where fate is freedom, Grace and Surprise. |
Perhaps I am being over sensitive, but to me, this has overtones of “Freedom Is Slavery…, War is Peace…, Ignorance is Strength!”
The Meditation Room, "A Room of Quiet"
Since the inception of the UN, there have been several meditation rooms in UN offices. On the UN’s website, you will find information on the one now in existence at the New York headquarters, apparently set up by Swedish Diplomat Dag Hammarskjöld. According to information from Bill Cooper, “Tremendous pressure was brought to bear on Trygve Lie and Dag Hammarskjöld to install such a room at the [United Nations] by such organizations as the World Council of Churches.” It was also supported and funded by a multi-faith group called Friends of the UN Meditation Room. John D. Rockefeller was a big contributor to the project. Cooper goes into considerable detail about the occult significance of what is in the room. Also of note is the fact that John F Kennedy called Dag Hammarskjöld "the greatest statesman of the 20th century." Hammarskjöld was killed in a plane crash in Sept 1961, which was never properly investigated.
A Darker Allegiance?
Now, as with people who follow or contribute to the work of the Lucis Trust, they likely see there is nothing wrong in furthering the goals of wider/global peace and good will – and neither do I think there is anything wrong with this. Nevertheless, it appears some part of these organisations have a darker allegiance and are following a darker agenda. This is partly revealed in what we have already discussed above, though a further study of occult symbology will reveal more – again, Bill Cooper covered this in considerable detail.
When I recently pointed out the connection of the Baha’I Faith to the UN in a presentation on the topics in this article, someone wrote to me to state that as far as they were concerned, the Baha’I faith could not be involved in anything to do with “the New World Order that the ultra-rich group of powerful people are promoting.” I must point out that, we can read on the Bahai’s own website…
Since 1947, the Baha’is of the U.S./UN Office has supported the work of the United Nations and its efforts towards “the planetization of mankind.”
I find the use of the word “planetization” kind of unusual – too much like “globalisation” for my liking. I therefore explained (to the person that wrote to me that) that while Baha’i seeks to find common ground between faiths, it would be an ideal target for a infiltration / control by those who want this unity – for different reasons than the stated goals of Baha’i. Outwardly, most religions say the same things in that they strive for equity and harmony – like most of the rest of us. But digging deeper into world events, one soon becomes aware that there is someone “in the shadows” who is “pulling strings” and manipulating things in a negative way, causing harm and destruction.
Myths of Climate Change/Global Warming and a ‘97%’ Consensus on the Causes
Much data is/are already available showing how Global Warming is a myth – created for control purposes. I have covered this extensively in a report called “Re-Investigating Climate Change.”
Frequently quoted is a figure that “97% of scientists agree on the causes of climate change.” What is the origin of this constantly repeated false belief? We can read in the Wall Street Journal…
This figure comes from a survey “The "97 percent" figure in the Zimmerman/Doran survey represents the views of only 79 respondents who listed climate science as an area of expertise and said they published more than half of their recent peer-reviewed papers on climate change. Seventy-nine scientists—of the 3,146 who responded to the survey—does not a consensus make.”
Also see a presentation by Dr Don Easterbrook for some detailed information which dismantles the arguments put forward by those promoting the anthropic-caused climate change myth.
It now seems we have propagandised consensus, which claims “The Debate is over”. However, when a debate ignores contradictory pertinent evidence (as given in the links above), debate is not over because any conclusions from that debate are wrong. It is clear to me “the con is in place” – there is an unwritten law “don’t question it… or else!” As we will see, those disagreeing with consensus on climate change have been ostracised – the “thought police” have been busy since the early 1990’s.
Hegelian Dialectic
This is essentially another technique, which can be used as a kind of “backdrop” to the Delphi Technique to encourage people to come to a particular, desirable conclusion about something, so that one or more parts of a larger plan can be put in place, without people noticing what that actual plan is. One description is as follows:
The Hegelian dialectic is the framework for guiding our thoughts and actions into conflicts that lead us to a predetermined solution. If we do not understand how the Hegelian dialectic shapes our perceptions of the world, then we do not know how we are helping to implement the vision. When we remain locked into dialectical thinking, we cannot see out of the box.
To add to this definition…
The synthetic Hegelian solution to all these conflicts can’t be introduced unless we all take a side that will advance the agenda. The Marxist’s global agenda is moving along at breakneck speed. The only way to completely stop the privacy invasions, expanding domestic police powers, land grabs, insane wars against inanimate objects (and transient verbs), covert actions, and outright assaults on individual liberty, is to step outside the dialectic. This releases us from the limitations of controlled and guided thought.
Hegelian conflicts steer every political arena on the planet, from the United Nations to the major American political parties, all the way down to local school boards and community councils. Dialogues and consensus-building are primary tools of the dialectic, and terror and intimidation are also acceptable formats for obtaining the goal. The ultimate Third Way agenda is world government. Once we get what’s really going on, we can cut the strings and move our lives in original directions outside the confines of the dialectical madness.
David Icke condensed this too “problem-reaction-solution.” Another version, used in marketing is even shorter “hurt and rescue,” where you point out to someone they must have a real or potential problem that they weren’t even aware of and then you offer to “sell them the solution.”
Asch Conformity Experiment
This clearly shows that it is fairly easy to generate a consensus conclusion, which is clearly and absolutely false.
A simple experiment using actors and an unwitting “victim” shows them a simple diagram with vertical lines to compare, and state which line is the same length as another one. In the diagram here, line C is the same length as the example. The “victim” must indicate which line he thinks is the same length as the example (correct answer C). The actors deliberately give incorrect answers.
Asch measured the number of times each participant conformed to the majority view. On average, about one third (32%) of the participants who were placed in this situation went along and conformed with the clearly incorrect majority on the critical trials.
Over the 12 critical trials about 75% of participants conformed at least once and 25% of participants never conformed. In the control group, with no pressure to conform to confederates, less than 1% of participants gave the wrong answer.
Conclusion: Why did the participants conform so readily? When they were interviewed after the experiment, most of them said that they did not really believe their conforming answers, but had gone along with the group for fear of being ridiculed or thought "peculiar". A few of them said that they really did believe the group’s answers were correct.
It is important to note that this was an isolated experimental run. Participants were not subjected to repetition of “A, A, A” (using the diagram above where “line A is the same length as the example”) multiple times per day/week etc, as is the case with what is shown in hourly news bulletins. i.e. in the Asch experiment, the “wrong conclusion” was not programmatically repeated for weeks, months and years to influence the “victim”…
UN – Education of “Global Citizens”
The UN has a branch or arm which is concerned, it seems, primarily with education. It also seems to be concerned with educating children. It has an“Associated Schools Programme (ASPNet)…”
Learning to live together as global citizens
The UNESCO Associated Schools Programme is a global network of schools, which educate for sustainable development allowing every human being to acquire the knowledge, skills, attitudes and values necessary to shape a sustainable future.
The global network of over 10,000 educational institutions from 181 countries is coordinated internationally by Livia Saldari, based in Paris.
The UK ASPnet network is coordinated by educational charity, the Steve Sinnott Foundation in partnership with the UK National Commission for UNESCO.
We have already seen how the Global Warming/Climate change issue has been cemented via propaganda, repetition and so forth, and we do have at least one example, albeit from 1994, of how it seems the UN has tried to push Agenda 21 type thinking into the minds of children.
A book called “Rescue Mission Planet Earth – Agenda 21 for kids” was produced in 1994 – Sponsored by the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), the UN Educational, Scientific & Cultural Org. (UNESCO) and the Foundation for Environmental Awareness, Hilversum, The Netherlands.
On Page 44 of this book we can read:
Many parents don’t have time for their children, so they try to compensate by giving them anything money can buy. Yet a mountain of teddy bears is no consolation for a lonely child. Adults are really just big children. In their weak moments, they buy teddy bears for themselves as well, to wipe away their tears. Cars for example, a stereo or a new house. More things! Are they too weak to care that their new toys are harming the environment? While they play they are destroying our future.
Isn’t this tantamount to an attempt at brainwashing? Looks that way to me…
Similarly, standard “consensus thinking” (i.e. based on wrong conclusions) on climate change seems to be built into the UK National Curriculum and the US Common Core recommendations.
Agenda 21 – Predictive Programming
We can obviously suggest Huxley’s “Brave New World” and Orwell’s “1984” as being relevant to what Agenda 21 seems to be “about”. There are a fair number of films/movies which are set in a dystopian future where people live in cities with various controls and restraints in place. Outside the city it is a wasteland or a wilderness. This sort of scenario is presented in films such as “Logan’s Run”, the “Mad Max” series from the 1980’s, The Hunger Games series and the Divergent/Insurgent series. Jay Dyerand other commentators have looked at how such films could be a form of predictive programming. This is a huge area of study in itself.
Some people suggest that Agenda 21 is part of a depopulation plan and they cite things like the text written on the Georgia Guide Stones, because of a fairly blatant message they contain about reducing the world’s population to 500,000,000 or less.
Exposing the Scam is Bad for Your Career…
So what happens to those who haven’t been affected by “program
ming”, “education” or indoctrination? Well, it seems that they are “dealt with” by those that have been affected…
Dr David Bellamy, a hugely popular Science Presenter on the BBC at one time, is quoted as saying about Global Warming “This is not science – it’s religion.” His scepticism meant the end of his career as he had known it. He said that “They froze me out, because I don’t believe in global warming. My career dried up. I was thrown out of my own conservation groups and I got spat at in London.”
Another popular BBC Science Presenter, Johnny Ball, also rejects any consensus and was reported as saying:
“In the past decade or so I’ve been mocked, vilified, besmirched — I’ve even been booed off a theatre stage — simply for expressing the view thatthe case for global warming and climate change, and in particular the emphasis on the damage caused by carbon dioxide, the so-called greenhouse gas that is going to do for us all, has been massively over-stated.
A further example of the work of the Climate Change “thought police” was on the case of Quentin Letts who hosted a BBC 4 series called “What’s the Point Of.” This light-hearted series poked fun at various organisations. One particular episode, was about the UK Met Office and the subject of climate change came up. Letts is reported as saying:
“I was accused of having shown disrespect to climate change. Mr Lilley had cracked a joke: ‘They [the Met Office] come before the Select Committee on Energy and Climate Change . . . and tell us they need even more money for even bigger computers so they can be even more precisely wrong in future.’ I chuckled. I had ‘not reflected prevailing scientific opinion’ about global warming.”Letts asked: “Er, hang on, chaps. No one ever told me that. Why on earth would independent journalists accept such a stricture? Why should climate change be given such special protection?”
This episode of the programme was deleted from iPlayer prematurely.
A further example was seen when Philippe Verdier, weather chief at France Télévisions, the country’s state broadcaster, was “sent on a forced holiday” for publishing a book questioning the causes of any climate change. He did this following a “meeting with Laurent Fabius, the French foreign minister, who summoned the country’s main weather presenters and urged them to mention “climate chaos” in their forecasts.”
911 and Global Warming Consensus
I have written extensively about 911 research and have seen in that work how “establishing consensus” is one of the main goals that needs to be achieved to propagate propaganda and lies – to close down questioning. Funnily enough, Dr David Ray Griffin, author of several books sceptical of the official account of 911, has not been quite so sceptical about the “alleged CO2 crisis”. He is not a scientist – he is a theologian. Quoting from the“911 consensus” website we find:
“David Griffin’s 2015 book, “Unprecedented: Can Civilization Survive the CO2 Crisis?” was reviewed as “a great service to humanity,” and was taken to the Paris climate summit in December by Panel co-founder, Elizabeth Woodworth, who has just made, with a professional film producer, a 2016 video entitled “A Climate Revolution For All. COP21: An Inside View.” Griffin’s book is featured for its section on mobilization.
So why won’t David Ray Griffin talk about what happened to the WTC on 911 and its likely connection to weather events? (More on this later…)
Climate Change, Extreme Weather,
Floods etc
In 2015, we again saw awful flooding in parts of the UK – such as Carlisle, Lancaster, Hebden Bridge, York, parts of Leeds and elsewhere. Significant flooding was also seen in the UK in 2007 (Hull), 2009 (Cockermouth and elsewhere in Cumbria), 2012 (Exeter area and Malmsbury), 2014 (Dawlish and Somerset Levels). In 2015, they started naming storm systems in the UK for the first time (Desmond, Eva etc).
Who would consider that these events were engineered…? Who would consider that this was an example of the Hegelian Dialectic at work again – but on a massive scale? Agenda 21’s success relies on people NOT thinking of connections. They must NOT entertain control anddeception of this magnitude…
EU Natura Policy 6 – Allowing Floods
In 2014 much upheaval, destruction and disruption was apparent in Somerset, UK. Some people quickly became aware of one of the possible contributing causes of this widespread flood damage – the fact that dredging of rivers had been halted in some areas. From Christopher Booker in the Daily Telegraph:
“These have included the EU’s Natura 2000 strategy along with a sheaf of directives on “habitats”, “birds”, “water”, and not least the “floods” directive of 2007, which specifically requires certain “floodplains” to be allowed to flood. In 2008, when the EA was run by Baroness Young, this was reflected in a policy document which classified areas at risk of flooding under six categories, ranging from those in “Policy Option 1”, where flood defences were a priority, down to “Policy 6’’ where, to promote “biodiversity”, the strategy should be to “increase flooding”. The Somerset Levels were covered by Policy 6.”
In “Policy 6” areas, dredging was stopped – based on an EU directive – itself seemingly part of “Agenda 21 land management” guidelines or policies. And, indeed, from an EU Natura 2000 Webpage we can read:
Natura 2000 is not a system of strict nature reserves from which all human activities would be excluded. While it includes strictly protected nature reserves, most of the land remains privately owned. The approach to conservation and sustainable use of the Natura 2000 areas is much wider, largely centered on people working with nature rather than against it. However, Member States must ensure that the sites are managed in a sustainable manner, both ecologically and economically.
But who would consider that the climate/weather itself could also be being engineered to make such events happen…? The Hegelian Dialectic can be used to guide people away from thinking about such a conclusion and make them focus on more prosaic explanations, whilst also shouting things like “something should be done by government to protect our property and livelihood!” (For example, build up flood defences and take steps to somehow reduce insurance premiums etc.)
Fracking is OK!?!
If there has been a push towards “Sustainable Living” since about 1992, then how is that licenses for fracking have been granted around the world? Is it not really the case, then, that large corporations are exempt from “sustainability” rulings/guidelines, yet individuals acting on a much smaller scale are not exempt?
Why is it that police forces here in the UK have been employed to protect corporate interests rather than environmental ones – or the interests of residents in the affected communities? I would argue that a study of what has happened at fracking sites, and the way protestors have been treated proves that Agenda 21 is not what is claimed – and is much more likely a plan to strengthen corporate control of land, resources and people.
The Hegelian Dialetic with this issue then becomes one of environmentalist vs. groups who advocate the development and use of natural resources, to benefit the economy of a nation, county or area. As you will read below, I know there is no need to frack anything anywhere. It’s another “phoney bone of contention” which no one that I have heard talking about fracking or Agenda 21 will discuss with the same candour.
Revolutionary Energy Technologies and Health Treatments
Over the years, following the footsteps of many people who are more
clever, more resourceful and more resilient than me, I have come to know that we have been deprived of world-changing technologies and techniques which, at a stroke, render any arguments about scarcity of resources or worries about the environment as next to meaningless. The same dark forces that are pushing Agenda 21, and similar programmes, are the most likely culprits for suppressing technologies which would completely resolve the problems Agenda 21 is meant to address.
I have covered, in some detail, the suppression of energy and health information, techniques and technologies in other presentations called “Healthy Scepticism” and “Infinite Energy But Not for the Masses.” I will just add, here, a note about Bob Lazar’s Hydrogen Car System. This is an example of a fairly conventional alternative system for running a car on Hydrogen Gas – created on demand. It has been suppressed, not only because of the nature of one of the materials that is used in its construction, but also due to “health and safety” issues which Lazar was told he had to comply with. Authorities kept saying additional “requirements” had to be met, so the system has never been approved.
Other notable examples of energy technology cover up include
· Certain Elements of Nikola Tesla’s Work
· Dr. T. Henry Moray’s Radiant Energy Device(s) (1920’s)
· Stan Meyer’s Water Fuel Cell
· Cold Fusion / LENR (1989 Onwards)
· Lutec Device – Australia (c. 2000)
Now we move on to the final “taboo topic,” that few if any researchers will discuss in the same context as other topics covered here.
911 and Weather Anomalies Suggesting Geoengineering Cover Up
Perhaps the biggest taboo and the hardest thing for people to
get to grips with is the truth about the climate.
We have seen how all-pervasive and powerful the climate propaganda is – it has even caused a kind of “bullying” of well known and popular figures such as Johnny Ball and David Bellamy. However, even those 2 figures wouldn’t really be happy talking about ongoing and active geo-engineering, weather modification and control. This has a history which a very few people will sensibly discuss. I have discussed this at some length in a presentation called “Chemtrails and Climate.”
On the one hand, the mainstream and most political organisations and NGO’s are stuck in the Climate Change/GW/AGW merry-go-round and don’t even look deeper into the history of geoengineering and climate modification technology. Similarly, they may largely accept the official version of the events of the terrible tragedy which happened on 911. They would never connect the evidence to the topics already covered in this article. This is something I attempted to do in “911 Finding the Truth.” I hope people will watch, listen, study and think (and send me notes about any errors they find.)
The research of Dr Judy Wood, former professor of Mechanical Engineering at Clemson University (South Carolina), into the destruction of the World Trade Centre, lead her to post a collection of data about Hurricane Erin. Few people are aware that this category 3 storm, comparable in diameter to Hurricane Katrina, was closest to New York City at about 8am on the morning of 9/11/2001. More detailed weather related data also has an unusual correlation with the timing of events at the WTC in New York. Most people are simply unaware of this evidence, others deny or ignore it – but, in this way, they are themselves then part of the global cover up which has been immensely effective.
Since 911, in true Hegelian style, the promotion of the fake war on terror has allowed politicians to pass various laws and make wars. The UK has had
· Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (2000)
· Serious Organised Crime and Police Act (2005)
· Terrorism Act (2006)
· Counter-Terrorism and Security Act (2015)
There have been Wars/Occupation of Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya and elsewhere and USA has had, among other things, the Patriot Act and the NDAA – National Defence Authorization Act.
Successful passing of these laws has been made possible by fear and ignorance – which have essentially come about through a form of Trauma Based Mind Control on a grand scale – implemented with and after the events of 911.
Agenda 21 talks about “security" such as is embodied in the concepts of “Strong Cities” and “Smart Cities”, but it is completely undermined by a knowledge of what really happened on 9/11, 7/7 etc i.e. it wasn’t “Muslim terrorists” – nothing of the sort!
COP21 – The Marriage of the “Terrorism” and Climate Change Scams
The “Paris Climate Conference – COP21 – Conference of Parties” took place between 30 November 2015 and 12 December 2015. From their website we read:
“The international political response to climate change began at the Rio Earth Summit in 1992, where the ‘Rio Convention’ included the adoption of the UN Framework on Climate Change (UNFCCC). This convention set out a framework for action aimed at stabilising atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases (GHGs) to avoid “dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system…. The UNFCCC which entered into force on 21 March 1994, now has a near-universal membership of 195 parties.”
Just before the conference 13/14 Nov 2015 saw the alleged bombings and the deaths of over 100 people. Paris then went into “Lockdown”. However, terrorist incident drills were going on at the same time as the events happened – just like they were on 7th of July 2005 – the date of the alleged bombings in London.
I suggest that, to notch up the “fear and trauma programming,” and reduce any effects that scepticism might be having on the progress of the global governance and control agenda, what we experienced was the “interlocking” of 2 global psychological operations – in a major world capital. This was then blasted 24/7 across the world’s media… to sear away any dissent and re-inforce the previous decades long programming. An immediate result was that “Climate change” protestors were arrested. (Though the banners they held almost certainly did not show any of the topics mentioned in this article.)
The Global Deception Grid
Agenda 21 represents some of the “construction material” for the Global Grid of Deception. I argue that 2 of these elements of “the global deception grid” interlocked in Paris.
Energy usage and climate change are never discussed in a way which takes into account all of the evidence. For example, it is never, ever discussed in any mainstream source, nor even in any popular alternative media outlet that some group has the technology that can turn 3 buildings to dust in 10 seconds or less each. It is never discussed that some group can steer hurricanes and use their field as a component of a weapon system of some kind– and that this weapon system was used on 911 to destroy most of the WTC complex.
Many have said that use of energy is the key to global control of the masses. Free energy for everyone changes this. Almost no one connects this to the events on 911.
Obviously organisations such as Amnesty International, CND, Stop the War will have none of this. There is too much inertia, infiltration and control of NGO’s (Non-Governmental Organisations) who pride themselves on being “pro-peace” and “defending human rights”. And in any case, several of them have some kind of connection either to the UN itself, the Tavistock Institute or other groups with seemingly dubious goals.
Ongoing fear and confusion is required to prevent people from thinking for themselves and exploring the evidence. I don’t think there’s ANYONE who talks about Agenda 21 who knows that its basis is completely and comprehensively undermined by a knowledge of what happened on 911.
So, the set of “fear cards” dealt to you by mainstream sources which help structure the Global control grid include:
· Terrorist attack
· Climate Change / extreme weather
· Biowarfare or virulent disease outbreak
· Cancer
· Fuel shortage
· Food crisis
· Economic collapse
Agenda 21 can be implemented because the perception is created that you would then be “protected” in “smart cities” functioning on ideals of “Social Equity” while other areas are “left wild” and by and large, you wouldn’t be able or allowed to go there.
It is important to realise that in any arguments about humans damaging the environment – where people say “We need to change our ways – we’redestroying the planet…” IT’S NOT US that is really responsible for this at all. (By “us” I mean the ordinary people just trying to live their lives and help one another in some way.) Ordinary people are NOT TO BLAME for being forbidden from having access to knowledge and technology to live in harmony with the rest of the planet. ANOTHER GROUP has kept secrets and told lies to protect itself and hide itself. This “other group” has technology and they’ve kept it to themselves and made (most of) the rest of us ignorant of it. They turned it into a weapon and destroyed the World Trade Centre with that weapon. It also seems very much like they are controlling the weather with similar technology. That is the true situation which few will properly investigate or articulate – because they haven’t seen the relevant available evidence. I hope you can and will study the evidence if you’re not already aware of it. (In 2008, I tried to write about similar themes in “A World of Abundance or a World of Scarcity.”)
Consciousness and “Mind Before Matter”
When you study this evidence which shows how we have been encouraged or forced into a certain way of thinking, and you break out of the “Hegelian dialectic,” it seems like an alignment takes place between your conscious and subconscious mind and you then come to know certain things that subconsciously you just suspected.
Many speakers (including Alex Jones, Ian Crane and even David Icke) and websites will talk about NWO and Agenda 21, but they won’t talk about the links I’ve shown you. They will not appropriately discuss what really happened to the WTC, nor its connection to the energy and climate issues. Do these people want to block the advance of the New World Order Agenda? Well, by talking about the reality of Free Energy Technology and the weaponry based on it, they could help to prevent a New World Order Agenda being successful. By talking about Weather Control on 911, they could help to prevent a New World Order Agenda being successful.
So, I would say to them – and to you – that the NWO Agenda is not quite a “done deal” yet – being conscious and mindful of the scams mentioned here and other scams not mentioned here – should make it far less likely that your thinking is controlled and funnelled into accidentally supporting this “control agenda”. Be aware there are always alternatives. It’s just that some people don’t know about them or do know about them and don’t talk about them.
So will you have a “fear” or “fight or flight” reaction to all of this? Or will you continue to be curious, ponder and study and then be willing, when asked, to teach others about what you have come to know…?
