There are so many links currently … as folk figure out what’s really been going on … more disaster capitalism. Here are some I’ve gathered over the past week:
(Note: third fire hidden in above image …however it is clear in the video. In addition a reader has notified me that that image is from fires in 2020. See comments. And here. This does not however detract from the important info contained in the video. I’m awaiting info from the source).
Note also, Deborah Tavares who features in the video speaks of the UN Agenda 2030 ICLEI countries, of which NZ is one. ICLEI cities, Dunedin and Christchurch.
“Today we bring you an urgent warning for all inhabitants of planet Earth. It’s not just the fires. We must stop the deliberate climate engineering / geoengineering / weather weaponization destruction of our biosphere or we all perish.
If we do not stop these planet-destroying schemes, farms will fail, crop yields will plummet and much of humanity will starve. This will lead to revolts, revolutions, violence and financial collapse.
This seems to be precisely what the globalists want to achieve. They are pushing mass human extermination to make way for the robots. And in today’s broadcast, we feature a clip of a WEF speaker who admits all this right on camera.” Mike Adams
– Globalist Depopulation Strategy Exposed (0:00)
– Interview with Dane Wiggington on Geoengineering (6:36)
– The Role of AI and Depopulation (36:13)
– The Impact of Geoengineering on California Fires (36:44)
– The Broader Implications of Geoengineering (50:58)
– The Role of AI in Depopulation and Energy Consumption (53:57)
– The Impact of Geoengineering on Agriculture and Food Production (1:09:17)
– The Broader Implications of Geoengineering on Global Stability (1:15:37)
– The Need for a Comprehensive Approach to Sustainability (1:16:28)
– The Urgent Need to Address the Environmental Crisis (1:17:03)
– Impact of UV Radiation on Global Gardens (1:17:24)
– Human Responsibility and Beyond (1:20:44)
– Mouse Utopia Experiment and Historical Parallels (1:22:25)
– Call to Action and Takeaways (1:27:06)
– Venus Syndrome and Climate Engineering (1:29:24)
– Chemical Ice Nucleation and Weather Control (1:30:50)
Don’t “vaccination,” and the Blitzkrieg that incinerated all Pacific Palisades, PROVE that we are in the hands of psychopaths? You better believe it.
“Those who literally CAN’T BELIEVE what the authorities have done to them and all the rest of us had better wake up fast, because their self-protective blindness has us all at risk”
The authors of the worst atrocities in modern history have always grasped the chilling paradox that they were largely shielded from exposure by the very heinousness of what they’d done, and/or what they were doing. In other words, the perpetrators were, and are, protected from exposure not so much by mass indifference (although that, surely, is a factor) as by mass incredulity—a sort of sentimental chauvinism, shielding us from guilty knowledge (and, therefore, complicity) by the authoritarian conviction that those in power on our side certainly would never do such things, whereas the Enemy (of course) does little else.
The maintenance of that mass delusion has required two strategies, one practical, one psychological.
Mandatory medical activity authorisations: for a human medicine that is or contains gene technology that has been approved by at least two recognised overseas gene technology regulators.
Emergency authorisations: when there is an actual or imminent threat to the health and safety of people or to the environment, for example, threat from a disease outbreak, or an industrial spillage. The Minister responsible for the Gene Technology Act (the Minister) will have the power to grant an emergency authorisation.
These clauses bypass the medical choice provisions of the New Zealand Bill of Rights.
They violate the conclusions of Phase 1 of the Royal Commission on the pandemic which found that vaccine mandates hurt people and the economy.
They pre-empt the findings of Phase Two of the Royal Commission which has yet to examine the safety of COVID-19 vaccines produced via gene editing.
It empowers the Minister to make health decisions affecting all Kiwis on the say-so of foreign gene regulators of his choice.
The Bill is being passed under Fast Track legislation designed to prevent public discussion of its controversial provisions and adequate understanding of its impact by MPs. There is no time sensitive need for this.
The Bill ignores the experience and lessons of the last five years of the pandemic which has been a gene technology disaster responsible for 30 million deaths worldwide. Its logic is therefore incomprehensible even to well-informed observers, but it appears to find echoes in a dark history:
“The sun shines” wrote Christopher Isherwood in his 1930s Berlin Stories“and Hitler is the master of this city. The sun shines, and dozens of my friends are in prison, possibly dead.” As are too many of my friends recently, young and old alike.
Following the 1933 Nazi acquisition of power, Germany underwent a rapid and sweeping revolution that reached deep into the fabric of daily life. At the beginning, it occurred quietly and out of sight of most of the population. At its core was ‘enabling’ legislation that empowered the government and its appointees (read: regulators) to take far reaching decisions on behalf of the whole population. Its core aim was Gleichschaltung—coordination—designed to bring citizens, government ministries, universities, cultural and social institutions inline with Hitler’s extreme beliefs and attitudes.
Today we are facing efforts aimed at global coordination of technology, including biotechnology, food tech and information technology. The New Zealand government appears very willing to play a leading role in this revolution, whatever the implications. We have reported on these previously at length (here, here, here and here).
In addition to the prospect of government reimposition of medical mandates, the Bill does not require labelling of gene altered foods. As this flies in the face of all the canons of food safety and traceability established over the last 100 years, the only possible motivations are either a desire to deny consumers any right to preferences, or a wish to avoid any safety monitoring or culpability. Not only will we be unable to exercise medical autonomy, but we will no longer know what we are eating. This is an extraordinary and frightening prospect and not just for those who struggle with allergies. Food choice is not the prerogative of the government or bioscientists no matter how sure of themselves.
Something absolutely fundamental and personal is being taken away from us
This Bill is being promoted and steered by Judith Collins, with the full support and encouragement of the Prime Minister Chris Luxon and the leader of the ACT Party David Seymour. Collins is a lawyer and long time Parliamentarian, she will fully understand the import of the Bill. As a previous leader of the National Party who lost an election, it is hard to escape the suggestion that Collins may be taking satisfaction from the imposition of her will on those who rejected her leadership. We have all heard stories of waiters who piss in the awkward customer’s beer and laugh behind their backs. I am sorry to draw such a gross comparison, but my sense of outrage demands it.
The Gene Technology Bill seeks to institute a revolution, it spits in the face of the public who suffered during the pandemic and who voted in a new government with the thought that things might change. Instead we appear to have more of the same or worse. The refusal of Health New Zealand to publish up to date health statistics such as those for cancer incidence, speaks volumes about a government determined to avoid any accountability, even at the expense of public health. For the record, US insurance data reveals that cancer incidence has had a steady and unremitting upward trajectory since the introduction of COVID-19 vaccines. Ignored by our government and worse: covered up.
There is a time for everything and a season for every purpose under Heaven. A time to be born and a time to die, Now is the time to lobby your MP and let them know exactly what you think. Time to make our voice heard.
Please write to your MP before the summer break brings consideration to a close and put a note in your diary to follow up afterwards. This fight is winnable.
WEF-associated Presidents and Prime Ministers are falling like dominoes, first in Ireland, now Canada, Germany, France, UK. Long gone in NZ and elsewhere.
EWNZ comment: clearly with each domino fall they have another schooled in WEF ways to replace them, however, every fall is worth celebrating nevertheless.
Here are two PARTIAL lists of WEF Young Global Leaders, as the WEF has become more cagey about who it has been training:
Just this week the UK Telegraph has been warning us of the next possible plandemic, with their eye this time on your pet cat that might be putting us all in danger:
Experts have long regarded pigs as one of the greatest zoonotic threats to public health because their cells allow viruses to mix and mutate, creating new strains capable of causing human pandemics. This is how the 2008/09 H1N1 swine flu pandemic started and it is suspected that pigs in Haskell country, Kansas may have triggered the 1918 Spanish Flu pandemic which is estimated to have killed between 50 and 100 million people. Now a new study suggests that pet cats could be just as dangerous – and could provide the bridge that allows H5N1 bird flu to mutate and jump to humans.
We should be very afraid and be looking to getting rid of our pets, or so they’d have us believe. Meanwhile the Guardian is hyping it up by warning all pregnant women who contract bird flu will die!
They’ve actually been targeting cats in NZ and elsewhere for some time now.
We’ve also been targeting possums, deer,birds, rabbits, tahr and other animals considered by our conservation authorities to be pests. They even reward children these days for their efforts in killing them.Then there’s the NZ poultry farm in the South Island that recently had to have its birds culled to the tune of 80,000 plus.
In NZ here we have Pest Free NZ (PFNZ). It fuels the production of 1080 poison a lucrative business. Here begins the unravelling.
The poison 1080 is a deadly poison NZ uses with impunity (has done for 60+ years) claiming it is harmless, breaks down in water and targets pests… it doesn’t. It is a very dangerous poison and Doctors are deterred from reporting 1080 poisoning of humans as one MD found out following the death of a hiker that he reported in 2006. The NZ lab lost her heart!
(To learn more about NZ’s favourite poison go here and here. Particularly informative is the Graf Boys’ award winning doco called ‘Poisoning Paradise’. Also, find ‘1080 poison’ in the categories drop down box, top left of page, here.)
To throw some light on all of this seemingly senseless culling and the endless hype about yet another ‘flu’ strain that looms ready to kill us all, I draw your attention to an excellent article by Jenese James written in 2018. She uncovers the underlying agenda to much of this.
Jenese describes NZ’s Pest Free agenda in her article, Who is driving PFNZ?:
There is much more to this story that you can research yourself but the core thing here is that NZ is part of a much bigger extremist idea under the guise of protecting biodiversity – or purism as I call it – where everything and anything non native and not productive to human use will be destroyed
What is driving the Pest Free NZ Agenda and the hysteria in eradicating non native species. Answer – International agreements and a global agenda [Agenda 21, 2030] to purge all non native species of animals and plants around the world…
All over the world the word has gone out that all creatures great and small that are not indigenous to that land will be terminated. Its not just New Zealand..
So in the mix of the plandemic threats from lamestream, and the culling of both wild and pet animals, you will see what is really afoot. Do read the whole article.
The plandemic of course kills (pun intended) more than one bird with one stone. They get the next human cull with the new speedily produced, untested, EUA jab designed for whatever deadly disease presents itself (especially targeting those ‘miscreants’ who declined the first one) and they eradicate all of the food sources you may draw on in the coming famine that they will have created by destroying farmers, Bill Gates is hogging all the farm land, promoting fake meat production and targeting all good food like raw milk and home gardens. NZ is currently working on the GM front to feed us unlabeled GM poison without even consulting us. We’ve gotten used to that.
On reflection they are actually killing three birds with that one stone. It’s long been rumoured that another long term agenda the poisoners have is that of clearing the environment for mining. You can read about that in the following two articles which go into the purpose of all those recent man made disasters we’re now seeing world wide. It is all interrelated! One of the purposes of those is land grab:
So it’s multi purpose, multi layered rape and pillage by the corporates. All cleverly hidden ‘behind the green mask’, to quote Rosa Koire.
UN Agenda 21/Sustainable Development is the action plan implemented worldwide to inventory and control all land, all water, all minerals, all plants, all animals, all construction, all means of production, all energy, all education, all information, and all human beings in the world. INVENTORY AND CONTROL.—-Rosa Koire
Which leads us to the recent revelations about David Seymour’s corporate links to the Atlas Network. You can learn about that here. In more ways than one it is also ‘cui bono?’
They wish to deceive we the public into thinking they have our best interests at heart. Saving native species, saving us from so called man made global warming by herding us into 15 minute ‘smart’ cities, ensuring we own nothing and are happy.
Fortunately folk have woken up to the agenda & are pushing back.
“Whether we’re fighting for Te Tiriti or against new coal mines, for tax reform and fair pay, to protect Te Taiao or even just to keep NZ’s stop-smoking programme on track – we all face the same well-funded and well-organised ideological opposition”.
Further to our previous article revealing David Seymour’s links to the Atlas Network, I came across this one recently at Substack by Torfrida Orme (posted at Tapatahi Substack) and was intrigued to see Seymour’s Waitangi 2024 interview with Mihingarangi Forbes. It’s earlier on in the piece with relation to the Treaty Principles Bill, soon after it was introduced.
In it he shifts uncomfortably when asked ‘does the Act Party have any links to the Atlas Network?’ (@ 13 mins this topic begins)
He replies ‘no’, but resorts to the now time-worn and fizzled go-to … ‘conspiracy theory’. Trying unsuccessfully to heap shame on Mihingarangi for descending to such ‘low quality’ information, casting aspersions upon her journalistic ability. Her ability IMO towers well above today’s lamestream endeavours.
Seymour’s own links to Atlas are easily-verifiable by his historical job stints at two Canadian Atlas-affiliated think tanks.
Because we appear to have a repeat scenario such as happened in Australia, particularly with regard to the Treaty Principles Bill here and Aussie’s referendum with respect to an indigenous voice in Parliament. (Video links all in the article). Rather than promoting equality for all, it is becoming more apparent that he really is inciting racial division. Going by the Aussie playbook at least. Race is another time-worn tactic. It is the ace card of those who seek to divide and rule. It’s how GB retained control over so many millions in India for so long.
“In all our varied campaigns we are up against the same powerful groups trying to keep hold of their resources. It’s in their interest that we are fragmented.”
The last thing these corporate pariahs want is environmentalists messing up their mining plans. Isn’t it all making sense now?
The article below by Torfrida Orme is a must read IMO.
Remember (quote):
“we all face the same well-funded and well-organised ideological opposition”.
EWNZ
ATLAS – how a right-wing global network is building influence in Aotearoa
Over the last six months it’s become so much clearer what we’re up against.
Whether we’re fighting for Te Tiriti or against new coal mines, for tax reform and fair pay, to protect Te Taiao or even just to keep NZ’s stop-smoking programme on track – we all face the same well-funded and well-organised ideological opposition.
As we plunge into fight-back, it’s worth spending some time to find out more about this opposition, why it seems to have appeared now and how it functions.
There are some aspects of the source article we don’t agree with however the main thrust is Seymour’s links to Atlas and their agenda. Re climate change. We do recognize there is a change in climate however who is behind that, in our opinion, is not you & I and our alleged use of ‘fossil fuels’, rather it is the well documented practice of weather modification. (Read Elana Freeland’s books on topic and if you can’t do that at least visit our geoengineering pages, main menu). See also Sen Malcolm Roberts exposé. The other aspect I have reservations about is the Fabian Socialists. Barry Smith spoke often of them (including the Mont Pelerin Society). Their original logo is a wolf in sheep’s clothing. Read more here. It is quite a web we have to negotiate to get to the truth of things, even moreso in the past few years. There will always be differences of opinion and it’s best we don’t play into the hands of those who seek to maintain rule over us, by building walls in response to their divisive tactics. Rather we need, now more than ever, to put aside those differences (agree to disagree) and unite. They are a few thousand, we are a few billion. They are culling us and intend to continue. EWNZ
IMO a must see. A not too long doco style presentation of just how Schwab operates & what he has in view for all useless eaters. Not what he calls us openly but we know that’s how we’re classified hence the drive for depop. These characters have infiltrated all govts (corporations in actuality) and they mean for us to own nothing, parading that concept as being inclusive… sharing is caring and all that. Nothing could be further from the truth … it is communism in new garb. Make no mistake, it is tyrannical and evil.. EWNZ
Description Stakeholder Capitalism is an investigative documentary series about our undemocratic transition away from free-market capitalism to a global, authoritarian political system called Stakeholder Capitalism. Enacted in 2020, Stakeholder Capitalism replaces both Shareholder Capitalism (free-market) and State Capitalism (communism) with a single, universal system that is governed by the World Economic Forum’s exclusive elite members, including the presidents of Russia and China.
In the first episode ‘Our New Political System’, former TV producer and tech entrepreneur, Richard Jeffs, discovers what Stakeholder Capitalism is and how its Inclusive and Sustainable policies are changing our society. Richard also investigates how the ESG corporate credit score forces us to adopt Stakeholder Capitalism.
Please tell us what you think and join the debate by signing up to Yellow.Forum for FREE by clicking on the button in the header.
In 1996, Henry Lamb exposed the UN’s plan to take over the world using a book the UN had published the year before. The title of the book is ‘Our Global Neighbourhood’.
Written by 28 “experts” the book describes a global taxation scheme to fund the UN’s operations; a standing UN army; an Economic Security Council; UN authority over the global commons, expanded authority for the Secretary-General and much more. By 1996, some of the plans had already been implemented. As the years have gone by, more and more of the plan has been and is being rolled out.
In 1996, Lamb gave a t talk on the Convention on Biological Diversity and the Wildlands Project at the Granada Forum.
“All of the conspiracy theories that you’ve ever heard about ‘One World Government’, about the UN takeover of the world, all of those conspiracies have now been laid to rest,” he said. “There’s nothing conspiratorial about it. It’s all published!”
“The UN-funded Commission on Global Governance began meeting in 1992, in earnest … and last fall released their final report. It is entitled ‘Our Global Neighbourhood’,” he said.
After briefly describing the 1995 document, he goes on to talk about Agenda 21, the Biodiversity Treaty, The Wildlands Project and the Global Biodiversity Assessment.
If the video above is removed from YouTube, you can watch it on Rumble HERE and BitChute HERE. Hyperlinks to some of the documents referred to above can be found HERE.
In the video above, Lamb also mentioned topics on which we have previously published articles: Agenda 21, the Biodiversity Treaty, The Wildlands Project, Global Biodiversity Assessment and the 30×30 plan. See our articles HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE and HERE.
For this article, we are focusing on the first document Lamb mentioned: ‘Our Global Neighbourhood’.
Our Global Neighbourhood is the report of the Commission on Global Governance issued in 1995. The Commission on Global Governance, an international commission of 28 people, was established in 1992 to suggest new ways in which the international community might cooperate to further an agenda of global security.
The report presented the Commission’s conclusions and recommendations for discussion at the General Assembly of the United Nations’ 50th-anniversary session. Divided into seven chapters, the report served as “a call to action,” encouraging world leaders and non-governmental actors to work together toward achieving the goals expressed by the commission.
In 1996, Henry Lamb published ‘A Summary Analysis’ which is 22 pages. The following is a summary of Lamb’s analysis. You can read his full analysis HERE.
A Summary of Henry Lamb’s Analysis of Our Global Neighbourhood
The Commission on Global Governance released its recommendations in preparation for a World Conference on Global Governance, scheduled for 1998, where official world governance treaties were expected to be adopted for implementation by the year 2000.
The Commission’s proposals included expanding the authority of the United Nations (“UN”) to provide global taxation, a standing UN army, an Economic Security Council, UN authority over the global commons and an end to the veto power of permanent members of the Security Council.
Other proposals include the establishment of a new parliamentary body of “civil society” representatives (“NGOs”), a new “Petitions Council”, a new Court of Criminal Justice, binding verdicts of the International Court of Justice and expanded authority for the UN Secretary-General.
The Commission consisted of 28 people, carefully selected for their prominence, influence, and ability to effect the implementation of the recommendations. It was endorsed by the UN Secretary-General and funded through various trust funds and foundations.
The Commission on Global Governance has released its recommendations in preparation for a World Conference on Global Governance, scheduled for 1998, where official world governance treaties are expected to be adopted for implementation by the year 2000.
‘Our Global Neighbourhood’, was published by Oxford University Press in 1995 and reflects the work of dozens of different agencies and commissions over several years.
Background and Formation of the Commission
The Commission on Global Governance was established in 1992 with 28 members and funding from the UNDP, nine national governments and private foundations.
The Commission was formed after a report on global governance opportunities was presented in April 1991, in Stockholm, by Ingvar Carlsson, then Prime Minister of Sweden, and Shirdath Ramphal, Secretary General of the Commonwealth.
The report was initially requested by former West German Chancellor Willy Brandt, who called a group of international leaders to Konigswinter, Germany in January 1990.
The Commission’s co-chairmen, Ingvar Carlsson and Shirdath Ramphal, met with UN Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali in April 1992 to secure his endorsement of the effort.
Members of the Commission
1. Ingvar Carlsson, Sweden Prime Minister of Sweden 1986-91, and Leader of the Social Democratic Party in Sweden.
2.Shirdath Ramphal, Guyana Secretary-General of the Commonwealth from 1975 to 1990, President of the IUCN, Chairman of the Steering Committee of the Leadership in Environment and Development Program; Chairman, Advisory Committee, Future Generations Alliance Foundation, Chancellor, University of the West Indies, and the University of Warwick in Britain, member of five international commissions in the 1980s, and author of Our Country, The Planet, written especially for the Earth Summit.
3. Ali Alatas, Indonesia Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Indonesia since 1988; permanent representative to the United Nations.
4. Abdlatif Al-Hamad, Kuwait Director-General and Chairman of the Arab Fund for Economic and Social Development in Kuwait. Former Minister of Finance and Minister of Planning; member of the Independent Commission on International Development Issues; Board member of the Stockholm Environment Institute.
5. Oscar Arias, Costa Rica President of Costa Rica from 1986 to 1990; drafted the Arias Peace Plan which was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize; founded the Arias Foundation for Peace and Human Progress.
6. Anna Balletbo i Puig, Spain Member of the Spanish Parliament since 1979; member of the Committee on Foreign Affairs and on Radio and Television; Executive Committee of the Socialist Party in Catalonia; General Secretary of the Olof Palme International Foundation; President of Spain’s United Nations Association; and activist on women’s issues since 1975.
7. Kurt Biedenkopf, Germany Minister-President of Saxony since 1990; member of the Federal Parliament; Secretary General of the Christian Democratic Union of Germany.
8. Allan Boesak, South Africa Minister for Economic Affairs for the Western Cape Region; Director of the Foundation for Peace and Justice; Chairman of the African National Congress (ANC); President of the World Alliance of Reformed Churches and a Patron of the United Democratic Front.
9. Manuel Camacho Solis, Mexico Former Minister of Foreign Affairs and Mayor of Mexico City; Mexico’s Secretary of Urban Development and Ecology.
10. Bernard Chidzero, Zimbabwe Minister of Finance; Deputy Secretary-General of UNCTAD; Chairman of the Development Committee of the World Bank and the IMF; and member of the World Commission on Environment and Development.
11. Barber Conable, a former United States President of the World Bank, is mentioned alongside his roles as Chairman of the Committee on US-China Relations and Senior Advisor to the Global Environment Facility.
12. Jacques Delors, President of the European Commission since 1985, is noted for his positions as Minister for Economics, Finance and Budget, and Mayor of Clichy.
13. Jiri Dienstbier, Chairman of the Free Democrats Party in the Czech Republic, also served as Deputy Prime Minister of Foreign Affairs.
14. Enrique Iglesias, President of the Inter-American Development Bank since 1988, held various positions including Minister of External Relations and Executive Secretary of the UN Economic Commission for Latin America.
15. Frank Judd, a member of the House of Lords in the United Kingdom, served as Under-Secretary of State for Defence, Minister for Overseas Development, and Director of Oxfam.
16. Hongkoo Lee, Deputy Prime Minister of the Republic of Korea, held positions as Minister of National Unification, Ambassador to the United Kingdom, and Professor of Political Science at Seoul National University.
17. Wangari Maathai, founder of the Green Belt Movement in Kenya, also served as Chair of the National Council of Women of Kenya and spokesperson for non-government organizations at the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio.
18. Sadako Ogata, United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees since 1991, held positions as Director of the International Relations Institute and Chairman of the Executive Board of UNICEF.
19. Olara Otunnu, President of the International Peace Academy in New York, served as Foreign Minister of Uganda and Chaired the UN Commission on Human Rights.
20. I.G. Patel, Chairman of the Aga Khan Rural Support Programme, held various positions including Governor of the Reserve Bank of India, Chief Economic Adviser to the Indian Government, and Deputy Administrator of the United Nations Development Program.
21. Celina Vargas do Amaral Peixoto, Director of the Getulio Vargas Foundation, also served as Director-General of the Brazilian National Archives and Director of the Centre of Research and Documentation on Brazilian History.
22. Jan Pronk, Minister for Development Co-operation in the Netherlands, held positions as Vice Chairman of the Labor Party, Member of Parliament, and Deputy Secretary-General of UNCTAD.
23. Qian Jiadong, Deputy Director-General of the China Centre for International Studies, served as Ambassador and Permanent Representative in Geneva to the United Nations and Ambassador for Disarmament Affairs.
24. Marie-Angelique Savane, Director of the Africa Division of the UN Population Fund, held positions as Director of the UNFPA in Dakar, Advisor to the UN High Commissioner for Refugees, and President of the Association of African Women for Research and Development.
25. Adele Simmons, President of the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, served as a member of the Council on Foreign Relations, the UN High Level Advisory Board on Sustainable Development, and President Carter’s Commission on World Hunger.
26. Maurice Strong is a prominent figure from Canada, holding multiple positions including Chairman and CEO of Ontario Hydro, Chairman of the Earth Council, and Secretary-General of Earth Summits I and II. He is also a member of the World Commission on Environment and Development, and his work is featured in the November/December 1995 issue of Ecologic.
27. Brian Urquhart, from the United Kingdom, is a Scholar-in-Residence at the Ford Foundation’s International Affairs Program and has served as the United Nations Under-Secretary-General for Special Political Affairs from 1972 to 1986. Urquhart is also a member of the Independent Commission on Disarmament and Security Issues.
28. Yuli Vorontsov, from Russia, has held various diplomatic positions including Ambassador to the United States, Ambassador to the United Nations, and Advisor to President Boris Yeltsin on Foreign Affairs. Vorontsov has also served as Ambassador to Afghanistan, France and India.
The Reasoning for Global Governance
The Commission believed that world events, advances in technology and global awareness of environmental catastrophe create a climate in which the people of the world would recognise the need for global governance.
According to the report, global governance “does not imply world government or world federalism,” but rather a new system of governance that employs a variety of methods, without giving the governed an opportunity to vote on the outcome.
The foundation for global governance is based on the belief that the world is ready to accept a “global civic ethic” based on core values such as respect for life, liberty, justice and equity, and that governance should be underpinned by democracy and the rule of enforceable law.
However, the report’s definition of “respect for life” is not limited to human life, but rather means equal respect for all life, consistent with the biocentric view that all life has equal intrinsic value.
[We have previously published articles to explain that “equity” is not the same as “equality.” In fact, the two concepts are fundamentally different. See HERE and HERE.]
Core Values and Principles
The Commission’s proposals were based on a set of core values that prioritise human security, environmental protection and global governance. These core values have been emerging in UN documents since the late 1980s and have dominated international conferences, agreements and treaties since 1992, including Agenda 21 adopted in Rio de Janeiro.
The Commission on Global Governance emphasised the importance of extending respect for life to all living beings, not just humans, and noted that the impulse to possess territory is a powerful one that must be overcome.
It also highlighted the need to balance national sovereignty with international responsibility, stating that although states are sovereign, they are not free to do whatever they want and that global rules of custom constrain their freedom.
Maurice Strong, a member of the Commission, suggests that sovereignty cannot be exercised unilaterally by individual nation-states and that it will yield to the imperatives of global environmental cooperation.
The Commission proposed sweeping changes to the UN based on the core value of “justice and equity,” which aims to reduce disparities and bring about a more balanced distribution of opportunities around the world.
It also emphasised the importance of “mutual respect,” defined as “tolerance,” and noted that individual achievement and personal responsibility may be counter to this value.
The UN’s World Core Curriculum, authored by former Assistant Secretary-General of the United Nations Robert Muller, aims to promote a global approach to education and encourage students to become “true planetary citizens.”
The Commission’s proposals also institutionalised the value of “caring,” which aims to encourage cooperation to help those in need and defines “integrity” as the adoption and practice of core values and the absence of corruption. It believed that as the world adopts these core values, a “global ethic” will emerge, which will embody a set of common rights and responsibilities and provide a framework for effective global governance.
A Global Ethic and Human Security
The proposed global ethic would bestow upon all people certain rights, including a secure life, an opportunity to earn a fair living and equal access to the global commons.
The Commission noted that the effectiveness of this global ethic will depend on the ability of people and governments to transcend narrow self-interests and agree on a set of common rights and responsibilities.
The Commission on Global Governance emphasised that the right to a “secure life” encompasses not only freedom from war but also protection from chronic threats such as hunger, disease and repression, as well as sudden disruptions in daily life.
Human security was considered a goal as important as state security, marking a significant expansion of the United Nations’ responsibilities, which would now include the security of individuals within member states.
The Commission also highlighted the importance of environmental security, emphasising the need to control human activities that harm the planet’s life support systems and applying the “precautionary principle” to mitigate these risks.
Economic Security and Global Governance
The right to earn a “fair living” has far-reaching implications, including the need for fair distribution of natural resources, elimination of extreme income disparities, and the creation of job opportunities for all people.
The Commission proposed the establishment of an Economic Security Council to oversee global economic governance and ensure that all people have the opportunity to earn a fair living.
The Trusteeship Council would be given the mandate to exercise trusteeship over the global commons, including the administration of environmental treaties and the levying of user fees, taxes and royalties for permits to use the global commons.
The global commons are defined as the atmosphere, outer space, the oceans and related environment and life-support systems that contribute to the support of human life.
Restructuring the UN System and UN Army
The Commission’s recommendations for achieving global governance involved enforcing core values through a global bureaucracy, which would be established through a revitalised and restructured United Nations system.
The UN Security Council, the supreme organ of the United Nations system, would be reformed to have 23 members, with the permanent members’ veto power phased out and the remaining members serving as “standing members” until a full review of member status can be conducted.
New principles for the Security Council’s actions would be established, including the right to a secure existence for all people, the prevention of conflict and war and the elimination of conditions that generate security threats.
The Security Council would be empowered to intervene in the affairs of sovereign states when the security of individuals is in jeopardy, including military intervention as a last resort, and would be authorised to raise a standing army, known as the United Nations Volunteer Force.
The United Nations Volunteer Force would be a small, highly trained, well-equipped force of 10,000 troops, available for rapid deployment anywhere in the world, under the exclusive authority of the UN Security Council and the day-to-day command of the UN Secretary-General.
The Trusteeship Council, an original principal organ of the United Nations system, would be reconstituted to have authority over the global commons, with a fixed number of members, including qualified members from “civil society,” such as accredited NGOs.
The Commission proposed a significant shift in the UN system, giving unelected, self-appointed environmental activists a position of governmental authority on the governing board of the agency controlling the use of the atmosphere, outer space, the oceans and biodiversity.
The Economic and Social Council (“ECOSOC”) would be retired, and its agencies and programmes would be shifted to the Trusteeship Council, which would ultimately be governed by a special body of environmental activists chosen from accredited NGOs appointed by delegates to the General Assembly.
The United Nations Environment Programme (“UNEP”), along with all environmental treaties under its jurisdiction, would be governed by this special body, and the environmental work programme of the entire UN system would be authorised and coordinated by it.
Enforcement would come from an upgraded Security Council and the new Economic Security Council (“ESC”), described as an “Apex Body,” that would have the standing concerning international economic matters that the Security Council has in peace and security matters.
The ESC would be a deliberative, policy body that works by consensus without veto power by any member, and its responsibilities would include continuously assessing the overall state of the world economy, providing a long-term strategic policy framework to promote sustainable development and securing consistency between the policy goals of international economic institutions.
The ESC would also study proposals for financing public goods by international revenue raising, address long-term threats to security and promote sustainable development, with a focus on issues such as shared ecological crises, economic instability, rising unemployment, mass poverty and environmental sustainability.
The Commission recommended that the ESC have no more than 23 members, be headed by a new Deputy Secretary-General for Economic Co-operation and Development, and use Purchase Power Parity (“PPP”) to measure the gross domestic product (“GDP”) of all member nations.
The ESC would have authority over telecommunications and multimedia, and businesses that use the airwaves and satellites would be subject to its policies, to provide a measure of global public service broadcasting not linked to commercial interests.
The World Trade Organisation (“WTO”) and the International Labour Organisation (“ILO”) would be brought under the authority of the new ESC, which would aim to promote open and stable trade based on multilaterally agreed rules to raise the living standards of the poor and achieve environmental sustainability.
Global Governance of Trade, Development and Migration
The Commission on Global Governance emphasised the need for a system of global governance to oversee the global information society through a common regulatory approach, with the World Trade Organisation (“WTO”) giving preferential treatment to poor countries in license allocations and creating rules to counter national monopolies.
The Economic Security Council (“ESC”) is expected to address various global issues, including tariffs and quotas, technical and product standards, social provision and labour markets, competition policy, environmental control, investment incentives, corporate taxation and intellectual property law.
The ESC aims to centralise and consolidate policymaking for world trade, the international monetary system and world development, with a broad consensus on elements such as environmental sustainability, financial stability and a strong social dimension to policy.
To deal with third-world debt, the Commission recommended establishing a system similar to corporate bankruptcy, where a state’s affairs are managed by the international community, allowing for a fresh start.
The ESC is expected to facilitate technology transfer, crucial for development in developing countries, and establish immigration policies to address the inconsistency in government treatment of migration.
Environmental policies will be under the authority of the Trusteeship Council, with implementation and enforcement coordinated through UN organisations and non-governmental organisations (“NGOs”) such as the World Conservation Union (“IUCN”), the World Resources Institute (“WRI)” and the World Wide Fund for Nature (“WWF”).
The Role of NGOs
The Commission on Sustainable Development (“CSD”), created as a result of the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, would serve as the focal point for coherence and coordination of UN programmes, providing political leadership in implementing Agenda 21 and achieving sustainable development.
The Commission recognised the importance of NGOs and institutions as partners with government and businesses in achieving economic progress and sustainable development, citing the contributions of organisations such as the IUCN, WRI, and WWF.
The Commission emphasised the importance of involving civil society in global governance, leading to more people-focused and productive programmes and projects. To achieve this, the Commission proposed the creation of two new bodies: the Assembly of the People and the Forum of Civil Society, which would provide a platform for representatives of NGOs to participate in global governance.
The Assembly of the People would consist of representatives elected by national legislatures, with the possibility of direct election by the people in the future.
The Forum of Civil Society would comprise 300-600 representatives of accredited NGOs, meeting annually before the UN General Assembly to provide considered views on global governance.
The Commission recognised the essential role of NGOs in global governance, which is a demonstrated fact of life, and sought to institutionalise their participation through legal status.
The idea of NGO participation in global governance dates back to the founding of the UN, with Julius Huxley playing a key role in establishing the International Union for Conservation of Nature (“IUCN”) in 1948.
The IUCN has been instrumental in promoting NGO participation in global governance, with 980 accredited NGOs as of 1994, and has created influential organisations such as the WWF and the WRI.
These NGOs have been involved in shaping major environmental documents and have a significant presence in global and regional conferences, including the UN Conference on Environment and Development (“UNCED”).
The Commission noted that there are 28,900 known international NGOs, many of which are directly involved in advancing the agenda of global governance, and have significant resources and national constituencies.
The participation of NGOs in global governance is not limited to international conferences but is also being applied to domestic policy, with national NGOs playing a key role in shaping the domestic agenda on global issues.
The structure of “civil society” participation in global governance is revealed in various documents from UN organisations, the IUCN, WWF and the WRI, often described as “Public-Private Partnerships.”
These partnerships involve the creation of “boards” or “councils” representing the interests of all “stakeholders,” but are often dominated by well-prepared NGOs.
At the local level in the USA, NGOs are frequently full-time professionals, funded through the Environmental Grantmakers Association or the federal government, and coordinate with regional and national NGOs.
The NGOs that set the US national agenda are often the same ones accredited to the UN or members of the IUCN and ultimately aim to establish a “Bioregional Council” with authority over local land and resource use decisions.
The Commission recommended the creation of a “Right of Petition” available to international civil society, which would allow NGOs to petition the UN directly through a Council for Petitions.
This Council would be a high-level panel of five to seven persons, independent of governments, appointed by the Secretary-General with approval of the General Assembly, and would make recommendations to the Secretary-General, the Security Council and the General Assembly.
Although this mechanism had not been formally incorporated into the UN system in 1996, it was being used, as seen in the example of the Greater Yellowstone Coalition petitioning the World Heritage Committee of UNESCO to intervene in a private company’s plans to mine gold near Yellowstone Park.
International Law and Global Governance
The Commission aimed to remedy the historical limitations of international law by developing and drafting proposed international law through the UN International Law Commission and the IUCN’s Environmental Law Centre.
The Commission recommended that treaties and agreements include binding adjudication by the World Court and that all nations accept compulsory jurisdiction of the World Court, with the WTO being a step in this direction.
Even in 1996, the WTO had a system where members agreed to accept WTO decisions and not seek bilateral resolution of disputes, ensuring compliance with global rules.
Also by 1996, the International Law Commission (“ILC”) had developed statutes for a new International Criminal Court, which would have an independent prosecutor to investigate alleged crimes, acting independently without instructions from governments or other sources.
The Commission recognised that implementing international standards could face opposition from internal political processes within nation-states and populist action, citing the example of the Biodiversity Treaty that was not ratified by the US Senate due to grassroots opposition.
The Commission noted that accredited NGOs and their affiliates are seen as “expanding democracy” through civil society participation, while non-accredited civil society activity is viewed as “political pressure” and “populist action.”
Financing Global Governance Through Global Taxation Schemes
The Commission proposed a fresh look at globally redistributive tax principles to finance global governance, suggesting a more sustainable approach to managing the global commons, particularly environmental issues.
The UN’s annual expenditures in 1996 were around $11 billion, with the cost of implementing Agenda 21 estimated at $600 billion per year, which in a Globalist’s mind highlights the need for a more robust financing system.
The Commission proposed establishing practical, small-scale schemes of global financing to support specific UN operations while avoiding giving the UN direct taxing power and instead relying on member nations’ assessments and voluntary contributions.
The Commission noted that the United States had often withheld payment to influence UN policy and that the UN has no power to enforce payment of assessments or voluntary contributions, constraining the exercise of the General Assembly’s collective authority.
The Commission on Global Governance suggested that user charges, levies and taxes should be agreed upon globally and implemented through a treaty or convention to generate revenue for the United Nations. The Law of the Seas treaty served as an example, authorising a UN organisation to charge application fees and royalties to companies mining the sea bed, despite the United States not having ratified the treaty.
The Commission proposed various global revenue-raising schemes, including charging for the use of common global resources, corporate taxation of multinational companies and a tax on international monetary exchange, as suggested by Nobel Prize winner James Tobin.
The Commission says “It would be appropriate to charge for the use of some common global resources. Another idea would be for corporate taxation of multinational companies.”
The favoured scheme was first advanced by Nobel Prize winner, James Tobin. He has proposed a tax on international monetary exchange which would yield an estimated $1.5 trillion per year.
“Charges for use of the global commons have a broad appeal on grounds of conservation and economic efficiency as well as for political and revenue reasons.”
The Commission supports a $2 per barrel tax on oil, which automatically escalates to $10 per barrel in 10 years.
“A carbon tax introduced across a large number of countries or a system of traded permits for carbon emissions would yield very large revenues indeed.”
As well as charging for the use of the global commons, and taxation on multinational companies, monetary exchange, oil and carbon, other recommended global revenue sources included a surcharge on airline tickets, charges for ocean maritime transport, user fees for ocean fishing and special fees for activities in Antarctica and geostationary satellites.
The Commission supported the concept of global taxation and urged the evolution of a consensus to realise this concept.
Implementation and the Future of Global Governance
By 1996, many of the Commission’s recommendations had already been incorporated into treaties, agreements and proposals, with some already implemented, and the General Assembly was scheduled to hold a World Conference on Governance in 1998.
The Commission called for preparatory work to develop documents on global governance, which will be adopted at the 1998 Conference and ratified for implementation by the year 2000.
Only accredited NGOs would be allowed to participate in the preparatory work, and only delegates appointed by the President of the United States would be able to cast votes on issues affecting Americans. The same would apply to all countries.
The NGO machinery of global governance is active in America, promoting the global governance agenda through various means, including agitation, lobbying and discrediting dissenting voices.
By 1996, the US national media was already portraying dissenting voices as right-wing-extremist, militia-supporting fanatics, leaving many American citizens unaware of the progress of the global governance agenda.
The United States is the only remaining power strong enough to influence the UN, and 1996 may be the last opportunity to avoid or influence the shape of global governance, Lamb said.
Lamb added that the Commission on Global Governance’s recommendations, if implemented, would lead to a dramatic transformation of society, creating a global neighbourhood managed by a worldwide bureaucracy under the authority of a small group of appointed individuals. This bureaucracy would be policed by thousands of individuals paid by accredited NGOs, certified to support a specific belief system that many people find unacceptable.
This article from The People’s Voice is ‘fact checked’ internet wide which would usually tell us it’s likely true. Basically they’ve (re) set their sights on the over 70s with view to expunging them. It is of course no secret that those whose lip service is sustainable development, long for the elimination of we ‘useless eaters’. ‘What to do with us’ asks Schwab’s adviser, Yuval Noah Harari. Drugs and pc games he reckons.
Note, the overpopulation myth is required to keep this evil agenda going of course. It really is a myth and most folk have bought into it unfortunately.
“In The Affordable Care ACT in the U.S.A., it says that every 5 years, the elderly will get “end of life counseling.” I think this is when they are convinced that their life is not worth living, they are a burden, and they may as well be gone. It is required, so nobody can escape it.”
Richard Vobes Whistleblower, Irene Chain joins me to explain how the important role of the midwife is being manipulated in New Zealand, as well as the rest of the world.
EWNZ Comment: all that stands out for me about this man is the smirk we saw on his face when he said in the midst of ‘their’ plandemic that destroyed countless people’s lives …‘wait until we see the next one [fake ‘virus’] … that, and 47K crippled children …. he is no philanthropist ..
“Gates doesn’t simply receive rent checks from his Nebraska farmland. He’s also using it to borrow staggering sums of money.”
In 2017, the Canadian board made the decision to sell a significant portion of its American farmland portfolio, which amounted to half a billion dollars and included all 22,830 acres of its land in Nebraska. The purchaser and financial details of these seemingly ordinary Nebraska farms remained undisclosed until recently, it has now been revealed that the individual behind this purchase is none other than Bill Gates and over the past six years, Gates has has invested more than $113 million in purchasing farmland in Nebraska.
Gates’ ownership of farmland is structured through over 20 shell companies located across the country. Some of these entities trace back to a P.O. Box in Kirkland, Washington, where Cascade Asset Management, responsible for managing all of Gates’ investments, is headquartered. Bill Gates’ Nebraska neighbors don’t know he owns the soybean field down the road.
Here’s the story of his spending spree, including the massive loan he took out against his land by Destiny Herbers of Flatwater Press.
The US under “Joe Biden” is a rogue state doing all it can for world depopulation, through incessant WAR all over
From Russell “Texas” Bentley in Donetsk:
I wrote the following article a few days ago. It was published in a somewhat watered down form by Sputnik International News. (MSM is the same everywhere, it only varies by degrees.) This is the original. Feel free to publish or share. The news it contains IS important. There is also a link to a second article with very important news below my article.
Reuters reports that NATO “exercise” Steadfast Defender 2024, will begin on Monday, January 22nd, and will run “through” May, which means until June. The deployment will include 90,000 troops, 50 ships, including aircraft carriers, more than 80 combat aircraft, including fighter jets, and over 1,100 combat vehicles, including at least 133 tanks and over 500 infantry fighting vehicles. The fact that the “exercise’ begins next week, and the Western MSM is only now publicizing it, means that all the military assets are already in position. They’re not “coming”, they’re here.
NATO to hold biggest drills since Cold War with 90,000 troops
This is the biggest NATO combined arms “exercise” since REFORGER 1988, back when the USSR and Warsaw pact were still in existence. In other words, this is the biggest NATO troop movement since the end of the Cold War, almost doubling the previous largest, which was 50,000 troops involved in Trident Juncture in 2018. 90,000 troops on the move for almost half a year, concentrating in the Baltic states on Russia’s borders, in Romania, on the Ukraine border, and in Germany, the military logistics hub of NATO, and where it all started “last time”. You know what I mean.
Politics and war can best be exemplified by the game of chess. In chess, there are three specific stages – the opening, the middle game, and the end game. The opening is when the two opponents move their pawns into a defensive line and develop the major pieces for maneuver. It is relatively bloodless, and if done correctly, more strategic than tactical. There is no defining moment when the game transitions from the opening game to the middle game, but the middle game is where the fighting really begins, and you know it when you get there.
The middle game is where the majority of pieces are lost, the fighting is most intense, and surprise moves are most likely. The game can often end in checkmate during this phase, with one side being totally defeated by a surprise move they did not see coming. Remember that.
If there is no surprise defeat, the middle game is usually short, and when it is over, the chessboard is vastly different than when it began. In the end game, the majority of pieces on both sides have been eliminated, only a few pieces remain – the kings, of course, and a few pieces close to them, defending them. From here, the game ends in checkmate, a definitive defeat of one side or the other, or a stalemate, where both sides agree that neither can win, thus ending the game, and agreeing to start over at some time in the future.
(Russell Bentley in the opening game, on frontline position “Blesna”, 2015)
With Steadfast Defender, Europe (and probably the world) enter the middle game. Fasten your seatbelts, we are in for a rough ride. This middle game will almost certainly not be confined to Europe. and before it is over, will most probably include surprise moves in the form of the use of chemical, biological and nuclear weapons. No place on Earth will be safe, except, perhaps, for the luxury bunkers of the world’s billionaire elite. Maybe not even there…
The “Great Reset” has been interpreted by some as code for a depopulation plan to cull the human herd of the majority of its members. This idea has been dismissed by popular culture as just another “conspiracy theory”, but in reality, it remains the most plausible explanation for the many developments of the last few years. For instance –
The proof that the covid virus, and the “vaccine” it engendered, are actually biological weapons grows stronger every day. The genocide in Gaza, and Israel’s absolute disregard for international law and total lack of any meaningful response to it by the UN or international “community”, the intentional destruction of the US and European economies, spending, borrowing and looting national treasuries as if there were no tomorrow, the ecological destruction fomented by the very ones who pass draconian laws they claim are in order to protect it, the disinformation and gaslighting aimed at destroying people’s very ability to discern truth, and therefore, reality …
All of these developments that have intensified and accelerated in the last few years, when taken as a whole, can only be rationally and realistically explained thusly – “They (the global Parasite Class) are not stupid, they are doing it on purpose.” If there really is a plan by world elites to depopulate the planet, (There is, because) everything they have done would be exactly the way they would do it. Think about it. Prepare. And don’t forget to say your prayers. The middle game, just like Steadfast Defender, is already upon us. The end game begins soon, but it may well end in a stalemate like this…
David Rogers Webb (DRW) is a financial expert and former global money manager who lives in Sweden. Recently, DRW revealed the game plan of globalists like Klaus Schwab who publicly predicts, “You will own nothing . . .” According to DRW, this is not some idle threat but a complicated active plan demonic Deep State globalist central bankers have been working on for decades. DRW has explained this theft in a free book and documentary called “The Great Taking.” It is a stunning plan to steal almost all wealth and legally not be required to pay one red cent for it. The plan is in the process of unfolding now. DRW explains, “The core of what I am showing here is about securities, stocks and bonds. I also go into the good old fashion way of doing it, which is taking anything encumbered with debt. That’s been done for centuries. They create a cycle where there is a fall in price, and then anyone who is in debt is in trouble, and the collateral is taken. This was the big hammer in ‘The Great Taking 1.0,’ which was the Great Depression. In this go-around, ‘The Great Taking 2.0,’ that is taking things that are not encumbered with debt. . . .There is very sophisticated subterfuge that has been put into place. . . . They have worked for half a century to put this in place. So, it is quite deliberate. This is not an accident.”
The privately owned stocks and bonds in brokerages are now collateral backing up the massive $2 quadrillion in derivatives in the world. DRW calls this a “sleight-of-hand” in regulations that changes ownership of securities in a severe financial meltdown, which is already planned. Actual owners of securities have no idea they are about to be robbed of their wealth. DRW says, “The public had property rights to these stocks and bonds, and they turned that into a contractual claim. So, they have no rights or standing in a bankruptcy. Then, the collateral is transported into the ‘Central Clearing Parties,’ which are set up to fail. They are actually preparing for that. When those fail, it is the secured creditors behind that derivatives complex that have ‘Super-Priority’ to take that collateral. This is what is meant by ‘You will own nothing.’ This is sleight-of-hand to take people’s assets to underpin these financial contracts. . . . I say derivatives are not real things, but they can be used to take the real things through this construct. . . . They are using these vast pools of client securities . . . as the collateral underpinning all these derivative contracts. . . . I think their goal is simply to take all the stuff, and it is taken free of payment.”
This is not just simple greed. It is war, and we are being attacked in ways we have never seen before such as the CV19 bioweapon vax that has already murdered millions of people globally. DRW says, “This is a full spectrum ‘Hybrid War’ because it is not a war between nation states. Russia has been held up as a boogeyman . . . In the book (The Great Taking), I show is a very elaborate structure put in place and implemented by the CIA, The Federal Reserve and the Department of State. This is not being run by the Chinese or the Russians. This is the central banks. . . . They are trying to collapse everything . . . we are in a war, and there are going to be big disruptions. . . . We are all in danger now.”
DRW says the best way to protect yourself is to get out of debt and stay out of debt. He also suggests you may want to sell your stocks and bonds now, and pay off your house or any debts you have. DRW says, “It’s better to get something now than get nothing later.”
There is much more in the 1-hour and 9-minute deep-dive on how central banks plan on stealing everything in the next financial crisis. This is a crisis that is coming much sooner than you have been told.
Join Greg Hunter of USAWatchdog.com as he talks with David Rogers Webb, who is a financial expert and author of the free new book and documentary called “The Great Taking” for 1.20.24.
But it’s much worse than all of this. Foreign police cars and more National Guard have arrived to patrol the perimeter, and keep people out.You are not even allowed to stop on the side of the road. What the actual f*ck is going on here? (video below #3)
All media is still being blocked. Drones are still not allowed. NO OVERSIGHT IS ALLOWED. What in Gods name are they trying to block people from seeing?
Tucker Carlson and Bret Weinstein discuss Big Pharma and the World Health Organization’s dark agenda.
Note ‘they’ have a new word … ‘malinformation’. Learn the difference (according to ‘them’) between disinfo, misinfo and now malinfo! Hint – it’s about not doing what the corporation parading as goobermint says.
PS.. Weinstein describes vaccines as ‘elegant’ .. (?) I did wonder at that (thinking vaccines generally) & a reader here has pointed it out also. On that topic here is a post by Karen Kingston … Is mRNA Nanotechnology Elegant? or Evil? so she is referring to the safe & effective. What a minefield. Read & decide for yourself. Many of these so called experts expound a pound of truth with a quarter ounce of lies/deception sprinkled in.
(Taken from `Their Terrifying Plan’ by Vernon Coleman.)
The World Economic Forum (pompously and arrogantly announced as ‘Committed to Improving the State of the World’) was set up in 1971 by a man called Klaus Schwab, though the organisation wasn’t called that then. When Schwab began what was to become the WEF he had an endowment of just 25,000 Swiss francs in a bank account.
The first Davos meeting of what was then called the European Management Symposium, lasted two weeks and involved 450 participants, including chief executives and senior managers from top companies and 50 faculty members from business schools. Things then moved quickly.
The chairman of the second Davos meeting was supposed to be Herman J.Abs who had to cancel at the last minute but this link gives us a clear insight into the background of the WEF.
As Zina Cohen explains in her book The Shocking History of the EU, Abs was a bank director who helped Hitler enormously by forcibly purchasing Jewish banks at low prices. The money was then used to build the Nazi war machine.
During the Second World War, Abs was a member of a secret group formed in 1943 and known as the Committee for Foreign Economic Affairs – a group of bankers and businessmen who met to discuss Germany’s future after the end of the War.
After the War, a friend of his, Charles Gunston of the Bank of England, asked Abs to help rebuild German banking – though Abs had been arrested as a war criminal and sentenced to death in his absence. Gunston worked for the Bank of England as the manager of the German desk and was a senior official in the British occupational authority after the War. Gunston cared nothing about the atrocities perpetrated by the Nazis. All he wanted to do was to help rebuild the German banks. To this end he recruited Abs who was high on a list of Nazi officials wanted for war crimes. Gunston protected Abs to help Germany rebuild its banking system ready to continue Hitler’s work. Thanks to help from his friends at the Bank of England, Abs was not executed or even imprisoned, and by 1948, he was deputy head of the Reconstruction Loan Corporation and President of the Bank Deutsche Lander. Unbelievably, it was then Abs who decided which German companies should receive the billions of dollars provided as Marshall Aid. And for decades afterwards, Abs had a powerful role in Germany. He was one of a number of former Nazis who helped create the organisation which became the European Union. (For more details of how the European Union was created please read `The Shocking History of the EU’ by Zina Cohen).
Until the mid-1990s, Abs was chairman of the Deutsche Bank and his Nazi background was ignored. The Independent, a British newspaper, described Abs as the outstanding German banker of his time and quietly ignored his work with IG Farben and Kontinental-Ol, where he had knowingly employed slave labour in the concentration camps. Nor did they mention the money he had helped steal from Jewish people and banks. And this was the man Schwab asked to chair the second Davos meeting of his new organisation. It has frequently been rumoured that Schwab’s father was a Nazi who was an associate of Hitler but, of course, the fact checkers deny this.
The honorary sponsor of the third Davos meeting in 1973 was Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands (a former Nazi and the founder of the Bilderberger meetings) and the Commission of the European Communities ‘renewed its patronage’. An Italian industrialist delivered a speech summarising The Limits of Growth, a book that had been commissioned by the Club of Rome and published in 1972. Participants drafted a code of ethics based on Klaus Schwab’s stakeholder concept.
It was clear early on that the WEF was very close to the European Commission of the EU with two meetings held at the European Commission in Brussels.
Today, the WEF describes itself as a public interest not for profit organisation based in Switzerland. It has offices in New York (USA), San Francisco (USA), Tokyo (Japan), Mumbai (India) and Beijing (China). In 2022 the WEF reported an income of 383,000,000 Swiss francs in fees and other funding. Out of this 130 million Swiss francs was spent on staff, with Schwab himself reportedly being paid more than $1,000,000 a year (plus, allegedly, rewards from associated companies Around 252 million Swiss francs was spent on `office and activity’. (It is interesting that many of those working with the conspirators in some way have become extraordinarily wealthy. Tony Blair, for example, was a modestly paid politician for most of his working life but is now a multi-millionaire. The staff of environmental and green charities are often enormously well-paid and enjoy first class travel around the world.) The WEF does not pay any federal taxes.
An organisation which, just a dozen years ago was regarded as having no influence and was known merely as the organiser of an annual shindig where virtue signalling celebrities such as pop star Bono (famous to many for his tax avoidance schemes and hypocrisy) could rub shoulders with politicians and industrialists eager to be photographed with famous people, and which was not taken seriously by many people, is now one of the most powerful bodies in the world. It has taken over from the far more secretive Bilderbergers as the face (and voice) of the conspirators.
Schwab himself was born in Germany in 1938 and acquired a variety of academic qualifications before founding the WEF in 1971 when he was just 33-years-old. The WEF was originally called the European Management Forum but changed its name to the rather grander and more ambitious World Economic Forum in 1987.
Just prior to founding the European Management Forum, Schwab had been a member of the Managing Board of a medium sized Swiss manufacturing company with which his father appears to have been associated. Today the WEF claims to have more than 600 employees but I would describe Schwab as (like Charles III and Tony Blair) as a fixer and a pimp for the conspirators. None of them seems to me to be serious players.
There is no record on the WEF’s website of how Schwab acquired the money to set up what is described (on its own website) as ‘the foremost global multi-stakeholder organisation’ nor is it clear how, within three years, his organisation had been able to invite political leaders from around the world to a conference in Davos.
In 1971, the same year that he founded the forerunner of the WEF, Schwab wrote a book called Modern Enterprise Management in Mechanical Engineering (it seems unlikely that the royalties from this enabled him to found the WEF). There have been rumours that his mother was related to the Rothschild family and that his father was close to Adolf Hitler but both these suggestions have been dismissed by fact checkers (though we should remember that fact checkers claimed that the covid vaccine was effective and perfectly safe). In that early book, Schwab argued that the management of a modern enterprise must serve both the shareholders and the corporate stakeholders – with the stakeholders including employees, customers, government, creditors, local communities and financiers. Schwab has worked with the United Nations for many decades and has advised various UN bodies on sustainable development issues. Schwab has warned that there would be much anger in the world as the conspirators’ plans unfolded, and is best known for warning citizens everywhere ‘you will own nothing and be happy’.
As an aside, it is curious, is it not, how the phrase ‘you will own nothing and be happy’, which is believed to have originated with the World Economic Forum can be compared to the principles of the communist revolution as described in Karl Marx’s ‘Communist Manifesto’? Marx wrote that in order to establish a socialist dictatorship, and to obtain total control over the proletariat, the communists would have to eliminate all rights to private property, destroy all religion, which Marx famously described as ‘the opiate of the people’ and dissolve the family unit which was seen as a threat to the ability of the State to obtain total control over people’s lives. (Today, under the Great Reset, traditional religions will be replaced by a faith in nature as defined by the United Nations and promoted by the consortium of bankers who are managing the global economy. Astonishingly, the leaders of traditional religions have accepted the change, and the Pope and the Archbishop of Canterbury seem happy to commit themselves and their followers to the pseudoscience in preference to the traditional teachings their religions have espoused. It doesn’t seem to matter to them that the science of climate change is provably fake; they are wedded to, and happy to influence, the blasphemies promoted by the rabid environmentalists. In 2023, a WEF advisor and establishment enthusiast called Yuval Noah Harari claimed that AI could create a new religion and a new bible, thereby making AI the new god. This is, presumably, the proposed replacement for orthodox, traditional religion. We already know that AI will bring an endless encyclopaedia of lies to the internet, now, it seems, AI will also bring us a brand new fake religion.)
Actually, as Gary Allen and Larry Abraham point out in their excellent book None Dare Call It Conspiracy, which was published in 1971, the Communist Manifesto was merely an update of the revolutionary plans proposed 70 years earlier by Adam Weishaupt, the founder of the Order of Illuminati. Today we can see the WEF, the Bilderbergers and the other conspirators following the recommendations made by Marx, and previously by the Order of Illuminati.
Meetings of the WEF are held annually in Davos and participants arrive from all over the world (many of them in private jets) to discuss the threat of climate change.
Most dangerously, perhaps, the WEF has what it pompously calls a ‘Young Global Leaders Scheme’ which trains ruthless young men and women to be puppets of the cabal. Many of the graduates get jobs in politics, the green movement, charity management and so on, and Schwab boasts that ‘graduates’ from what might by some be seen as a brainwashing programme can be found in high places everywhere. The boast is justified and WEF followers can be found in many governments: Sunak in the UK, Trudeau in Canada and Macron in France all have links to the WEF.
The whole organisation reminds me very much of the Scientology cult though, as a replacement for the Bilderbergers and a promotional organisation for the European Union and the United Nations, it is infinitely more dangerous and it has influence far greater than would seem justified.
Taken from the book `Their Terrifying Plan’ by Vernon Coleman – to purchase a copy please CLICK HERE
When CIA/DARPA creation Elon Musk used taxpayer money that he laundered via selling overvalued Tesla shares in order to “purchase” Twitter, this Substack was warning that the social media platform was nothing more than a limited hangout. Now that PSYOP-MUSK = The Deep State has revealed his true hand by attacking Substack, it is the perfect time to rev…
Now that Elon Musk has folded Twitter into the “X Corp” it is time to revisit this substack’s earlier article predicting this Deep State con inevitability. Tweets as of this posting no longer embed into Substack, so here is a screenshot that is linked to the fraudster’s announcement:
Some links here, given there is so much going on and it’s difficult to keep up. Ain’t that just like the string pullers? Bread and circuses, psyops and the like abounding to keep your eye off the ball. Their ball. But… yes folk are waking up & making moves in opposition to the ‘desired’ direction.
Growth in gas cars is now far higher than electrics, flipping a trend from 12 months ago.
• COVID vaccine uptake has plummeted. Pfizer’s stock is down 50% from 2 years ago. Moderna’s is down over 70% in the same time frame.
• Zuckerberg’s Threads has failed. There’s a lack of enthusiasm for heavily censored social media platforms.
• Decline in interest and market value for alternative meat products like Beyond Meat.
• Even DEI (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion) has hit the skids! Wisconsin just dialed back all funding and froze the programs.
Let’s be grateful for every amount of capitalism we have remaining because markets mean consumer choice. And when given the choice, we know now that consumers don’t like Klaus Schwab’s plans for our lives, no matter how much Bill Gates endorses them.
From Mark Crispin Miller @ substack: Happy New Year to the growing RESISTANCE breaking out, in different ways, worldwide—also including Canada, France, Malaysia and Australia
Before we get into the second half of this presentation, let me say that, despite what the media tells you, many highly credentialed whistleblowers have come forward, such as Doctor Bill Deagle, a military doctor, who warned the public about this spraying program:
Maybe you think Dr. Bill is a nut; perhaps he just wanted attention and his life destroyed (and ultimately, death). How about testimony from Alfred Webre, a former United Nations representative:
If you think both of them are crazy, check out my Substack post showing military whistleblower, Kristen Meghan:
The Great Taking is described by former hedge fund manager David Webb as a system put in place by central bankers to take everything, from everyone
This planned confiscation of global securities assets deserves the title of “greatest crime ever contemplated”
Although the plan is decades in the making, Webb details signs that indicate it may be coming to fruition soon — if nothing is done to stop it
The Great Taking is a carefully orchestrated construct, but one that has legal underpinnings and support from the CIA and upper echelons of government, dating back to the 1960s
The best ways to protect yourself include eliminating debt, investing in real things like land and having an ability to produce your own food
You’ve heard of The Great Reset? Now delve into The Great Taking, described by former hedge fund manager David Webb as a system put in place by central bankers to take everything, from everyone. “It is about the taking of collateral (all of it), the end game of the current globally synchronous debt accumulation super cycle,” Webb explains.1
In the video above, you can learn more about this planned confiscation of global securities assets, which Webb argues deserves the title of “greatest crime ever contemplated.”2 Although the plan is decades in the making, Webb details signs that indicate it may be coming to fruition soon — if nothing is done to stop it. If and when that occurs, it would result in complete subjugation of humanity.
Signs a ‘Great Taking’ Financial Collapse Is Coming
Webb has been studying global financial systems for more than two decades. By researching historical precedents, like bank closures that occurred during the Great Depression, he’s noticed signs that may foreshadow a coming financial collapse:3
“This scheme is being executed by long-planned, intelligent design, the audacity and scope of which is difficult for the mind to encompass. Included are all financial assets and bank deposits, all stocks and bonds; and hence, all underlying property of all public corporations, including all inventories, plant and equipment; land, mineral deposits, inventions and intellectual property.
Privately owned personal and real property financed with any amount of debt will likewise be taken, as will the assets of privately owned businesses which have been financed with debt. If even partially successful, this will be the greatest conquest and subjugation in world history.”
Webb compares it to the global financial distress that occurred in the 1930s due to debt levels. At the time, 9,000 U.S. banks failed, taking $7 billion in depositors’ assets with them.4 “When a bank failed the depositors were simply left without a penny. The life savings of millions of Americans were wiped out by the bank failures,” the U.S. Social Security Administration states.5
Their debts, however, were not canceled but, rather, were consolidated into the Federal Reserve system and enforced. “So, people that were in debt were in trouble,” Webb says. “Even wealthy people lost everything. The difference this time around is they’re not going after just property that is encumbered by debt.” He explains:6
“They’ve engineered this so they can take things, all securities, as collateral from people and entities that have no borrowings against them. They own them clear and outright. Now let me give you an example as an analogy to explain the horror of this. So, you have bought a car and you paid cash for it, you think you’re being very conservative, you have no debt against the car.
But unbeknownst to you, the dealer continues to control your car as collateral, you’re not told this, the dealer uses your car and all the other cars sold by the dealer as collateral for his borrowing and his business. Now, the dealer goes bust, and only certain secured creditors are empowered to immediately take your car and all the cars ever sold by the dealer without any judicial review. Immediately.
When I describe this to people, they get worried about their cars. This is not about your car. This is an analogy for what has been done. It’s much worse than this being about your car, because it is literally about the entire securities complex globally. So it is not about your insolvency that causes the loss of your assets. It’s the insolvency of the people that secretly used your collateral as their property without telling you that or disclosing it.”
The Dematerialization of Securities to Electronic Holdings Started in the ‘60s
The Great Taking is a carefully orchestrated construct, but one that has legal underpinnings and support from the CIA and upper echelons of government. It’s a plan that dates back to the 1960s, when the process of dematerializing securities to hold them electronically began. According to Webb:7
“Yes, they have changed law. Can that be challenged? That’s what has to happen. So, this was the process, they changed it in the Uniform Commercial Code. This was beginning in 1994. The efforts to affect this actually go back further than that into the 1960s, when they began the process of dematerialization of securities to hold them all electronically, which some people were suspicious about then — and they were right to be suspicious.
It is clear that that beginning process was literally run by the CIA. And this is not conspiracy theory. The man who was charged with forming the Depository Trust … discloses that he was a career CIA operative from the time he was a young man. So, there was a grand strategic purpose behind this.
They’ve been able to do it because it has been run from the highest levels of the U.S. government … then this construct of the securities entitlement was put into the Uniform Commercial Code that was pushed through all 50 states — done quietly … in 1994. It took maybe 10 years to get it done in all the states, then they changed the Bankruptcy Law in 2005.”
The bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers in 2008 — the largest commercial collapse in history8 — was a test that paved the way for global harmonization, that is, the plan to force this model in global law. Webb continues:9
“They did this through the EU, the first discussion in documents in the EU is in 2002. So that’s when the process was beginning then in the aftermath of the.com bust, and the EU created something they called the legal certainty group. And again, that sounds like a good thing.
But what they mean is legal certainty that the secured creditors will take the client assets, and they worked at this for years, figuring out how to subvert local law. When you think about it, rights to property is kind of a sacred thing. It’s something that all people should care about. And oddly enough, even the people participating in making this happen should care about this in a big way.”
The private control of the central banks is what’s providing the power behind The Great Taking. “When you look around the world, they are all privately controlled,” Webb says. “You are not allowed to know, actually, who controls the Federal Reserve and how it is controlled. We know that it is controlled somehow by a set of banks.”10
The same pattern is seen in central banks around the world. “If you notice, any country that has attempted to have a national bank is literally attacked and destroyed. They’re not allowed to exist,” Webb notes.
“It is linked with the war machine, this private control of money. The intelligence agencies, the militaries globally would not be able to function as they are if they weren’t linked with this money creation power.”11 Meanwhile, money is created out of thin air, all but ensuring a financial collapse:12
“When we were kids, perhaps we thought that the money you borrowed from the bank is someone else’s savings that they’re giving you. It’s a zero sum game. I think we now know, with the scale of the money created during the COVID period, that that is not the case. The scale outstrips any real-world activity, and it’s just created out of thin air.
So, this is the power that controls everything. They control all political parties, all governments, all the major corporations, the media, and this was the case leading into the 20th century in this period when the velocity of money was collapsing. That is basically a collapse of their control system.
The money is a very sophisticated control system, because it requires almost no energy input, people are directed by chasing money incentives, but this power through chronic overuse, when it reaches this point where no matter how much money is created, it’s not translating into actual economic growth, then it goes into a financial bubble.
And then you get the major collapse of the whole system. Then they must have a plan to stay in control through that collapse, which will require physical control over people through the reset, because the money control system has broken down.”
CBDC Rollout Will Make It Difficult to Opt Out of the System
Central bank digital currencies (CBDCs) are one pawn in the plan to consolidate control of the financial system — ultimately leading to control of the world population. These government-backed digital currencies are issued by a central bank and promoted as digital tokens that can simplify monetary policy and bring about convenient cashless societies.
They’re also sometimes said to be similar to cryptocurrency13 due to their digital nature, but there are important, and major, distinctions.
While cryptocurrencies are decentralized and allow anonymous transactions, CBDCs are centralized and can track every transaction. They can also be controlled by the powers that be — meaning all your CBDC assets could be taken away or turned off by a central power, and there’d be nothing you could do about it.
When the financial collapse occurs, banking institutions will be protected and use the narrative that they must seize all assets in order to restart the economy. According to Webb:14
“They will be taken under the argument that, well, we have to save these systemically vital institutions so that we can restart the economy again. How could we restart the economy if they are not protected? … It’s like a game of Monopoly where all of the pieces, all of the money on the board, are pulled back to the bank, and then they say, let’s start a new game.
And we’ll start over from the basis that we have everything and you don’t, so would you like to borrow something?
And this is what the CBDC, the central bank, digital currency, will be. It will be very difficult for people to refuse to use it, because they literally won’t be able to eat. They will have an app they can download … this will be the cavalry riding to the rescue, just download this app. And you can load your phone with suit currency to allow you to go buy milk, but every time you use that you’re actually borrowing money from them.
They have you again. It will happen very fast. This will unfold in a very frightening crisis kind of environment and people have difficulty refusing. That’s why it’s so important to spread this awareness beforehand, so that people understand what is happening.”
Central Banking Should Be a Public Utility
When Silicon Valley Bank (SVB), the 16th largest in the U.S.,15 collapsed in March 2023, it rattled the markets, but this and similar bank failures in the recent past are not bank-specific problems. “These are the canaries in the coal mine. This is absolutely systemic,” Webb says.16 Plans dictated that globally important banks be ready for wind down by the end of 2022. Additional planning documents cite the end of 2023 for banks to be ready to go flat.
“These are indications to give you another idea of the seriousness of this,” Webb explains. “They’ve been running these trilateral exercises with Britain and the EU and the U.S. for six of the seven past years.”17
Participants in these exercises in the U.S. include the Treasury Secretary, the Chairman of the Federal Reserve and the chairman of the FDIC. “They’re very, very serious about this. And these exercises are about assuring the cross-border transfer of the collateral when the banks are put into wind down. So, you’ve noticed in the news that there have been some failures of banks in the last year and that is due to this increase, this backup and interest rates.”18
If we can decentralize financial power, however, it will lead to an improved economy and future. This is why Webb states central banking should be a public utility:19
“The very idea that it should be controlled by private interests, that is the source of all the problems for humanity, that must stop as a public utility. You know, of course, banking is a useful thing to have. We have to realize we don’t have to go back to sticks and stones, we don’t want everything burned to the ground.
We have to take back control of our society, which has largely been created by good people, all the innovations … we just have to not allow them to control these things any longer.
So, public banking would be like a utility. Any profits would be returned to the public or used to support government. We have to have government. We have to have some way to operate society and have roads and do things that work for society. So, anarchy and chaos, we can’t have that. So, this has to be done peacefully, it has to be done legally by another concept.”
Solutions? Eliminate Debt and Grow Your Own Food
On a larger scale, Webb proposes that a small fee on every electronic money transfer could generate the economic resources necessary to operate the government. “Imagine how people would feel if they were told you don’t have to file taxes anymore. That’s all going to be handled. Just pay a 10th of a percent on whatever electronic transfer you’re doing. But the people that run this system don’t want those kinds of solutions because they would eliminate their control.”20
On an individual level, you can start to break free from this system and protect your finances by eliminating debt:21
“You have to get over this notion that you should use borrowed money to control more stuff. They want you to do that, because when the price level falls, you won’t be able to service that debt.
So, you take advantage of this time remaining to sell things to pay off your debts. It doesn’t make sense to have money in the financial markets when you also have debt. There are people I know who have sold their homes, which is a tough decision to make, and are simply renting to make sure that they’re not in debt at all.”
Beyond getting out of debt, Webb recommends investing in real things, like land and buildings, and have an ability to produce food. You might invest in a greenhouse, plant an orchard or move to a rural area where you can raise chickens. Any additional level of self-sufficiency you can create will offer you more protection.
To delve deeper into The Great Taking, Webb’s book can be downloaded for free at TheGreatTaking.com.22 “I’ve done it this way because it will make it close to zero friction so it can spread globally. And that is really happening … This is the most important thing I can do right now,” Webb says, is spread awareness of The Great Taking before it occurs.23
Good luck with that Mark.As I recall, come the day such bunkers will be required, particularly by those who screwed the planet, and more recently Hawaii, there will actually be nowhere for such to hide…EWNZ
Mark Zuckerberg is planning to survive the end times by building a top-secret Hawaii doomsday-bunker with its own sources of food and energy within a sprawling, $100 million compound in Hawaii, according to a Wired investigation. Zuckerberg has added hundreds of acres to his controversial 1,500-acre ranch in Kauai, Hawaii for years, but now it has been revealed that there are new planning documents for a “5,000-square-foot underground shelter.”
Several former contract workers at the ranch were bound by a non disclosure agreement (NDA) that made anyone on-site unwilling to “take the chance to get caught even taking a picture,” but, according to the Wired investigation, detailed public planning documents obtained through public records requests “show the makings of an opulent techno-Xanadu, complete with underground shelter and what appears to be a blast-resistant door.” Wired.
Below is the Wired investigation that reveals the true scale of the project—and its impact on the local community.
Inside Mark Zuckerberg’s Top-Secret Hawaii Compound
OFF THE TWO-LANE highway that winds along the northeast side of the Hawaiian island of Kauai, on a quiet stretch of ranchland between the tourist hubs of Kapaa and Hanalei, an enormous, secret construction project is underway.
A 6-foot wall blocks the view from a nearby road fronting the project, where cars slow to try to catch a glimpse of what’s behind it. Security guards stand watch at an entrance gate and patrol the surrounding beaches on ATVs. Pickup trucks roll in and out, hauling building materials and transporting hundreds of workers.
What we are now seeing emerge … the smart, and 5, 10 or 15 minute cities. And globally not just the US of course, it being a global plan for those unelected parasites who think they have a right to rule over us… EWNZ
Development decisions affect many aspects of people’s everyday lives – their homes, their health, the schools their children attend, the taxes they pay, their daily commute, the natural environmental around them, and economic opportunity in their community. Smart Growth is an overall approach of development and conservation strategies that help protect our health and natural environment and make our communities more attractive, economically stronger, socially diverse, and resilient to climate change.
Market Common in Arlington, Virginia is a walkable, mixed-use development with access to public transit.
Based on the experience of communities around the nation that have used smart growth approaches to create and maintain great neighborhoods, the Smart Growth Network developed a set of ten (10) basic principles to guide smart growth strategies:
Mix land uses. Take advantage of compact building design. Create a range of housing opportunities and choices. Create walkable neighborhoods.
Foster distinctive, attractive communities with a strong sense of place. Preserve open space, farmland, natural beauty, and critical environmental areas. Strengthen and direct development towards existing communities. Provide a variety of transportation choices.
Make development decisions predictable, fair, and cost effective. Encourage community and stakeholder collaboration in development decisions.
THE LONG-TERM STRATEGY OF THE UNITED STATES 2 THE LONG-TERM STRATEGY OF THE UNITED STATES create high-quality jobs, improve public health in every community, and spur investments
This will come as a shock to many reading this because they did not learn of these events from FOX or CNN.
However, in actuality, the process of moving the United States towards a complete Agenda 21 style of total urbanization has already commenced and it began nearly 20 years ago.
via RealityCheckRadio: Award-winning investigative journalist James Corbett from The Corbett Report beams in from Japan to talk about COP28 (Conference of the Parties) which was recently held in Dubai. James and Paul discuss the globalist influencers there who are driving policy and events.
Thank you for reading The Corbett Report. This post is public so feel free to share it.
Described by former Education Minister Przemysław Czarnek as “Stalinist.” This is censorship at its most blatant and surely not a good sign. We had the slightly more subtle version in NZ with yours truly claiming to be the one source of truth …
Special thanks to Maria Zeee (@zeee_media) for doing an incredible job hosting Media Blackout!
Merry Christmas! Please repost and follow (Vigilant Fox, Maria Zeee, and Vigilant News) to support our work — and stay tuned for episode 4 on January 7!
Not surprising in light of all we now know… If you’re short of time go to .58
Video Info:
THIS IS ALL PART OF THE SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT AGENDA THAT IS WORLD WIDE!!
There are no property rights under Agenda 21/2030. Property Rights are incompatible with the 17 United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. America is the only place where property ownership is unique, and fueled our success, but that is coming to an end-of-life. Everything that you own now, and in the “near” future, will become a rental service in the new global circulation economy, in basic terms. When you are done with your items, you will return them to the corporation that made it for recycling. Even the clothes that you wear. To prevent waste, and to save the planet from humanity.. Homes, Vehicles, Properties etc can be applied to this circular economy concept being put into place, globally. Property rights are not sustainable for the environment and contribute to climate change. Get ready…
Washington state lawmakers passed a bill (HB 1287) on April 15 which aims to stop the sale of new internal combustion-engine vehicles starting in 2030
HB 1287 – 2021-22 Concerning preparedness for a zero emissions transportation future.
The World Economic Forum (WEF) is calling for the end of private car ownership in the name of saving the world from climate change by reducing the need for green tech resources.
Something to think about. Cars These 9 States Are Banning the Sale of Gas-Powered Cars More states are following California’s lead in ending the sale of new vehicles with internal combustion engines.
At least nine states are slated to join California in prohibiting the sale of new gasoline-powered cars by 2035.
California is gearing up to prohibit the sale of new gas-powered cars.
A measure approved by the California Air Resources Board in August 2022 requires all new cars, SUVs and pickup trucks sold in the state to generate zero tailpipe emissions by 2035.
The policy won’t take existing vehicles off the road, but automakers and car dealers will be restricted to selling electric vehicles and certain plug-in hybrids.
This story is part of CNET Zero, a series that chronicles the impact of climate change and explores what’s being done about the problem.
“Our cars shouldn’t make wildfires worse — and create more days filled with smoky air,” California Gov. Gavin Newsom said. “Cars shouldn’t melt glaciers or raise sea levels, threatening our cherished beaches and coastlines.” Read more: What to Know About California’s Ban on Gas-Powered Cars The state’s Advanced Clean Cars II rule requires zero-emission vehicles to represent 35% of new cars and light trucks in lots by 2026, and then 68% by 2030, before reaching 100% in 2035.
When it comes to emissions, California is a bellwether: Nine states that link their standards to California’s have already announced plans to prohibit the sale of new
You must be logged in to post a comment.