Comprehending Agenda 2030

The Ideologues Behind This Global Kakistocracy

“The future of man is going to be decided very much by the decisions taken in this generation.” 

Maurice Strong, United Nations, Committee of 300

We are told to believe that The Great Reset is a conspiracy theory, yet it is clandestine only because legacy media are silent. This openly-declared, multilateral operation seems inconceivably absurd. It is surely far easier to assume that the accusations of “conspiracy theory” are correct, and then sit back and let the world run its course?

Throughout history, warning bells have always been dismissed. In Cambodia rumours of a covert military operation running exercises in the northern forests were dismissed until 17 April 1975, when armed rebel forces marched on Phnom Penh. The population were told to evacuate the city “for their safety", but what followed was actually a brutal genocide. Rather than “The Great Reset”, Pol Pot used the term “Year Zero” to represent his ideology of returning the population to pre-colonisation times. We find similar comparisons during Fascist regime takeovers across time.

Those with first-hand experience of totalitarian regimes have been quickest to recognise that our democracy is under threat. When your life has been restricted and suppressed by collectivism, authoritarianism, censorship and poverty, the signs are obvious.

New Zealanders have largely led protected and privileged lives in a free and predominantly democratic society. This makes it difficult to comprehend that ongoing events, including intervals of relative reprieve from lockdowns and mandates, are anything other than the unavoidable consequences of a health crisis.

However, evidence shows deliberate planning is underway from a constellation of powerful, converging interests. Their success relies on an element of secrecy and confusion because once enough people understand what is being attempted, the whole fragile house of cards will collapse. Only when we are conscious of what is happening, and understand some of the background and motivations, can we protect ourselves, our families, our nation and the world, by informing each other and rejecting all efforts to “reset” our lives, and all involvement in the “reset” of others’ lives.

Sources of Information

The perspectives of most New Zealanders come from assumptions of trust in both legacy media and government, albeit with expected hiccups along the way. There was little reason for most of us to consider a need to look beyond these tried and ’trusted’ institutions that is, until 2020.

Over the past three years, many of us have realised that all may not be as it seemed, given the authoritarian behaviour of our government, their representative bureaucrats, and the state-funded media. The determined disregard that so many, none more so than our vaccine injured, have experienced in a time of need, should be a warning sign to everyone. Yet many remain loyal to the idea that we are being “protected”, despite all evidence to the contrary.

We are all at different stages of the journey towards understanding the ‘managed changes’ taking place in society. New information which challenges our assumptions about the world, can be difficult to process. It helps to know the sources of different frames of reference so that you can judge their credibility.  Below is a list of our main information sources which, despite stemming from different decades and disciplines, all concur. There is insignificant variation in their overall conclusions.

1. Dr John Coleman – British intelligence agent, MI6 whistleblower and author.  Book here.  1994 speech here.

2. Dr Wolfgang Wodarg – physician, epidemiologist and ex-politician.  Interviews here.
   Planet Lockdown also has interviews with a range of health, economics, science and political experts explaining events from their specialised perspectives.

3. Dr David Bell – physician, speaking out about the UN / WHO plans.

   See our interview here.

4. Mikki Willis – filmmaker. Plandemic Series.

5. Sandi Adams – independent investigator. Website here.

6. Jeffrey Jaxen – investigative journalist at The Highwire.

7. Catherine Austin-Fitts – financier. Website here.

8. Whitney Webb – independent investigator and author. Website here.

9. Matthew Ehret – investigative journalist and lecturer. Website here.

10. Calin Georgescu – ex-United Nations Development Programme official.  Interview here.

Energy Poverty

Through history as humans became better at sourcing energy for warming, cooling, lighting, cooking and food storage, our living standards and health improved. If you ever visit an impoverished country, one of the first things you may notice is that people have limited, or no access to energy. They live in the dark at night, cook on open fires, burn polluting substances, store food by hanging it in the shade, and rarely move far from home. The poorer we are, the less access we have to energy; and the less access to energy we have, the poorer we become. Learn more at this short video.

United Nations

At the end of World War II, representatives from 50 nations met in San Francisco from 25 April to 26 June 1945, to draft and sign the United Nations Charter. The stated overall purpose of the Charter was to maintain international peace and security, by upholding human rights and fundamental freedoms. Charter articles include ideas such as social and economic progress, international law, treaties and obligations. Today 193 countries have United Nations (UN) membership, including New Zealand.

Club of Rome

The Club of Rome is a society of powerful tycoons established by Italian industrialist Aurelio Peccei and Scottish chemist Alexander King, who met at a Rockefeller residence in Bellagio, Italy in 1968. Alleging “profound concern for the long-term future of humanity and the planet”, the Club of Rome have, from their inception, been claiming that the globe cannot support present rates of economic and population growth for much longer.

As early as 1976 there is documented evidence that the Club of Rome were thought to hold genocidal ideologies. Peccei, who died in 1984, published a book called The Chasm Ahead, which outlined three eugenicist solutions:

1. A biological germ or virus.

2. Mass sterilization.

3. Elimination of all surplus humans.

The first Club of Rome publication was The Limits to Growth, in 1972. Based on early computer modelling performed by a group of systems analysts at Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) , the authors claim that only by limiting human population and productivity can humanity, and the planet, survive.

Computer-generated mathematical modelling has since been a useful tool of fearmongers. This is described by New Zealand Doctors Speaking out With Science, in reference to Professor Neil Ferguson at Imperial College in London, whose advice led the 2020 lockdowns.

“Professor Ferguson has a history of over-estimating infectious disease threats. In 2002 he predicted 150,000 deaths from “Mad Cow disease” (aka bovine spongiform encephalitis or BSE); the total number of deaths in the UK since 1990 is 178. In 2005 he predicted 150 million Bird Flu deaths; the final number over six years was 282 deaths worldwide. In 2009 he predicted 65,000 British deaths from Swine Flu; the final number was 457. His models rely on an old computer code which attempts to simulate real life and has been ridiculed by coding experts as “totally unreliable” and “a buggy mess“.

This begs the question: how did academics associated with a eugenicist organisation, using a computer built in 1970, accurately predict the destruction of planet earth due to human activity? In a 2017 interview, Dr Dennis Meadows, a systems analyst who is co-author of The Limits to Growth, and a Club of Rome member and World Economic Forum contributor, offered further clues to the ideology underpinning this willing intent to use secrecy and euphemistic language to achieve destructive goals.

In a 1991 UN-commissioned publication The First Global Revolution, the Club of Rome admit to using global warming as a reason to establish global collectivism.

The Club of Rome continue to proclaim that the planet is in crisis due to human activity. Is it possible that a crisis of energy poverty is being underwritten?

From the Club Of Rome website - Click to visit.

Committee of 300

In his 1991 book, Conspirator’s Hierarchy: The Story of the Committee of 300, ex-MI6 intelligence agent Dr John Coleman detailed the Club of Rome’s role as a “subversive body” of a larger ‘Committee of 300’. He specified and named networks of powerful people, most unknown to the world but some high profile, such as Henry Kissinger, conspiring to impose a “one world government”. This is considered feasible only if there is an ‘adequate’ reduction in the human population, who can then be controlled when their numbers become ‘manageable’.

Included in the Committee of 300’s proposed strategies are a gradual phasing-out of local institutions, bringing them under the mantle of the UN. In 1994 Dr Coleman delivered a two-hour speech on the topic, including his experiences of learning about the subversion underway against society, describing the degeneracy of the people involved and appealing for humanity to “wake up”.

World Economic Forum

Established in 1971 as the European Management Forum by Klaus Schwab, the World Economic Forum (WEF) refer to themselves today as “the international organisation for public-private cooperation”. Schwab boasted in 2017 that the WEF had infiltrated democratic governments. Their annual meetings in Davos, Switzerland have become synonymous with the increasing practice of government representatives collaborating with private corporations for personal benefit and collective power, at the expense of unwitting and disempowered populations. British geopolitical commentator Maajid Nawaz identified this practice as ‘corporatism’, which is fascism by another name, in his March 2022 interview with Jan Jekielek.

Also known as ‘Summer Davos’, the 14^th annual WEF ‘Meeting of the New Champions’ is underway in Tianjin, China. Prime Minister Chris Hipkins was one of the first speakers. He shared the stage in a one-hour session with three other national leaders, the President of the World Economic Forum, Chairman of the Chinese Communist Party’s State-owned Assets Supervision and Administration Commission, and the Director-General of the World Trade Organization (WTO). 

Click to watch

World Trade Organization 

Stemming from an earlier forum known as the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), the WTO derives most of its income from member nations. Last year New Zealand contributed (Swiss Francs) 467,245 (0.239% of all contributions) to the WTO, whose biggest contributor by far is China (10.534%). 

Dr Coleman warned in 1994 that “one of the WTO provisions is that their Board will be able to go in and demand that nations change their laws, and take them to court if they don't.” They consider themselves as “central to achieving the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and its Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).” 

Other Organisations

There are so many organisations involved in this coup d'état, that it is not possible to discuss them all. They include the large corporate enterprises: Blackrock (CEO Larry Fink sits on the WEF Board of Trustees), State Street and Vanguard. Societies similar to the Club of Rome are named and discussed in Dr Coleman’s book and include, but are not limited to: Bilderberg Group, Trilateral Commission, Rockefeller Foundation, Carnegie Endowment, and Fabian Society.

The United Nations Climate Change Movement

Dr Coleman revealed Canadian oil magnate Maurice Strong as a member of the powerful Committee of 300. Via Rockefeller family connections, Strong entered the UN in 1962, where he remained influential until 2005. After becoming embroiled in the Food for Oil scandal he moved to – and died in – Beijing. His chequered career was dotted with links to criminal activity and corruption, and he admitted to being “a socialist in ideology, a capitalist in methodology.” You can learn more about Strong at:

• Maurice Strong’s unprecedented rise to power (2004); 

• Maurice Strong, Climate Crook (2015);

• Maurice Strong – the key to understanding global warming and Agenda 21 (2015);

• The Man Who Invented Climate Change – Maurice Strong (2022);
  and

• The Dark Origins of the Davos Great Reset (2023).

Strong was an avid proponent of depopulation ideology, as evidenced in this 1972 BBC interview (mentioning such ideas as “licence’s to have babies”) and in his 1992 introductory remarks (saying “we are now a species out of control.”) at the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro. As Conference Secretariat at the first UN Meeting on the Environment, held in Stockholm in 1972, and as Secretary General of the Earth Summit, Strong has been dubbed the ‘Godfather of climate change’. He stated that the only hope for the planet is the deliberate collapse of industrialised civilisations.

In 1983, the UN General Assembly appointed Norway’s Gro Harlem Brundtland as Chair of the World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED), with a mandate to formulate “a global agenda for change”. Maurice Strong was a member of the Commission.

The resulting 300-page report ‘Our Common Future’ planted seeds for the UN’s 1992 Earth Summit, where Agenda 21 was launched, and which has since evolved into Agenda 2030.

Private interests in attendance at the Earth Summit included George Soros, Edmond de Rothschild, David Rockefeller and Al Gore, who became a billionaire through climate fear-mongering and credit trading schemes. Earlier this year, Gore spoke at the World Economic Forum about our “boiling oceans.” In our ‘new reality’, those who don’t believe him are conspiracy theorists.

Meanwhile, in 1988, Maurice Strong founded the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), “the United Nations body for assessing the science related to climate change”. Under the powerful umbrella of the UN, the IPCC gives an impression of scientific consensus to their persistent claims of a need for urgent climate action.

Thousands of scientific experts challenge these claims, including Greenpeace founder Patrick Moore and climate scientist Willie Soon, who shows that even before the first IPCC report, the UN Environment Programme had pre-determined that human activity is responsible for climate change.

Given the severe restrictions to human activity that are being recommended in the name of protecting the planet, these claims must be thoroughly questioned and examined. This seems even more imperative with evidence of fraudulent data manipulation to maintain the narrative. Especially as involvement of leading actors and institutions such as Rockefeller and the World Economic Forum, ensure that a political agenda overrides authentic scientific examination of the issue, which is exactly what we observed to have played out during Covid.

The whole system revolves around the idea that the majority can be made to believe anything, so long as it is repeated loudly, and often.
And it works.

- NSA Whistleblower Edward Snowden

According to a recent Guardian report, major oil companies spend $200 million per year lobbying against climate change policies. This was first claimed by an academic climate activist in 2019, without a source reference. The Guardian also states that solar and wind energy could power the world more than 50 times over, rendering the oil industry obsolete. At the same time, Sweden has just cancelled the so-called ‘green energy targets’ pushed by the UN, WEF, World Bank, and others, citing the instability of solar and wind for meeting population energy requirements.

An excellent overall analysis is offered in Jeffrey Jaxen’s recent report on The Highwire: The Unexpected Origin of the Climate Crisis, which connects many of the dots in this festering wound of amalgamated power.

United Nations Sustainable Development Goals

Lying at the heart of Agenda 2030, the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are an urgent call for global partnership to end poverty and other deprivations, whilst tackling climate change. The 17 goals appear on the surface to revolve around care for humanity and the environment.

The cost of meeting these targets is reported to currently stand at $176 trillion.  Many independent researchers have revealed that beneath the benevolent veneer lies a much darker ongoing ideology of depopulation and global governance. The excellent investigative series, Sustainable Slavery, by journalists Whitney Webb and Iain Davis, is a good starting point to understanding this more deeply. Another, is researcher Sandi Adams’ recent interview with the World Council for Health. 

The first article in the Sustainable Slavery series states:

“Iain Davis and Whitney Webb explore how the UN’s ‘sustainable development’ policies, the SDGs, do not promote ‘sustainability’ as most conceive of it, and instead utilise the same debt imperialism long used by the Anglo-American Empire, to entrap nations in a new, equally predatory system of global financial governance.”

They discuss their findings in many interviews, including at Childrens Health Defense on 3 June 2023.

In June 2019, World Economic Forum and UN signed a partnership with the intent of accelerating the SDGs. Digital identity is considered ‘a necessary element’ and ID2020 was established with the express purpose of ensuring every person on the planet ends up with a digital identity.

Whitney Webb notes that ID2020 pilot programs are tested almost exclusively on extremely vulnerable populations, such as refugee camp residents, who exchange their biometric identity for access to food. Anyone who has worked or lived in refugee camps knows that spending money on expensive digital technology does not benefit the refugees. It benefits the IT corporations, and the corporations which purchase the resultant personal information for data mining (detecting behavioural patterns for commercial gain).

Financiers such as Catherine Austin-Fitts, Ernst Wolff, Professor Richard Werner, Martin Armstrong and Mads Palsvig have all expressed repeated warnings that digital ID is the precursor needed to implement Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs). Austin-Fitts has described the dangers of CBDCs.  Palsvig contrasts the ideology of depopulation, with the concept that the planet and humanity can flourish in unison.

Conclusion

This is a highly convoluted issue with many powerful, converging interests taking advantage of the vulnerability of populations, at a time when we are all susceptible, thanks to the world chaos that was manicured by authorities during the pandemic. Many people continue to live in fear and confusion. Many are harmed and dealing with unexpected health issues, as well as unemployment and loss of income. It is time for us all to participate, as best we can, in protecting each other against what has been referred to as a “psychopathic entity.”

Infiltration of democracies occurs surreptitiously, via the use of euphemistic language to paint a picture of innocence and benevolence. Many, if not most, who implement the new rules, regulations and activities have little or no idea of their own complicity, working instead in compartmentalised silos without a broad perspective of the overarching goals and planned outcomes.

This was highlighted during the Covid crisis, as we watched doctors and nurses complying with pseudoscientific policies which resulted in massive profits to the corporate world, while their health systems collapsed in front of them, and population health outcomes declined - and continue to worsen still.

It’s essential now that New Zealanders demand an appropriate response from our political representatives. Who, sitting in the Beehive, is collaborating with the various covert organisations and societies attempting to dismantle our democratic systems? Who is defending us against such movements as the WHO CA+ (the “zero draft” of the World Health Organization’s new pandemic treaty), or the constant changes to our laws without adequate transparency and representation? Who represents the people and has the courage to mount an opposition? Who has spoken out against the misleadingly-titled Public Interest Journalism Fund and the Disinformation Project, both of which are in fact overseeing, and hastening, the destruction of our once-free press?

We are eternally grateful to Dr David Bell for his insights at this perilous time.  He summed up the overarching point of this article in a few short sentences. The one thing he shares in common with Maurice Strong, is the advice that: “The future of man is going to be decided very much by the decisions taken in this generation.”