Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Feb. 16, 2023 - The Delingpod - James Delingpole

01:30:01

Sandi Adams

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	I love Danny Paul, come and subscribe to the podcast baby!
	I love Danny Paul, unless another time subscribe with me!
	Welcome to the Deliclock with me, James Deliclock.
	And I know I always say I'm excited about this week's special guest, but I'm so looking forward to talking to Sandy Adams.
	Sandy, I heard one of your podcasts a while back, and the thing that really struck me and delighted me Was that you're the kind of person who can explain what's going on in a way that doesn't frighten the horses for people of a normie persuasion because you sound measured and not kind of conspiratorial.
	I mean, I think that you're a sort of regular person who's been mugged by reality and you've suddenly realized what's what's going on.
	So I think Let's just launch into it and tell me about your journey.
	Your journey of discovery.
	Tell us about yourself, first of all.
	Well, you know, I'm a mother, I'm a grandmother.
	I, you know, I write stuff now and I sort of, I'm a researcher into United Nations Agenda 21, 2030 and beyond, because it's become far more than that.
	And, you know, I started off really as a, you know, as a normal per... I am a normal person, but... We all are!
	We're all normal, aren't we?
	But our eyes have been opened, to be honest.
	And that's really what happened to me quite a while ago.
	But I didn't realise where it was all going.
	I just kind of went with it, if you know what I mean.
	And what happened was I was working... I started off going to art school.
	I really wanted to be a set designer in theatre, which is what happened.
	I was a set designer in theatre.
	And I did work in scenic art and used to paint big backdrops.
	And I worked at the Old Vic and the National Theatre and places like that.
	And I loved doing what I was doing.
	But as things went on, you know, theatre funding was, you know, happened and there wasn't so much money in theatre.
	And I went into a bit of film and TV, but that was all kind of being a bit cut off.
	But what was really, really going very well was corporate live events.
	And I got into that because by that time I had a mortgage and children and I thought, well, maybe this is the way to go.
	And I started being a bit naive.
	I started working for some of the big corporates.
	And within those corporates were people like, I mean, companies like Microsoft and Google.
	and Bloomberg and GlaxoSmithKline and I suddenly realised what I was in and yet all around me, all the people around me thought it was really cool and I found myself, I did actually meet Bill Gates, I worked on a project called Microsoft Life Squared and it was about creating a sort of mini smart city in Chelsea
	That was all wired up to this AI technology and it was in the early 2000s, mid 2004, something like that.
	I had to design the interiors for all the buildings around this square, it was a disused school.
	And all the tech was going in.
	And I thought, this is really spooky.
	You know, things like nobody had really heard of GPS then.
	And there was cars within that square that had GPS in them.
	And there was all the technology that was going into the homes and the cafe, fake cafe we'd made and a visitor center.
	And this was a six, I think it was actually open for about seven weeks.
	And delegates flew from all over the world to see this installation.
	It was a proper sort of Microsoft installation.
	And I just got a really weird feeling from the whole thing and, you know, the whole thing around Bill Gates arriving and this almost like worship going on and I thought, this is very strange.
	And then I worked for Google, which was an even worse experience, actually.
	But I won't go into that.
	I've got to pause you there, Sandy.
	You tell me you've actually met Bill Gates.
	Did you smell the whiff of sulphur?
	What was he like?
	I didn't get a good feeling.
	He was just very, very geeky.
	Uh, he didn't say much, he was, he, he just looked like, I don't know, I, I, you know, we had to sort of line up and shake his hand and I, I didn't, I just didn't get a good feeling from him at all.
	I didn't like, you know, there were a lot of PAs running around him looking after his, you know, his needs and everything and he, I don't know, he was just very, very strange and he didn't engage with anyone.
	He was very, very... What, what, what are his needs?
	Does he, does he have a rider where he drinks weird stuff?
	Blood, children's blood.
	They offered him, you know, sort of amazing food and what have you.
	And he just wanted crisps and Pepsi-Cola.
	I mean, it's very, very odd.
	He didn't really want to eat at all or drink anything significant.
	He's got this sort of, what I can only imagine is very carefully cultivated there.
	He wears these kind of cosy, sort of Valdunican style sweaters, which seem to exude this sense of, I'm an ordinary guy, I'm just down to earth and stuff.
	Yeah, he's... I just got... I don't know.
	I think he's... I think he could be controlled.
	I don't know, but he didn't... There was something about him then, and that was the young Bill Gates, actually, because, you know, he was much younger than he is now.
	So, you know, I don't know, because I was quite young then, and I hadn't picked up on, you know, all of this stuff.
	Now, you know, I really do realise that he's actually quite a dark person, actually.
	I don't know.
	I mean, they're all in this huge machine, you know, that they think they're doing good and they're clearly not.
	And whether they are aware of the damage they're doing to humanity, I've no idea.
	You'd have to almost have a conversation with him about that.
	But, you know, interestingly, you know, with his TED Talks, he's quite open about depopulation.
	And stuff like that.
	And you just think, well, how can somebody be fully human, wanting to destroy the human race?
	I don't know.
	But he's... Or maybe he classes himself as a god that isn't really part of our world.
	Isn't that part of the shtick, though?
	That he goes... You say he looks geeky.
	He wears his sweaters.
	And he says this stuff.
	Which is at odds with the person you see in front of you.
	He seems quite boring in a way.
	And yet he says this stuff which is really outlandish.
	And he sort of reminds me a bit of Yuval Harari in a funny sort of way.
	Excuse me, I've got a bit of a cough.
	Um, yeah, Yuval Harari, you know, says all this stuff in a, in a very kind of innocent way.
	I don't know if you listen to him.
	He's, um... Sorry, I've got to take a cough.
	They're probably, they're probably, they're probably poisoning you, Sandy.
	Sorry, I've got a bit of a cough, so... You're on the list.
	Starts with a cough.
	Yeah.
	So yeah, we've got all these sort of strange characters all playing a part in this whole literally, you know, almost destruction of everything that we know and love.
	And, you know, they don't seem to have this human, you know, sort of soul that we have.
	I don't quite get them.
	They actually want the destruction of the human condition, which I find really bizarre.
	Yeah.
	So your antennae started twitching.
	Yes.
	How did you confirm your suspicions?
	I think it was when I was working for Google and I had to work on an event in Dublin.
	And it was all about internet censorship, actually.
	But at that time, they were sort of covering it up with this facade of, it was called the Summit Against Violent Extremism.
	SAVE, it was called.
	You know, they have those acronyms.
	And it was called SAVE.
	And I realised, you know, that actually it was about domestic terrorism.
	So they were trying, They got all these terrorists and they said it was to stop terrorism on the internet and they got all these ex-terrorists.
	How do you find ex-terrorists?
	I don't know but you know people that have been in the IRA and I don't know Palestine Liberation Army or something and they got them to explain how they'd organized themselves on the internet.
	And I just kept saying to my colleagues, don't you think this is a bit of a weird conference?
	And they were going, no, no, no, it's just trying to help us, you know, so that we don't get, you know, these terrorist attacks.
	And my spidey sense was really going crazy.
	Maybe because I don't know why.
	I mean, I'm very sensitive to all this kind of stuff.
	And I thought, Weird.
	And then of course, you know, you meet Eric Schmidt in the bar and he's bragging about nobody in Google pays tax and how he's going to be flying into Blasphemy Festival to meet his friends Jay-Z and Beyonce in a helicopter.
	And I'm thinking, ooh, I don't like the sound of all this.
	But I seemed to be alone in that, in the industry I was working in.
	Everyone else thought it was so cool to be working with these people.
	And I just got this absolute revulsion.
	So I was a bit on my own in that respect, particularly also in my marriage.
	My ex-husband still works for Tony Blair, you know, out in the Middle East, with impact investing, which is something that I really don't agree with, but we won't go into that now.
	You know, the whole, the whole thing, you know, was really kicking off for me.
	And I, I found, I got to the point where I, I just couldn't work in that industry anymore.
	I, I almost had, well, I call it a breakthrough, but everyone said I'd gone nuts.
	Breakdown.
	I had this sort of breakthrough where I thought, I can't do this anymore.
	And it caused a big, big problem, you know, in my marriage and everything.
	And I just knew that I was doing the right thing.
	I just literally cut myself off from it.
	You know, we split up, you know, my kids all went off to university and they were in the West Country.
	So I moved to the West Country and I started really researching into, I don't know how I found Agenda 21, I really don't know.
	I started researching into Agenda 21 which for me was Well I read Rosa Corey's book, Behind the Green Mask, and I suddenly saw this world that they wanted to create using the Trojan horse of anthropogenic global warming at the time.
	And how they would use that to actually gain control of all the resources on the planet and how This would become a control mechanism that we're seeing right now in action.
	What they're throwing at us now is the culmination of the decisions that were made prior to 1992, the Earth Summit, that were really put into action at the Earth Summit in 1992 and beyond.
	So, you know, Agenda 21 was the agenda for the 21st century.
	And it was actually put into action at the Earth Summit in 1992 in Rio de Janeiro.
	And then in 2015, they hadn't met their goals.
	They put together some goals, which were the Millennium Development Goals.
	Those goals weren't met.
	So then they revised it and they turned it into Agenda 2030.
	The agenda for 2030 in 2015, endorsed by the Pope in Rome with President Obama.
	So really 2030 is just a goal.
	It's the same thing, but they've reinvented it, they've rebranded it, and it's to achieve all these goals that they wanted to.
	So at the Earth Summit, You know, it was all held in Rio de Janeiro and it was really a bunch of globalists getting together and inviting 178 leaders of countries, basically every world leader in the world, getting them to Rio, giving them a fabulous time.
	You know, the Royal Yacht Britannia was in the harbour, there was Maurice Strong's yacht, there was the Rockefeller's yacht, there was Al Gore there with all his, you know, sort of Climate stuff.
	And what they really did was they guilt tripped, you know, all of these, and actually probably got them a bit pissed and, you know, having a good time and said, you know, you've got to sign up to this to save the planet because, you know, it's dying and if you don't do this, then, you know, the planet will die.
	And all of these world leaders signed up to Agenda 21.
	And what's interesting is from there, they then got a plan to bring it from global to local.
	So they created something called ICLEI, Which is the International Council for Local and Environmental Initiatives, which is almost like an NGO that brings the whole Agenda 21 policies into your town council, which is what we're seeing now with the 15-minute cities.
	And it's taken a while, obviously, but that was implemented at the Earth Summit.
	Yes.
	When I was researching all this, I thought, well, what they'll do is they'll just use climate change and people will get wind of that and not buy into it.
	You know, I really thought, yes, this is this is what they'll do.
	And, you know, the MDGs, the Millennium Development Goals that they set up at the at the Earth Summit, did fail.
	And so and they do fail every now and then.
	I mean, they sometimes can't implement these things.
	So then, in 2015, as I said, they had Agenda 2030, where they changed the seven Millennium Development Goals into the 17 Sustainable Development Goals.
	And all of them are a bit nefarious, if you care to look at them on the internet.
	They're all about basically controlling everything.
	You know, the land, the sea, education, health, just about everything.
	It's about, you know, control of every aspect of our lives.
	And so, you know, this whole thing just kind of was progressed to 2030.
	And then, you know, I thought, well, they'll never get away with this because people will wise up to anthropogenic global warming, which a lot of people have.
	But then, you know, then this, you know, suddenly the pandemic hit.
	And that was also a very interesting process because in I think it was 2019.
	Klaus Schwab met with Antonio Gutierrez of the United Nations, because obviously Agenda 21 is a United Nations initiative, and he met with Antonio Gutierrez, who was the I think he was the director of the UN at that point, and he still is.
	And they got together, and this is in June 2019, and they wanted to accelerate the 17 goals of Agenda 21.
	So they had a meeting called the Strategic Framework Partnership Meeting in Geneva at the United Nations to come and try and accelerate these goals that weren't moving fast enough for them, you know, on climate change.
	And they held a meeting and they had photographs taken.
	And then weirdly, four months later, we had Event 201 with Antonio Guitares, with the World Economic Forum.
	But added on was Bill and Melinda Gates at the Johns Hopkins Institute in New York.
	And they held this tabletop exercise, which was a what if, what if there was a pandemic in a third world country and it got loose in a wet market in Brazil?
	And what would we do about it?
	And it was so close to what really happened.
	And of course, Bill and Melinda were there saying we can help.
	We've got the vaccine.
	And the rest is kind of history, really.
	And what...
	What we saw was a planned operation of world leaders accelerating this agenda that they wanted to do.
	And literally, I think it was in November, they held this meeting in this tabletop exercise.
	You can look it up.
	It's still online, I think, Event 201.
	And you can look at it.
	The it accelerated it.
	It made everybody stand up.
	And then, of course, when the pandemic pandemic did hit, everyone sort of thought, well, we'll put we'll put in that that sort of that plan that Bill and Melinda Gates had got.
	Yeah.
	So it all happened almost organically.
	Yes.
	And so what it did is it opened up an opportunity to actually accelerate it, but also to bring in all this stuff that we're seeing now, the CBDCs, you know, all the infrastructure that they were putting in whilst we were in lockdown, all that literally, all the 5G stuff and the stuff that needs to make that all work.
	Um, you know, all the technology, the AI that they need to implement these structures was all put in when we were asleep and locked down.
	And all of this is there.
	It's waiting to just literally kick in, this AI.
	And for me, at the moment, it's a battle.
	It's a battle for humanity and for us to remain human.
	Because as we know, they've got the transhumanism agenda going on as well.
	So this is really an attack and a total assault on the human condition.
	Yes.
	I just wanted to rewind a second because What you're describing, it seems to me, is, well, problem, reaction, solution.
	Yeah.
	And what they do at these conferences, often given really boring names, so that ordinary people think, oh god, it's just the international bureaucracy having more of their interminable meetings and yawn.
	And they They set up these notions for the benefit of the media, presumably.
	They are combating things which every reasonable person would wish to see dealt with.
	So, for example, terrorism.
	Terrorism's bad.
	Yes, sure, we must be fighting terrorism.
	Or the environment.
	The environment is in peril.
	So they have these headline stories for the benefit of the dumb populace because they treat us like idiots.
	And in many cases, I think probably, They're right to treat us like idiots, because we do swallow this stuff.
	But what you're saying, as I understand it, is that they've already decided what the agenda is going to be.
	They...
	They just have these sort of smoke and mirrors distractions to give them a fig leaf on respectability while they get on with introducing all these regulations that are going to turn us into digital slaves.
	Now, I wonder what you're thinking.
	You have a thick document or two which details their plans.
	Tell me about that.
	I do.
	Sadly, I don't have it with me because, as I told you yesterday, I'm staying at my son's.
	And I wish I'd brought it with me, but I didn't know I was going to do this.
	No.
	But you can actually buy Agenda 21 online from the United Nations or Amazon or wherever you like.
	And you look through it and it's in that awful sort of doublespeak, that kind of Milton Erickson word salad of stuff.
	But it is all about restricting the damage that humans have done on the planet.
	And it's in 42 chapters and it's... Sorry, a bit wobbly.
	So it's really...
	It's putting it into a nutshell.
	After Agenda 21 was published, in 1997 I think it was, Oh, 1995, I beg your pardon.
	They published something called the Global Diversity Assessment, which was, I mean, if you think of Agenda 21, the 42-page document that you can buy online, still quite happily, that was the plan.
	But the Global Diversity Assessment was massive.
	It's over 1,000 pages long.
	It's nearly 2,000 pages long, actually.
	It's huge.
	It's a great big book.
	And I managed to get a copy of it in, I think it was 2013.
	And I paid £50 for it, which is quite a lot of money in then.
	And I, you know, people struggle to get the actual hard copy now.
	I don't know whether, I don't think they publish it.
	You can find it online, but it's very difficult, as you know, to look at something and download something so enormous online.
	But people are, people have sort of flagged it up.
	But in that, that was, that was Agenda 21 put into action.
	And they've literally, it's a control and inventory of every single resource on our planet and how they're going to do it.
	And it catalogues every single endangered species, every single endangered plant, all the countries in the world, what they're going to do with it, how they're going to manage.
	And it's a management structure of managing the entire world's resources.
	And within that, it really does say that the human beings are responsible for all this.
	And on page 993 of the Global Diversity Assessment, it talks about how we have to be contained in certain areas and not allowed into nature.
	And we have corridors running in between where we're supposed to be.
	So they're talking about human settlement zones, which they are quite open about.
	And they talk about the Wildlands Project of America, which they were associated with.
	which, you know, the UN were associated with the Wildlands Project, which was really a map of America and how it was going to be zoned into human settlement zones and that there were corridors in between that would only be for federal use and military use.
	And the people would be actually in these zones that they couldn't leave.
	Like the Hunger Games.
	Exactly.
	It's a very Hunger Games situation and I honestly believe that that book was not a book of fiction.
	I think somebody, I can't remember who wrote it now, but it was made into a film.
	But that is really, the end game is to have us in these smart cities and Well, they call them human settlement zones.
	And we're seeing this in a soft, smart city agenda with the 15-minute cities in all the towns that they're trying to implement.
	Which have cropped up almost simultaneously, not just in the UK, but around the world.
	And people are thinking, oh, it's just an Oxford problem, just a Bath problem.
	It's not, is it?
	It's a global plan.
	It's a global action plan for the world.
	It's a global action plan for the world.
	Agenda 21, 2030 is a global action plan for the world.
	It's been brought in through ICLEI, from global to local, and all those policies are in your town council now.
	And that's what ICLEI was for.
	That's the, you know, I think I mentioned it before, it's the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives.
	So it was almost like an NGO that came into every town and said to every town council, do you want to save the planet?
	You need to have these initiatives in place.
	And that's what they're doing.
	And whether people are aware of it in their local councils, but it seems to be this whole communitarian plan that's been rolled out.
	And it's very much in the, you know, the needs of the community come above the needs of the individual.
	And if you don't go along with this, then you're not saving the planet and you're a bad person.
	Yeah, yeah.
	So, they've made a very clever calculation, haven't they?
	Which is that, look at the kind of person who wants to get involved in local politics, local government.
	I mean, number one, they're going to be busybodies of some kind.
	They're going to want to affect change and use their power at a local level.
	Two, they're probably quite Middle middle brow, intellectually, they're not going to be the brightest and best because they wouldn't be working for the local councils, they'd be they'd be probably working in the private sector.
	Three, they're going to be ideologically geared towards the power of the state being a good thing because they want to work in local government rather than in the private sector.
	And so that combination is quite toxic.
	This is very fertile ground for a supranational body like the ICLR or the people who are pushing the Rio Earth Summit to say As you say, this is a serious climate problem.
	You can do your bit on the local level, which explains so many people's experience.
	They wonder why they've had to sort out their rubbish into increasingly diverse spreads of, you know, one for One colour-coded bin liner for that, another one for this, and so on.
	And all these regulations, zoning regulations and stuff.
	So I think you've discovered a major piece of the jigsaw that was missing in a lot of people's imagination.
	They just didn't know, where did all this stuff come from?
	Well, you know, it goes, it goes back a long way.
	I don't know if you ever read Patrick Wood's work.
	I mean, he wrote a wonderful book called Technocracy Rising.
	And I really, I love him.
	I think he's fantastic.
	And as we know that the Agenda 21 really has its origins in the 1930s, because then there was this communitarian plan then.
	that came out of Columbia University, where you had these social engineers like M. Scott Hubbard.
	And I think it was, what was his name?
	The other guy was called, there was Mark, oh yeah, that was Howard Scott and M. K. Hubbard.
	Sorry, I got the names wrong.
	Howard Scott and M. K. Hubbard.
	And they were sort of political scientists and activists working in Columbia University at the time.
	And they set up something called Technopathy Inc, which is still actually active today, that company.
	But we're talking about the 1930s when they'd had this terrible depression in America.
	And they wanted to kind of reinvent the whole of society in this rather socialist way and get rid of capitalism.
	And the way that they thought they could do this was by getting rid of the price-based economy and turning it into an energy-based economy.
	So this is nothing new.
	What they're trying to do now is nothing new because they tried to do it in the 1930s.
	It didn't actually gain any traction.
	Because I think the Second World War kicked in and it all got lost somewhere.
	But they really were trying to push this agenda.
	And what's interesting is that Technocracy Inc.
	really was very active between 1930 and 1947.
	Elon Musk's grandfather was quite instrumental in this.
	His name was Joshua Haldeman and he was part of Technocracy Inc.
	and he really pushed it.
	I mean, I think their final push was in 1947 and then it was lost.
	They didn't do any more after that until the reinvention of the technocracy movement in 1971 by Zbigniew Brzezinski, and I'll go into that in a minute.
	But Joshua Haldeman created this, what they call the Grey Convoy, to raise awareness of this plan, of getting rid of capitalism and replacing it with this form of, I suppose it was really, you know, an energy-based I suppose it was really, you know, an energy-based economy, trying to replace it.
	And he went from, I think they got about three or four hundred cars and sprayed them grey, put the Technopsy ink logo on them.
	You can find this on a wonderful video on I think it's YouTube.
	And they went from California right up to Vancouver, this whole convoy, and it was financed by the Masonic temples.
	So he was actually speaking at every Masonic temple right the way up from California to Vancouver, pushing this agenda.
	And it's just bizarre.
	And then it sort of died a death for some reason.
	And then they started, I think 1971 is when Zbigniew Brzezinski decided to reignite the technocracy movement. - With David Rockefeller. - Exactly, exactly, yeah.
	And so they sort of ignited it and I think he wrote a book called, you know, America's Role in the Technocratic Age and all that sort of thing.
	And that's when the three Club of Rome reports that really are the bones of Agenda 21 were published from 1971 onwards.
	The first one was Limits to Growth.
	Now these make up the plan for Agenda 21, and that was all about population and depopulation.
	It's called Limits to Growth.
	The second one was in 1987, and it's called Our Common Future, written by Grohal and Bruntland.
	Who was the socialist prime minister of Norway at the time.
	And she had this plan that really the world's wealth should be redistributed to the third world.
	Because we in the West were big polluters.
	We've overstepped the mark.
	Capitalism's gone rampant.
	We have to make reparations to India and China.
	Which is actually what happened.
	And that's why our whole manufacturing base went in the 1980s over to India and China.
	And it's interesting that they're now the big polluters but they're not being sanctioned.
	So it's all a big plan really to sort of destroy the West.
	It's very interesting, just to pick you up on that point, there's one of the lines I'm sometimes fed by people who are determined to believe that it's cock-up rather than conspiracy.
	They say, well you only have to look at how incompetent local government is.
	They couldn't run a bath, let alone a major conspiracy.
	Meanwhile, you've demonstrated what people have often wondered about, which is why was all our industry offshore?
	We were told there was this thing going on called globalism.
	Why was all this car manufacture outsourced from Flint, Michigan?
	Why did that industry die?
	This makes sense.
	It was all planned that way.
	It's all been planned.
	Every single step of the way it's been planned.
	Well, you know, I've actually done a timeline of Agenda 21 going right back to 1875 with the Biosphere Project.
	So it's... 1875?
	What's that?
	How does it go back?
	Well, it's how all these philanthropists got together and decided that the planet was a living, breathing entity and that humans were bad.
	And that was called the Biosphere Project.
	And it was promoted that man was bad and we had to be controlled.
	Who was behind that?
	Any names we know?
	Who's that?
	Let me just have a look.
	I've got the timeline here.
	While you're looking, by the way, I've noticed another thing.
	You mentioned M.K.
	Hubbard.
	He, of course, was the guy who invented Peak Oil Theory.
	When I wrote my book on environmentalism, Watermelons, which first gave me my insight into how these globalist organisations work, I looked at peak oil theory.
	And peak oil theory is this notion he promoted that soon this scarce resource, as we must learn to call it, is running out and soon we'll be forced to move on to different things.
	It kept being disproved.
	They always found new reserves.
	I think some of us don't even believe that oil is a limited resource.
	If you believe in abartic oil, the idea that it's scarce is part of the... No, it's always abundant.
	In fact, I did talk to Oil people about this.
	They said there's no scarcity of oil whatsoever.
	It's there and it's in abundance.
	I think it's something that naturally occurs in the earth.
	But they've been coming up with these bullshit theories about overpopulation, about scarcity for a very long time.
	You think about Thomas Malthus and Malthusian theory is another one which has again been repeatedly been debunked by reality.
	And yet they go on pushing this stuff.
	Regardless.
	Yeah.
	Yeah, definitely.
	I mean, this has been quite a long-term plan.
	Actually, the person that brought in the biosphere concept was a chap called Suess.
	S-U-E-S-S.
	I've got to research a little bit more about this because I'm actually writing a book.
	Not Dr. Suess?
	No.
	I wonder.
	No, it couldn't be, could it?
	Well, he was called Theodore Geisler, I think, in real life.
	Maybe he borrowed the name from...
	Maybe, maybe.
	And then you see in 1933 you had the Wilderness Society was formed and you've got things like the National Parks Institute in 51 and it goes on this whole timeline of the, you know, a big thing was the Lima Declaration on sort of like strategies of conservation, which was a massive one.
	And it just goes on and on.
	And all these different, the World Wildlife Fund, you know, that was all sort of a land grabbing sort of thing.
	Well, Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands and the Duke of Edinburgh.
	Yes, yeah.
	Who are very heavily embedded in this kind of land grab, freedom snatching.
	I mean, you look at Prince Bernhardt of the Netherlands' history.
	I mean, he was... I think he worked with the Nazis, didn't he?
	I think he was... Yeah, not a good history there.
	Not a good history there.
	So these people have been around since way back.
	Well, they have a sense of entitlement, you see.
	I think they think that we are all literally little plebs running around destroying, you know, taking up all the oxygen, taking up all the, you know, whatever.
	And that really they should have the right to, you know, to be somehow, to be lords over the domain of the earth, you know.
	Like Babylonian princes or whatever.
	Well, you know, who knows where this has all come from?
	I mean, I'm beginning to really think there is something.
	There's almost like history repeating itself constantly.
	And, you know, are there bloodlines involved?
	You know, what is going on here?
	I mean, I don't want to get into that conspiracy thing because I don't have the proof.
	I only ever deal with facts.
	And what facts I've dealt with proves that there's a massive plan to actually destroy humanity.
	I mean, honestly, the whole thing with I mean, after obviously limits to growth was the first Club of Rome report that was all about population and depopulation.
	And it was obvious, I mean, there was that chap, what was his name?
	Oh gosh, he wrote the population bomb.
	Oh yes, Paul Ehrlich.
	Ehrlich.
	Yes.
	And of course that bomb never went off.
	He wrote that in the 1970s.
	1968 I think it was.
	Limits to growth.
	And you know, the thing is that they have all these theories and none of it actually comes to anything because he made wild assumptions about the population.
	Would explode and that we wouldn't be able to feed half the world, or most of the world.
	And of course all this was nonsense because again it was based on flawed computer models.
	You know, as we know from Neil Ferguson, they don't work.
	You know, the computer models never work.
	And if you're going to rely on AI to make any decision for humanity, forget it.
	It's not going to work.
	Because it's, you know, humans are very interesting beings and they're quite creative.
	find ways around everything and you know this is this is this is all kind of been a big plan so they got the limits to growth then you had the redistribution of wealth to destroy the west and to to big up you know india and china um to get every all the world's goods you know going through india and china so we don't manufacture anything so the west actually becomes impoverished so we're about to become a third world country
	now i mean our our gdp is dreadful and you know what's going to happen to us if we don't actually pull ourselves back up again if the people don't take control of everything And what happened with Next was, I think, the last Club of Rome report was all about anthropogenic global warming because they called it the first global revolution.
	And that's where they, there's a quote in there where they actually say the enemy of humanity is man.
	Yes.
	And that actually they can create ways to actually pull us in And create, um, you know, I think the... I get, no, I know, it's in my book.
	Give me one second.
	Yes, it's in Searching for an Enemy, yes.
	Because they're looking for an enemy, a scapegoat, yeah.
	The thing is, as you've discovered, you only have to read the documents.
	This is a conspiracy in plain sight.
	Oh, absolutely.
	Plain sight for anyone prepared to do a bit of digging.
	So this is from the Council of the Club of Rome, 1991.
	And they're totally up front about it.
	They say, In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea.
	Came up with the idea.
	They thought about it and just plucked it out of thin air.
	That pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill.
	All these dangers are caused by human intervention.
	The real enemy then is humanity itself.
	Yeah.
	And they've got another phrase as well.
	Another of their slogans was, the Earth has a cancer and the cancer is man.
	So they invented the problem in order that they could provide the solution.
	Problem, reaction, solution.
	It's the Hegelian dialect all over again and that's what they use constantly.
	You know, it's actually, you know, You realize that if people actually really understood all this, would they be going along with all this stuff?
	Would they be going along with not using cash?
	Would they be going along with saying, oh yes, to CBDCs?
	This is a form of control.
	And of course, once we sign up to all that stuff, it's the end game, basically.
	Because they will have control of everything, and particularly our data.
	And then they can control us in the Chinese social credit system.
	Setting up in the UK right now.
	I mean, we haven't got any time now.
	It's actually happening now.
	I want to talk about that in a moment.
	But you say that you don't feel comfortable talking about conspiracies because, you know, you've got to be able to prove it.
	But I'll give you an example of this.
	Paul Ehrlich, his book, The Population Bomb, was a massive bestseller.
	I think it was 1968.
	And it created, it put in the public imagination the scare story.
	What I've learned in the last two or three years is that the publishing industry is as controlled by these people as any other branch of the entertainment industry.
	They are all over all forms of media, all forms of entertainment, all forms of publishing, because that is how they control the narrative.
	So Paul Ehrlich writes this book He can be guaranteed that this book will become a bestseller, because it is telling the normies what the powers that be want them to hear.
	Therefore, the powers that be who control the publishing industry will promote this book, and then...
	Alec, and people like Alec, get this thing called the MacArthur Genius Award, which is a whopping sum of cash, and you look at the recipient of the MacArthur Genius Award.
	Now, who controls the MacArthur, who funds the MacArthur Genius Award?
	The same people who want to promote this particular agenda.
	These shadowy, shadowy rich people.
	So, you say, if only the public woke up to what is really going on.
	I say, yeah, I wrote a book about this.
	Uh, called Watermelons, which is, which actually, unlike, unlike Paul Ehrlich's book, tells the truth.
	Yeah.
	About what is going on.
	It warns, it goes, goes through the, the, their wicked plans.
	It mentions the Rio summer, it mentions, Malthusianism, it mentions people, all the things that are essentially lies which are fed to us so they can advance their agenda.
	How did my book do?
	I mean, it did squat.
	I had to do it with a sort of small publisher, a bite back.
	It was never going to be picked up by the big publishers, so it never got the traction that somebody like Paul Ehrlich would.
	This is how the world works.
	It is a conspiracy, and it is a conspiracy in plain sight.
	Just going back to your document, which I think is fascinating, your 2,000-page document.
	Did you actually read all 2,000 pages?
	I haven't read all of it.
	I've kind of skimmed through it and picked out all the relevant things to what's happening with humanity.
	Because they do, it's all in scientific language, sort of environmental scientific language.
	I think it costs 3.3 billion dollars to produce.
	And it is, actually it's not... Really?
	Yeah.
	I suppose it would do if it details every resource in the world and how to control it.
	What's extraordinary, that must have taken years to put together.
	And it was just released three years after the Earth Summit.
	And it didn't happen overnight.
	That is a work that must have taken ten years to write.
	Yes.
	They just literally released it and it was actually for, it was a summary for policy makers.
	So that document goes to policy makers and that's how they implement environmental policy.
	So the civil service rather than elected politicians?
	Not the general public.
	So that is how they kind of implemented all this in governmental policy all over the world.
	So they had a policy for Indonesia, they had a policy for Malaysia, everywhere they had a policy.
	For, you know, America, all over the world they had policies.
	And all this has been brought in and it kind of goes, literally, from global to local.
	Which is why we're seeing all of this happening in our localities.
	What does it look like, this document?
	Oh gosh, I wish I had... Is it smartly printed?
	Is it sexily laid out?
	Or is it just a...
	Um, it's a very big, it's an enormous paperback, and it, it has, um, oh gosh, I wish I had it with me.
	Uh, how can I do, I mean, oh, I can't put anything, is there a chat?
	No.
	Just describe it, use the special method of language.
	It's huge, um, I can take a picture of it and show you.
	It's massive, it's about, I suppose about so thick, uh, about that thick.
	Yeah.
	And it's got all these, um, It's, it's just this huge, the front cover is a very beautiful cover of a beach and, and sort of otters and, you know, sort of lovely, you know, loveliness, forests and things.
	Sea otters.
	So it's got a very nice front cover and it's just called the Global Diversity Assessment.
	So what, what they're trying to do is, you know, sort of make it look, you know, beautiful and this is, this is the way our world could be.
	It could be this beautiful utopian, um, In a wilderness, because that's what they want it to be.
	They want it to be left to the wild so that they can control it and the people are just nowhere to be seen.
	And that theme runs right the way through this policy document.
	So it is really over and over again, the theme is The humans have destroyed the planet, therefore they don't have access to all of this.
	And we are cataloguing every resource, every endangered species.
	We're going to save these species.
	It's all got to be managed by us.
	And, you know, the humans have just got to go.
	Have you ever showed it to a normie as evidence that what you're saying is not bananas?
	Um, well, you know, I did go on tour all over England, um, you know, between, I suppose it must have been between 2014 and 20, 20, I think, I think 2019.
	Yeah.
	I went off on tour doing, you know, I was just, I'd sort of, I'd still got a business I was running where I live, but I used to take weekends off and I went on tour with, um, With a couple of other people.
	I mean, it was Piers Corbyn who was talking about the weather and Mark Windows who was talking about communitarianism.
	And we did these tours.
	They discovered me when I was talking at a festival in the West Country on Agenda 21.
	I was just really passionate about it.
	I used to talk anywhere and just talk about it.
	And of course it didn't go down well because it was, you know, a lot of these festivals are very green and I used to get heckled and people didn't like me very much.
	But I was very convinced that, you know, My research was correct in that this is not a green policy.
	It's fake green.
	It's like your watermelons.
	It's a watermelon agenda at the end of the day.
	It's communist on the inside and it's green on the outside.
	Or communitarian or whatever you want to call it.
	Whatever you want to dress it up as.
	But ultimately they don't want anybody to own anything.
	It's all got to be for the benefit of the community.
	with some sort of overriding structure, you know, sort of controlling it all.
	So I started talking and one day Piers Corbin and Mark Windows were there and they saw me speak and they said, oh will you join us?
	We're thinking of setting up a tour and I said okay.
	So I went round doing this tour on climate change in Agenda 21 and it was great because actually sometimes you'd be speaking in a church hall with about 10 people But those ten people have been absolutely amazing in following the work I've been doing and actually are now realising, oh my god, all those years ago, it's all coming true.
	What you said is all coming true.
	So, I do interact with as many normies as I can.
	In some ways it's impossible to convince some people that this is...
	I do apologise.
	Don't die, Sandy, we need you.
	I'll try not to die.
	But Bill Gates has got your number, that's the problem.
	Oh dear, has he?
	He probably has.
	yeah so that sowing those seeds when when pandemic hit all the people that you know we'd done these tours with have become real real movers and shakers in in whatever towns we went to ah followed our work and it's a bit like christ and the apostles see mark now because he's living in bulgaria and uh pierce is always in
	i don't know he's always somewhere with a megaphone it's not my thing you know so So I just, I just get on with talking, speaking the truth as best I can on my own.
	I'm going to try and set up some podcasting myself.
	Because, yeah, I lost my business during lockdown.
	I took over a music venue when I left the corporate world.
	And I ran it for 10 years, but I couldn't go through all that nonsense of, you know, Perspex screens and track and trace, so I just let it go.
	That was by design, I'm sure.
	They don't want us to meet up, because when we meet up, we talk about these things.
	Yeah.
	Exactly.
	And that's it, you know, the local pubs are all closing.
	You know, this is, you know, what we love, I mean, everything about England that is so quintessentially wonderful, they're destroying.
	And, you know, England is, you know, Britain is the most extraordinary country.
	And they have to break us, they really do, because we kind of hold the, you know, if you like, we're the blessed isles, we hold the key to everything that's wonderful.
	Yes.
	And, you know, I think it really is an assault, particularly on England, at the moment.
	And we've just got to really, you know, stand firm.
	I'm with you, Sanni.
	So your tour, you were talking to, like, literally ten men and a dog.
	Yeah.
	Ten men and women and a dog.
	Yes.
	I mean, sometimes we had a big, depending where we went really, you know, some places, yeah, you'd have ten men and a dog or ten women and, you know, men and women and a dog.
	But, in other places, like, for instance, Bristol, it was great.
	We had a massive, massive, you know, amount of people come.
	And they were really, you know, they were really switched on.
	Because Bristol, at that time, was being turned into the flagship smart city of Europe.
	With all this 5G and, you know, Internet of Things and, you know, Bristol's pretty hideous now.
	I mean, it's not the Bristol I knew.
	Oh, it's awful!
	Yeah.
	It's so sad.
	Well, it's dreadful.
	You think this great port city Yeah, yeah.
	And so there were certain places, you know, West Sussex was amazing, Haining Island, we had a massive, massive room full of people.
	And it just depended where you were and how awake they were.
	I think that the place where we found it really difficult was Brighton.
	We just got banned from Brighton every single time because it's so woke.
	It's interesting though, you say that, because I was listening to you to try and get tips on where are going to be the last strongholds.
	But I was thinking, you and I met at an amazing event that a group in Stroud held for me in this Gorgeous, gorgeous chapel, which they lit with candles and it was so wonderful.
	Delicious food was made for me and they really looked after me.
	And I was feeling rotten because I'd just had my mercury fillings taken out and I was having a bad reaction and I was really, I was feeling a bit weird that evening.
	But the love from the audience, but what they told me, the Stroud folk, the awake Stroud people told me, was that there are these two very bitterly divided, well, these two camps in Stroud.
	There are the insane Greenies who want to shut people like you and me down, and then there are the awake people.
	It's almost as though The example of Bristol, which is another incredibly woke town.
	I mean, I went to see a Greta Thunberg rally there once to report on that, the weird scene.
	But it seems like people who are receptive to the stupid ideas of the eco-fascist movement are also susceptible to our ideas, if only they choose the right path.
	And that's it.
	You see, I think there's a lot of well-meaning people out there.
	You know, the very fact that you get people gluing themselves, you know, for all the wrong reasons to, you know, to buildings and bridges and what have you, and stopping traffic, it means that they care.
	Now, they may be on the wrong track, But they care.
	And they care enough to do things like that.
	Yeah.
	The trouble is that they haven't got the right information.
	And that is the sad bit.
	And the people that do have the right information don't do all that.
	Not a lot, anyway.
	I mean, I was very heartened when we had the rallies in London.
	But, you know, they weren't covered by the mainstream media.
	So it didn't happen.
	I was on several where there was over a thousand of us.
	And, you know, I didn't catch anything, you know, everybody was locked down and wearing masks and everything and it was the most beautiful experience was marching through London with like-minded people who actually understood what is really going on.
	But, you know, I wonder, is this tsunami of Of course, you know, maybe things haven't got bad enough.
	Do you know what I mean?
	People only wake up when things get really bad.
	And I'm just wondering when that point will come, because when they'll join the dots, when they'll actually realise that this is a long-term plan, it's always been there.
	And it's just being... And I think, you know, I have to say, the powers that are pushing this, like the World Economic Forum, you know, the governments of the world, Clouds, you know, the club of Rome or whoever is behind all this.
	It's almost as though they're getting really desperate.
	You know, they tried with Greta.
	I mean, Greta was really pushing, pushing, pushing and people just had not such a good reaction towards her.
	So then we had the pandemic.
	Now people have woken up to that, that, you know, maybe things were a little bit wonky with the treatments that they were taking for that and, you know, that we were locked up for no good reason and all this sort of thing and all our businesses failed and, you know, all of this kind of thing.
	When will people actually say enough's enough, we have to stop this?
	And what I'm worried about is this whole, you know, encroachment of the CBDCs It's coming under the radar.
	They're trying to push it under the radar.
	Yeah.
	And, you know, once they've got us, they, you know, that's it.
	The end game.
	And it's about really trying to get everybody on board to just say no.
	To just, you know, there's a sacredness in the word no.
	It's our protection.
	Yeah.
	And a lot of people find it difficult just to say no.
	Yes.
	because they think, oh, well, it's the government and appealing to authority and all that sort of thing.
	And, you know, we've got to realise that actually they don't have our best interests at heart and that we have to really wake up and oppose things.
	My theory on this is that they recognise that they pushed too hard during the alleged pandemic.
	And when they pushed the vaccines, And I think they got much more pushback than they expected.
	Many more people didn't take the clot shot than they had hoped.
	And I think they learned a lesson from this, which is that it's better to administer death by a thousand cuts or the boiling frog Slowboarding frog technique, rather than direct confrontation.
	So I think we're in this stage where they are pushing forward their plan by increments.
	A bit like, what's it called?
	One of the people who founded the LSE, the Fabians.
	The Fabians, yeah.
	So they advance by stealth.
	rather than full frontal assault.
	And this is what we're experiencing now.
	I had a good example of this.
	Before this recording, I had an episode of London Calling with Toby Young.
	And it seems to me an open and shut case that Britain is now experiencing almost Soviet levels of censorship.
	Yes.
	In some areas.
	So, for example, the biggest story I think right now, I mean before we move on to CBDCs and stuff, is the fact that lots and lots of people have been injured or killed by this vaccine that they forced on us.
	The vaccine that isn't a vaccine, that was unnecessary in the first place.
	But this ought to be all over the papers, this ought to be a really big story.
	And we have an organisation called Ofcom, One of whose jobs, apparently, is to stop any of the broadcast media, even GB News, reporting on this major, major story.
	So, when I tried arguing this case with my good friend Toby Young, Toby's line was, well, this is what the regulator says, so GB News has to, more or less, toe the line.
	But that seems to me a very weak take.
	Surely, The issue is, the government is stopping us speaking out about vaccine injuries, never mind what Ofcom says or what the regulation says.
	It's like saying, well, I'm sorry, the rules are that people must be rounded up in death camps, so what can you do?
	I mean, them's the rules.
	I mean, the same tactics as Nazi Germany, basically.
	Yeah.
	Oh, those are the rules and we have to abide by them and that's what we do.
	There's no integrity there.
	Is this right or is this wrong?
	Yes, that's it.
	You know, that's the problem.
	It's about ethics.
	Yeah.
	And nobody's questioning whether this is actually ethical and that's the problem.
	Tell me about 15 Minutes Cities.
	What's going on?
	What are they about?
	Well, at the moment, you know, it's...
	They're holding a big rally on the 18th of June.
	I can't be there because I'm elsewhere, but there's a big rally against it.
	But unfortunately, I mean, they're just bringing this, you know, Oxford is the test case along with Canterbury and Cambridge, I think, and there might be one other, I can't remember.
	But they're not allowing people on, I think you're allocated I think it's a certain amount of days that you can actually enter the town in your car.
	And if you live in a certain zone, for five of those days you can't, for two of those days you can.
	Enter the city.
	But there's some people that, for instance, you know, they might have elderly relatives that need to look after the other side of town or they might have children to go to school the other side.
	Yes.
	What do they do?
	Do they catch buses and walk when it's raining?
	You know, what do you do?
	I mean, this is the most ridiculous.
	I mean, like most of their plans, they are ridiculous.
	You know, they're absurd.
	Because there's no reason.
	I mean, I've had friends who've tested the emissions in Oxford.
	There's no problem with emissions.
	I mean, everybody's got catalytic converters on their cars.
	The CO2 is 0.4 particulates in the air.
	CO2 is not a problem.
	I think it's 0.4, you know, particulates in the air.
	CO2 is not a problem.
	It never has been, as you know.
	So why?
	Why would they be doing this other than to control the people, and to make life miserable, and to get rid of cars?
	Because that's what they really want.
	I mean, everywhere you go, you've got massive cycle lanes, and the cars are all squished into maybe one or two lanes.
	Oh, one lane?
	I've seen this in London.
	And that causes congestion.
	And then they say, oh, there's too much congestion.
	Therefore, we've got to get rid of cars.
	Not that there's too many cycle lanes and, you know, everybody's cycling because you've pushed everybody into cycling.
	Because you say it's saving the planet.
	I mean, this is all nonsense, isn't it?
	So how are they reacting in these 15 minutes?
	I think, is it Sheffield, I think, has said pretty much no, but nobody else?
	I think there's a big, there is a big, big reaction at the moment.
	I think that people in Oxford are beginning to see it.
	Canterbury also.
	I mean, I'm doing a talk down in Canterbury on the 4th of March.
	So I'm hoping that people are waking up and realising that this has got absolutely nothing to do with any environmental issue whatsoever.
	It's not saving the planet.
	It is actually a means of control.
	And that's all they want to do is control movement, freedom of movement.
	And this is a big issue.
	You know, freedom of movement, freedom of speech, freedom of everything.
	Is being challenged at the moment by our governments.
	Yeah.
	Yeah.
	I've heard you talking about digital, digital identity, digital, digital.
	Tell me about that.
	Well, the thing is that the government, again through the back door, published a consultation, a government consultation, on identity verification, they call it.
	And they published it I think it was the 4th of January, when everybody had just had Christmas, a bit hungover, first week back to work, blah, blah, blah.
	So they published it, but they didn't tell anyone, they didn't advertise it.
	And a few of us stumbled on it, and I thought, oh my God, this is awful, because you had literally from the 4th of January to the 1st of March to fill it in.
	And when I went and looked at it, it was the most complicated document you've ever seen.
	It was just unbelievably trick questions, and it was 32 pages long.
	of which about 15 of them were stuff you had to fill in.
	And it was really almost trying to, you know how it's a bit like Delphi technique.
	They were trying to sort of bring you to a predetermined outcome with the wording of the questions.
	It's like, you know, what is it about identity verification that is a good thing?
	And what do you like about it?
	And all this sort of thing.
	I don't like any of it.
	So I did break it down and I did a little talk with Clive de Carl.
	I don't know if you know Clive.
	I did a little breakdown of all the questions for, you know, on a PDF.
	So that people, because actually you need about two or three hours to go through it properly.
	And who can do that?
	It's designed to ward off Who can do that?
	No one can do that.
	So I thought, well, I'll do a bit of homework for everyone.
	I'll be benevolent.
	And I filled it all in.
	And I published it under Clive's thing.
	And I will be putting it up on my website.
	My website went down the other day, not surprising me.
	It keeps going down.
	I have to get back to my domain people and my site ground and get it put back up again.
	So I haven't put that on there yet, but I will do.
	But it's, you know, the whole thing is designed for you not to want to do it.
	Now, had this been a census, they would have put a hard copy through everyone's door and they would have advertised it on breakfast television and said, look, if you don't fill it in, you'll get fined.
	But this has been sort of snuck in because they really don't want anyone to oppose it.
	And this week now they've they've brought in the what's it called?
	The same kind of consultation, but this time it's for the digital pound that has to be in by June.
	So I've got to do the whole process over again.
	And I looked at it this morning, the digital pound consultation.
	It's way more complicated than the last one.
	Verification, ID verification.
	So it's just like you've constantly got to do your homework and try and spoon feed people To filling it in because otherwise, you know, I do think a lot of people say, oh, you have to be sovereign and just say no, we don't consent to it.
	The thing is that this is a parliamentary process.
	And actually, the very fact they hid it means they don't want you to fill it in.
	All the more reason to fill it in.
	And as it's a parliamentary process, it will have to be debated if you fill it in and say no.
	So I think there's a lot of traction in filling it in.
	I'm sorry to all those people that say, oh, you know, you're straw man and all this sort of thing and don't fill it in.
	But I think it is worth filling in.
	Yes, I think you're right.
	Funnily enough, my reaction was rather, oh, you know, anything the government does is, you know, let's live outside the system, blah, blah, blah.
	But you're absolutely right.
	One has to use their process against them because at the moment it's all we've got.
	Now, I suppose a lot of people are going to be thinking, well, digital ID, you know, I've already given away all my personal information on Facebook.
	It'll make things... I'm happy just Putting a card, you know, making it go bleep and the money's dealt with, you know, so much easier than cash, you don't have to carry cash.
	And this will be an extension of that.
	They'll be going, well, you know, having all my information in one place, I haven't broken the law, what have I got to lose?
	It's convenient.
	Yeah, I mean, it's not a good idea to have all your information in one place.
	I mean, we've been encouraged all the time to have different passwords to get into different things, you know, your bank account, you know, you're encouraged to have different passwords.
	So to have all your information in one place is a bad idea, particularly in the hands of the Cabinet Office.
	I don't trust the Cabinet Office.
	This is the department that were nudging us to different, you know, psychological, you know, just nudging us psychologically to, you know, to go along with things.
	And I feel that the Cabinet Office have rolled this out, and they're saying, really, that they're going to share it with government departments, and there's a whole list of government departments that they're going to share it with.
	So your data can be shared with all sorts of government departments, you know, your health insurance, yeah, actually the health one they said they weren't, but that's being dealt with differently, that will be dealt with by NHSX, the app that you will have to, that's another thing, talking about What's happening to the NHS?
	That's a whole other show, I think.
	But to be honest, what they have failed to say is that there's a raft of stakeholders underpinning this because it's stakeholder capitalism.
	This is the new currency that they want to... It's a bit like going back to the 1930s when they were trying to get rid of the price-based economy, trying to get rid of capitalism.
	They're doing it this way, by using your data as a new form of currency.
	It's data.
	Data is the new gold.
	And the data, as well as your carbon score, is going to be the way that your bank account will work.
	They'll give you UBI, Universal Basic Income, but they will also be monitoring everything you do, so everything comes at a cost.
	So if you sign up to the CBDCs or the Digital ID, particularly the Digital ID, because that has to come first, then the CBDCs, which is why they've done the consultations in that order.
	So when you actually say, yes, OK, I'll give you all my data.
	I'll sign up for this digital identity.
	They can then, it's almost like a privilege, they can take away your ability to access goods and services.
	If you misbehave, a bit like the Chinese social credit system.
	So if you haven't got enough carbon credits, or you've said something you shouldn't have, like we're doing now online, they can actually just say, sorry, you can't access your bank account.
	Oh, you can't have UBI, or you can't have the goods that you wanted to buy in that supermarket.
	Because the biometrics are going into supermarkets.
	They're going in everywhere, into banks, supermarkets, hospitals.
	These biometrics Where they will be accessing your data, so as you're authenticating, because everything will have to be authenticated by your facial recognition, in that process they will be looking at every single part of your lives, where you shop, what you buy, what you do in your spare time, what kind of health conditions have you got.
	All of this will be in one place for the government to look at and be able to use against you.
	And I'm sorry to say that, but that's what we'll do.
	Have you wondered about the people who are pushing this stuff, particularly the CEOs and the senior politicians and so on, who are just going along with this stuff?
	What's their game plan?
	Do they think that they're going to be exempt from this stuff?
	I mean, do they think that they're... Are they happy to eat crickets and vegan food?
	Or do they think they're going to be somehow on a special escape raft?
	Well, you know, the proof is the way they act now.
	I mean, Davos, you know, for instance, they're flying their private jets into Davos.
	Do they care about the carbon you know, sort of issue.
	They're all fine.
	I mean, if you look at the runway, you know, it's full of private planes, private jets that have flown from all over the world.
	So no, they don't care.
	They do what they like.
	And if you looked at the menu that they ate from at Davos as well, I don't know whether you saw that.
	Did you see the menu?
	I imagine it wasn't crickets.
	It wasn't crickets.
	It was venison and beef wellington and very, very fancy puddings, you know.
	OK.
	Yeah.
	So that's, but that's the, but Sandy, that's the Davos people.
	We understand that the super rich are obviously going to act like that.
	But I'm talking about, you think about all the people who are Well, I mean, even the Toby Youngs of this world.
	All the journalists in the mainstream media.
	All the well-paid commentators who are not calling this stuff out.
	Can you just rationalise what's going on in their heads?
	Do they think they're going to be exempt?
	I, no, they won't be exempt.
	I mean, I, you know, Toby's great, you know, we know, you know, he writes really well and all that stuff.
	I feel that sometimes he's just a bit naive.
	I don't want to get into ACS, you're right, I don't want to focus on Toby's, because Toby's is actually, you know... I'm sorry, no, I didn't mean that.
	No, no, no, I brought him up, but Toby's is fighting a fight on his level.
	I think there's some people, I won't, you know, focus on him, but I think there's a lot of people in the media who are just still not understanding that There is proof that this is a plan and if they actually understood that then they would probably Rise up against it and say something.
	I mean, they're all worried about their jobs and Ofcom.
	I mean, that's the problem.
	They're worried about the short term.
	They're worried about the short term and they cannot think beyond their noses.
	The long term, the long term implications of what is really happening in the world that we've only got until March before, you know, it's rolled out.
	I mean, really, they want the digital ID in place by December of this year.
	That really is the endgame of, you know, if they manage to do that, it's the endgame of our privacy, you know, our privacy being sold on to third-party stakeholders.
	and our data being used as a currency on the blockchain with non-fungible tokens.
	That is what will happen.
	And I just wish people would listen and understand that this is the world we're facing.
	And it's not conspiracy.
	It's all there for everyone to see.
	And people are just going, I'm not getting it.
	No, I don't think that will happen.
	So before you go off and do your babysitting, tell us what we can do.
	Because as I understand it, I listened to your podcast with Richard Vobes.
	Oh yeah.
	And you were saying it's not enough to say, or it's not even an option to say, I don't like digital currents, digital ID.
	It's an intrusion on my personal space.
	You have to have specific Objections.
	Mainly because I did a bit of research and it was Taiwan managed to get rid of digital ID in 2017.
	That was the first attempt and they batted it off and they did it also in 2021.
	And they used very rational reasons for not having digital ID.
	And yeah, you can say, oh, I think you're going to use my data and you're going to rule the world and take away our privacy and, you know, control us.
	But they'll just say, no, we won't.
	No, we won't.
	That's mad.
	You're a conspiracy theorist.
	But if you if you have provable harms that have happened historically through having, you know, sort of, you know, having this centralised information system.
	You can say, well, actually, it can be hacked.
	It can be hacked more easily if all your data is in one place.
	And that, you know, it could be under a threat of cyber attack.
	And we all know cyber attacks have happened in the past.
	And even, you know, even even the globalists would admit that yes, that's happened.
	So you can say, well, you're in danger of cyber attack.
	That's a provable harm, because you have to prove that it's going to harm us in some way.
	And so you can also say, well, you're open to identity fraud, which happens all the time and it will happen even more if all your data is in one place.
	So, identity fraud, banking fraud, you can say that.
	You can also say that, for instance, there's a digital divide that treats people, because they go on about diversity and equality, and does this in any way impact adversely?
	To some members of society.
	And I said, well, yeah, there's a digital divide.
	Older people won't understand all this.
	They won't even be able to access the consultation because they possibly don't know how to use a computer or indeed a smartphone.
	So, you know, in a way, it adversely affects certain sectors of society.
	And I also made a point of saying about hyper vulnerable.
	You know, people who might have mental issues and the teenagers and children who access these technologies might well not understand that their data is being collected and may be giving information that could actually make them vulnerable.
	So I've said that as well, and that's true.
	We've had people being groomed, and all sorts of things, because their data has been picked up by somebody who's not very nice.
	So I just use those things, those arguments.
	And is there any way of conveying these messages to the government without having to spend two hours filling in all the wank bits?
	Well, you could, um, you could, uh, I, I don't know where to put, you know, I could actually send, I don't know, send this document.
	I, I, I filled it all in and said, look, do this.
	And I've highlighted it.
	Because it will be a deal breaker for a lot of people.
	People will think, yeah, I want to fight the fight, but can I be asked to put aside two hours of my life?
	Yeah, I mean, should I just send it to you and... I don't know.
	Well, send it to me, apart from anything else, but let's try and find a way that people... Presumably they should be... I mean, my MP is, you know, part of the... every MP, I think, apart from Andrew Bridgen, is now spoken for by the system.
	Yeah.
	They're all part of it, but presumably they are obliged, if you email them, if you... they've got to respond, but one needs to know what the formal
	I think it's just, you know, it is actually sort of trying to get over, I mean, I was, you know, the guy on the consultation is a guy called Andrew Burkhardt, who's an MP, he works for the Cabinet Office and he's the one that sort of pushed this out, you know, sort of
	Sending your objections to him and saying, look, you know, I feel that this is against, it is against all our rights and freedoms to be, you know, having our data just bandied about and used, you know, for third party interests, you know, to be sold on to third parties.
	So, you know, it's about really making your MPs aware of it as well.
	You know, maybe it's just doing that, just at least Showing that you're not happy about it.
	Okay.
	There must be charities that could actually back us up.
	You know, things like Unity and what's that other one?
	There's plenty of charities that are there for our human rights.
	They should be picking up on this.
	Yeah, the time is short.
	They're not going to.
	They're not going to.
	Okay.
	And before you go, you told me that you have some good news.
	That it's not all going their way.
	Yeah.
	Well, I think what they're doing is accelerating it far too quickly.
	And literally, they've been doing this for a while.
	And they did this whole thing with the pandemic.
	That, in a way, to a lot of people, is waking people up.
	And I do believe that without all of this, we would not have reached this level.
	And there is a level of consciousness happening throughout humanity where their eyes are being opened.
	Maybe not to the degree that we'd like at the moment, but there is this huge silent majority Uh, even when you go out, I don't know if you've noticed, James, when you go out and talk to people, maybe, you know, in the supermarket or in the gym or whatever you do, whatever, where people are actually going, yeah, it's getting really bizarre.
	It's getting really bizarre and strange.
	And what's it all about?
	Well, maybe, you know, they could actually join the dots.
	You know, maybe they could actually see.
	And I think there's this massive tsunami of people understanding that there's something horribly wrong.
	And there needs to be a little bit of a push, and I don't know how it will happen, where they'll go, the penny dropped.
	No, we're not having it.
	And I think the British are a bit like that.
	We're far too tolerant.
	We're tolerant, and then we snap.
	And then we think, no, actually, that's a step too far.
	And I think that's the problem with us, us Brits, is that we allow something to go on and on, and then we go, ooh, no, maybe not.
	And I'm feeling that maybe not thing a huge amount.
	And I think that they have failed in the past with things.
	The technocracy movement failed for whatever reason.
	And I think there's a divine plan.
	Something will kick in.
	I don't honestly feel that this level of evil will be allowed to happen.
	But we have to take action in order to have help from whoever, from the divine or whatever.
	I'm sorry to go divine.
	No, no, no, you should.
	What we didn't talk about, which came out in that first podcast I heard you on, we can talk about this another time, but you think that there is something essentially, you looked through all the documentation of the New World Order and you have inferred that this is essentially Luciferian or Satanic.
	Yes, I think it is, yeah.
	Can you just give me some examples briefly?
	Well, the United Nations have a very strange bunch, really.
	And their publishing company is the Lucis Trust, which used to be called the Lucifer Trust.
	And there's various, oh, I wish I had the quotes with me, but there's various people within the United Nations that have said in the past, you know, you have to bound down to Lucifer.
	And, you know, certain countries, if they don't adopt, you know, the, you know, The policies of the United Nations.
	We'll live to regret it because they've got this awful prayer room in New York.
	Have you seen it?
	The one with the big... The black?
	The big black stone in it, which is saturnic, you know, which is Luciferian.
	And it's 6.66 tonnes of mega... I think it's megatite or something, some sort of... Is it really 6.66?
	Yeah, and they say, oh, this is a pantheistic prayer room.
	So basically you can be a Luciferian and go and pray there if you want, or a Satanist or a Christian or a Muslim.
	It's for everyone.
	It's a commutarian prayer room.
	You can be whatever you like and all this sort of thing.
	And there's something about all the plans they have are anti-human and anti-nature.
	So You know, this whole, also they're trying to financialise nature, they're trying to financialise a human being, they're trying to make this sort of almost like a god-like, you know, they just want to control everything, they think they're gods.
	Yes, well they want to replace God.
	Yes, God has to be wiped out of the whole thing.
	And I don't know whether you saw this week that they're trying to, I think it's the Protestant Church, The Anglican Church have said that God has to be gender neutral now.
	And you just think, well, it's got to change.
	Well, of course, the Luciferianism is very into the sort of... There are no sexes.
	We are all one.
	We all become... I mean, I was thinking about... I saw this play the other day about Gore Vidal.
	And Gore Vidal wrote this book, a bestseller in the 1970s called Myra Breckinridge about this man who becomes a woman and then becomes a man again.
	These elites, I hate to use that word, they sow these ideas.
	It's predicted programming.
	They've been working up to this agenda for a very long time.
	Before you go, one Final thing I wanted to ask you.
	When you were designing your sets for these, for Bill Gates and Eric Schmidt and stuff, was there any kind of, were you steered towards doing stuff that colours, you know, like purple is a satanic colour, or were you influenced in a kind of Luciferian direction?
	No, not at all, actually.
	I've got to be honest, no.
	I was given pretty much a free reign.
	I think the Luciferian part, in my eyes, was the AI that was going in.
	And I think there's something about AI, is unfortunately what it does.
	Yeah, I just got a bad reaction about the, you know, the level of artificial intelligence that was going in and how it could be used, you know, for not very good purposes.
	and that we would rely too much on it and that it would actually somehow take the power away from the human.
	And, you know, there is this whole thing with AI that, you know, we talk about alien invasions, you know, in some respects it's already happened, you know, it's in RNA, it's in It's in the AI that's going into our cities.
	That is the alien invasion.
	It's not anything external.
	We're getting it.
	We're getting it now.
	And the thing is that it does separate us from our souls.
	That's it.
	It takes the humanity.
	out of, you know, if we engage with it too much, you know, that they want the transhumanism.
	They want to take and turn us into cyborgs.
	I know people think that's crazy, but this is what they talk about.
	And this is all in the World Economic Forum's website and Elon Musk, you know, enmeshing the human flesh with the AI.
	This is what they want.
	They don't want us to be human.
	They want us to be part Part AI and then fully AI and get rid of the humans altogether, the Malthusian thing.
	So, you know, it's all a big plan.
	And if people want that, you know, that's what we're going to get.
	But we have to really, most people I'm sure wouldn't want that.
	So we have to really, really stand up and say, no, absolutely not.
	We do not want this.
	We don't consent to it.
	It's not what we, you know, human beings were born for on this planet.
	Yeah.
	Well, thank you, Sandy.
	And thank you for fighting the fight, before many of us were.
	Thanks for letting me talk about fighting the fight.
	Please tell us where we can find more of your stuff.
	Yeah, I mean, I'm not on Twitter.
	I'm told I've got to go onto Twitter.
	I'm scared of Twitter.
	But, yeah, I'm a bit low-key, actually.
	I've always been slightly under the radar.
	I'm on Facebook.
	I have a website, which is sandyadams.net.
	That's all about the history of Agenda 21 and how we got to where we are.
	I haven't put up an awful lot of stuff recently because it went down, but I'm rectifying that.
	Contact me on Facebook Messenger if you want to contact me.
	Yeah.
	I think you should definitely put up your explainer for what to do about the digital thing.
	Yeah, definitely.
	ASAP.
	And it's a hassle.
	And I'll put it on Facebook as well.
	I can put that on Facebook.
	It's a PDF.
	So people can be able to look at it and just, you know, just copy it if they want to.
	They might want to change the wording, but, you know, it's all done.
	And I think that's the trouble is they know we're all chasing our tails.
	We're all busy.
	We lead very busy lives because of all this.
	Um, and we, yeah, sometimes we don't have time to spend all that time, you know, filling in long, ridiculous consultations, and they know it, yeah.
	Yeah, so everyone, do as Sandy says.
	It, it, it, you know, it's a bit... Okay.
	May as well nip it in the bud now.
	I think your hands drew it, okay?
	It only remains for me to say thank you to my viewers and listeners.
	If you like what I do, please support me.
	The powers that be, the people that Sandy and I have been talking about, desperately do not want me to make a living.
	They don't want me to make any money.
	They try all sorts of tricks against me.
	Just for that reason alone, never mind what you think about me, just what I do, just please support me on Substack, on Patreon, on Locals and on Subscribestar.
	Buy me a coffee, buy a special friend badge, come to my events.
	I really appreciate your support and I need it because it's going to get a lot tougher.
	Find whatever way suits you.
	They seem to be on a mission to stop you, to encourage your bank, to question your payment to my business.
	They'll try every trick in the book.
	Don't let the bastards get away with it.
	Thank you very much.
	Thank you again, Sandy.
	Thank you.
	Thank you, James.
	It's been great.
	Bless you.
	Thanks a lot.
	Okay.
	Bye-bye.

▲