In researching Global Governance 2025, I was led to believe (as were many others) that this was the infamous document that contained a fictional scenario that refers to an attack on the London 2012 Olympics, killing several million people. Whilst researching some forthcoming material relating to the upcoming Olympic Games, it seems I stumbled across the actual document with the reference.The “Scenarios for the Future of Technology and International Development” report was published in May 2010 and makes for very interesting reading. Straight off the bat, it is crucial to highlight those responsible for producing this opus: The Global Business Network and… The Rockefeller Foundation.
Anything that pertains to these “Agenda Player” families should be a cause to sit up and pay attention. However, as with all these important documents, it is always worth remembering to read between the lines. What is ‘not said’ can be just as significant. The included letter from the foundation president Judith Rodin lauds the efforts and methods of those involved and the report itself, highlighting how such work is crucial to “improve the lives of poor and vulnerable populations around the world”. Very noble of them…
Drawing upon foundation staff, grantees and ‘external experts’ (including SRI – Stanford Research Institute, Cisco & University of California-Berkeley), the report is an attempt to analyse some of the “driving forces that would affect the future of technology and international development”. The document utilises fictional scenarios and builds them around specific “critical uncertainties” to create four possible global structure outcomes over the next several decades. These include: “Lock Step”, “Smart Scramble”, “Hack Attack” and “Clever Together”. Each of these four ‘set-ups’ are triggered by a number of “shock” events in order to advance the narratives toward their conclusions.
The report is very similar in structure to “Global Governance 2025” (possibly why the two have been muddled). Superficially, the “Clever Together” appears the favoured one. The title is a much less rigid/extreme use of language and sounds more positive than the other three. Further ‘proof’ of this can be seen in the tone and context of the “Clever…” narrative and also when compared to the other three. Remember though that more is often said in the greyer areas...
.
The first scenario – “Lock Step” – presents a “world of tighter top-down government control and more authoritarian leadership, with limited innovation and growing citizen pushback.” It begins with the outbreak of a pandemic in 2012: “unlike 2009’s H1N1, this new influenza strain — originating from wild geese — was extremely virulent and deadly.” The virus would go on to infect “nearly 20 percent of the global population and (kill) 8 million in just seven months.”
It would ultimately do devastating damage to the global economy, business, tourism, etc. The result would create varying forms of “top-down authorities” across the world (with numerous countries introducing mass bio-metric ID for example) and began the dismantling of international/global perspectives - creating regional trading blocs. “Cross-border ties proliferated in the form of official security aid. While the deployment of foreign security teams was welcomed in some of the most dire failed states.” The narrative paints the global masses as largely in favour of this until the mid-2020s.
The report looks at the role of philanthropy in this situation: “Philanthropic organizations interested in promoting universal rights and freedoms will get blocked at many nations’ borders. Developing smart, flexible, and wide-ranging relationships in this world will be key; some philanthropies may choose to work only in places where their skills and services don’t meet resistance.” The technological effect of “Lock Step” is also discussed. “Most technological improvements are created by and for developed countries, shaped by governments’ dual desire to control and to monitor their citizens. In states with poor governance, large-scale projects that fail to progress abound.”
The second narrative – “Clever Together” – is shown as “a world in which highly coordinated and successful strategies emerge for addressing both urgent and entrenched worldwide issues.” This sections catalysts are “environmental” and “climate” issues. A fictional flooding of New York due to a storm surge is also provided. It is interesting to note that this scenario posits that the global “economic crisis” of 2008 (and now, of course) would fizzle out by 2010 and growth would explode and prosper subsequently. “A functioning global cap and trade system was also established. Worldwide, the pressure to reduce waste and increase efficiency in planet-friendly ways was enormous. New globally coordinated systems for monitoring energy use capacity were rolled out.”
“Centralized global oversight and governance structures sprang up, not just for energy use but also for disease and technology standards… Nation-states lost some of their power and importance as global architecture strengthened and regional governance structures emerged. International oversight entities like the UN took on new levels of authority.”
The result here is global governance, with NGOs and companies playing huge roles. Hunger and disease is severely reduced via access to inexpensive technology, enhanced GMOs and “more effective vaccines”. This scenario is painted in such positive tones (the section on philanthropy calls it a “virtual model world”), with only the prospect of global food shortages by 2027 being suggested as a negative.
Scenario Three – “Hack Attack” – is described as “an economically unstable and shock-prone world in which governments weaken, criminals thrive, and dangerous innovations emerge.” The trigger here is the infamous “2012 Olympic bombing, which killed 13,000.” It follows with “an earthquake in Indonesia killing 40,000, a tsunami that almost wiped out Nicaragua, and the onset of the West China Famine, caused by a once-in-a-millennium drought linked to climate change.” We are obviously encouraged here to see this as the “fear” scenario…
The resulting humanitarian cost would damage the global economy and effect “citizen demands for more security, more healthcare coverage, more social programs and services, and more infrastructure repair.” Countries would turn their foreign policy back to domestic concerns, allowing crime, drug trafficking, violence and terrorism to have a free reign… according to the report anyway!
On a technological front, hacking and cyber-crime would damage advancement. “The threat of being hacked and the presence of so many thefts and fakes lowered the incentives to create “me first” rather than “me too” technologies.” However, it does suggest that “genetically modified crops (GMOs) and do-it-yourself (DIY) biotech became backyard and garage activities, producing important advances.” By 2021, “Synthetic Biology” would be out of control and, by 2027, there would be the onset of “Water Wars” in various countries.
The final scenario – “Smart Scramble” – is pictured as “an economically depressed world in which individuals and communities develop localized, makeshift solutions to a growing set of problems.” The trigger here is that the global economic situation of 2008 snowballed. Eventually “the United States lost much of its presence and credibility on the international stage due to deepening debt, debilitated markets, and a distracted government… the Chinese sharply curtailed their investments in Africa and other parts of the developing world.”
Unemployment and xenophobia is presented as the result. ”London had been drained of immigrants, as they headed back to their home countries, taking their education and skills with them.” Decline in communities and poverty is blamed for the lack of reliable technological advances – “Internet access had not progressed far beyond its 2010 status… When cell phone towers or fibre optic cables broke down, repairs were often delayed by months or even years.” The scenario suggests an upturn toward the late 2020s but perhaps only “staying isolated, and survival and success would remain a local — not a global or national — phenomenon.”
Many of these documents, presented by those continuously cited as being (or in close proximity to) controllers of the global agenda, are often very curious items. It is never truly clear what the intent is in presenting them. It is clear that most ordinary folk in the world will never read them, so suggesting that they are a form of predictive programming is a difficult call to make. Their readership will always be contained to those closer to the workings of the global machine. Are they possibly a strange form of ‘training manual’ for the facilitators and middlemen of the agenda? Are they orchestrated misinformation designed to create misdirection when some of us think we’re starting to see the bigger picture? Or are they a statement of intent on the part of the controlling elite – not obvious even in plain sight… hidden, but not really hidden?...
As a final thought, I'm always concerned by the flippant inclusion of these cataclysmic events in many of these damning documents. They seem to serve no other purpose than to titillate the powerful, frighten the uninformed and annoy or confirm the suspicions of those who see the bigger picture. Maybe that is the point after all...
Whatever the real reasons, we should always be aware. Spread the knowledge. Do our best to think for ourselves and never, ever allow ourselves to be told what IS.
Open minds and level heads!
Until Next Time…
The Truth Seeker’s Guide.
Links for Damning Documents - Parts 1 - 4:
http://thetruthseekersguide.blogspot.co.uk/2011/10/damning-documents-blog-series.html
Books available from Carl James:
Science Fiction and the Hidden Global Agenda - Volume One - http://www.lulu.com/shop/carl-james/science-fiction-and-the-hidden-global-agenda-2016-edition-volume-one/paperback/product-23209429.html
Science Fiction and the Hidden Global Agenda - Volume Two - http://www.lulu.com/shop/carl-james/science-fiction-and-the-hidden-global-agenda-2016-edition-volume-two/paperback/product-23209433.html
What Really Happened at the London 2012 Olympics - http://www.lulu.com/shop/carl-james/what-really-happened-at-the-london-2012-olympics/paperback/product-23221527.html
People always say, "Show Me The Money!". If you want insight into any aspects of a global agenda, the evidence is often right under your nose. It may not spell it out like Noddy's Guidebook, but when you combine insight and common sense, and read between the lines... it's there for all to see. It can't all be disinformation can it? Agenda 21, Northwoods, The Brookings Report, The MK Ultra files, The Tavistock Charter... the list goes on and on. I hope to cover many more over time, but for now, I have focused in on four particularly Damning (or controversial, depending on your point of view) Documents that are regularly cited as "smelling of a rat". Below are the links to my overviews and discussions of the four items. The documents themselves are easy to find on the web. So if you have the time, please also give them a read.
Remember though... Open minds, folks!
The Truth Seeker's Guide.
Part 1 - PNAC: Rebuilding America's Defences
Part 2 - Report From Iron Mountain
Part 3 - Silent Weapons For Quiet Wars
Part 4 - Global Governance 2025
Part 5 - Scenarios for the Future of Technology and International Development
Books available from Carl James:
Science Fiction and the Hidden Global Agenda - Volume One - http://www.lulu.com/shop/carl-james/science-fiction-and-the-hidden-global-agenda-2016-edition-volume-one/paperback/product-23209429.html
Science Fiction and the Hidden Global Agenda - Volume Two - http://www.lulu.com/shop/carl-james/science-fiction-and-the-hidden-global-agenda-2016-edition-volume-two/paperback/product-23209433.html
What Really Happened at the London 2012 Olympics - http://www.lulu.com/shop/carl-james/what-really-happened-at-the-london-2012-olympics/paperback/product-23221527.html
Reading between the lines is sometimes the only way to get an idea of the bigger picture… the hidden agenda, as it were. Such is the case with the 2010 document: “Global Governance 2025: At A Critical Juncture” . This curiosity is the brain child of a collaboration between representatives of the US National Intelligence Council (NIC) and the European Union’s Institute For Security Studies (EUISS). The former is very important, not only because it falls under the control of the US President, but also due to the direct connections it has with the National Security Council, the Homeland Security Council, the National Intelligence Program and numerous branches of the US intelligence community. The latter is also hugely influential in matters of European security, defence and intelligence.
“Global Governance” also had extensive input from the Atlantic Council of the US (ACUS), The Trans-Atlantic Policy Network (TPN), The US State Department, The Committee On Foreign Relations of The European Parliament, The Centre on International Co-Operation (New York University), The World Economic Forum, PFC Energy and contributions from 8 different multi-national organisations involved in international affairs, media, research, strategy and security studies. So “Global Governance” is no hoax document!
Despite being largely unknown to many and almost totally ignored by mainstream media, the document is totally unclassified and easily downloadable from the internet. In fact, it has been estimated that there are over 5.5 million articles written on the net about “Global Governance”. So what is the significance of this opus?
Upon initial reading, there appears little that is damning about the contents. However this impression is extremely misleading. The report represents one of the first ‘official’ partnerships between US and European institutions, although anybody who knows anything about the history of The Bilderberg Group (for example) knows that that a document like this is simply building upon what has been a long established collaboration… and a, just as long, established agenda for global affairs. Like many other “damning documents”, it also makes use of a complex system of forecasting (or creating) trends and future shocks.
The report was created “to assess the framework and long term prospects of a global governance process”. It makes numerous references to an “international agenda” applied with “mutually agreed instruments”. However, it also goes out of it’s way to stress that it is not a proposal for ‘Global Government’, which the authors claim is a totally different and undesired outcome. What is being said here is technically true.
For a long time, I have been frustrated with certain notions that The New World Order or Agenda is a plan for a single government, single authority, single currency, etc. and taken, by some, literally. I have always believed that the agenda is a multi-tentacled beast, with no obvious face and certainly not wielding such obvious and blunt weapons as a global ‘whatever’…
In line with my belief, “Global Governance” seems to confirm this. With a universal agenda, it doesn’t matter how many faces there are, they’ll all be ultimately dancing to the same tune. The report states that “the main risk to be averted is the creation of different formats that mirror competing geopolitical conditions. Such a development would defeat much of the basic purpose”. It asserts that “a needed precondition is for all the stakeholders to trust the system, commit to collective action, and accept stronger perogatives of international institutions over their domestic governance”.
Initial to the process are organisations such as the G8 and G20, The BRIC countries, the IEA, OPEC, the OECD, the IMF, the Federal Reserve, The World Bank, etc. Regarding the perceived idea of G20 currently being centred on economic matters, the report states: “as issues become challenging or crisis driven, common interests may expand beyond facilitating an economic recovery, requiring the G20 to expand it’s AGENDA further”. You don’t have to be labelled a “conspiracy theorist” to see this happening right now.
Key also, is the involvement of NGOs (Non Government Organisations) and embracing “hybrid, public-private partnership (PPPs)… emerging as an important feature of global governance innovation”. Under the proposed ‘agenda’, it is interesting to see that the report notes: “There is institutional Darwinism and we will see the survival of the fittest institutions”. The rhetorical question should be asked, who sets the standard of ‘the fittest’? Those dictating the agenda presumably…
It also strangely refers to other institutions such as international business, big pharma, security agencies, the media and crisis management outfits like WHO and FEMA, as integral to the overall process. In relation to this, “Global Governance” hammers home this idea of ‘global threats’. Terrorism is obviously discussed, but also ‘Climate Change’, energy security, overpopulation and migration, dwindling resources, threats from biotechnology, infectious diseases and pandemics. This is where the report seems to have an epiphany of multiple “new pearl harbour” musings. An air of foreboding and fear is created in these discussions, however one conclusion is reached in relation to all these aspects: being able to control the outcome would ultimately advance the agenda.
On the matter of terrorism, security and potential state conflicts, a “proactive management of state fragility” is proposed. Including “political intervention” and “the threat of or use of military force”. This one speaks for itself really. The Japanese participant in the report, tellingly reveals “the world will be a sad place if by 2025 we have not legalised quick military intervention for humanitarian causes in case of failing states. We will need a new legal system for sending quick military intervention squads”. Humanitarian my arse! It’s just an excuse for quick regime change in those regions that won’t capitulate to the agenda.
Regarding ‘climate change’ (or more accurately, the myth of it), there is another example of seizing opportunities (engineered or otherwise): “a crisis such as an environmental catastrophe… could spark co-operation”. As for an event triggered by a bio weapon: “ a biological attack has a psychological impact that outstrips lethality, placing democratic governments under severe pressure to respond forcefully”. Is this a false flag event in the making?! Notice the emphasis on “psychological impact”…
In relation to the health of the population, “Global Governance” praises the work of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and their work with the Global Alliance on Vaccines and Immunizations. Firstly, I wouldn’t touch Bill Gates with a barge pole and I trust vaccination programs even less. Never the less, the report does mention flu pandemics and emerging diseases on several occasions… and emphasises that prevention is paramount.
The report also mentions that “rapidly falling costs will bring biotechnology within reach of the hacker community”. A remark presumably designed to point out that such advances can only be safe in the hands of the ‘agenda’ players. However, I don’t feel very safe when they make comments like: “future capabilities open the possibilities for designing humans with unique physical, emotional or cognitive abilities”. Sounds like The Borg to me!
One thing that all “Damning Documents” have in common, is the crucial role that modern communications and media outlets will play in shaping the agenda. “Widespread use of the internet - probably has been the most important vehicle spurring the expanded role of civil society groups and public opinion at large in ‘agenda setting’”. The report spells it out clearly with the following: “persuasion and legitimacy (require) as much attention as military, economic and political weight”.
What gives “Global Governance” an edge in the ‘damning documents’ stakes, is the inclusion of several “fictionalised scenarios”. These take place between now and 2025 and are used to highlight the preferred outcome of a global agenda in the future. The scenarios are real oddities though, given that they include events such as food shortages, pandemics, economic breakdown, the rise of China as the dominant superpower, the threat of a nuclear conflict between the US and China and huge tidal waves that wipe out millions of people.
The significance of these doomsday scenarios remains unclear. Are they shock tactics leading us to conclude they can only be avoided if the agenda exists? Are they subtle warnings of false flag events to come? Who knows.
What I have presented here is only a brief overview of a handful of the main “Damning Documents“ that relate to a global agenda for the future of mankind.. To really makes sense of any document that paints a suspicious picture, I suggest you seek them out and read them for yourself.
If nothing else, they confirm what we see around us everyday.
When presented with the facts, it becomes harder to dismiss these perceptions as the musings of paranoid nutters.
I could easily be called a nutter!
But I’m a nutter in the know!!
Knowledge is power.
Till Next Time…
The Truth Seeker’s Guide.
Books available from Carl James:
Science Fiction and the Hidden Global Agenda - Volume One - http://www.lulu.com/shop/carl-james/science-fiction-and-the-hidden-global-agenda-2016-edition-volume-one/paperback/product-23209429.html
Science Fiction and the Hidden Global Agenda - Volume Two - http://www.lulu.com/shop/carl-james/science-fiction-and-the-hidden-global-agenda-2016-edition-volume-two/paperback/product-23209433.html
What Really Happened at the London 2012 Olympics - http://www.lulu.com/shop/carl-james/what-really-happened-at-the-london-2012-olympics/paperback/product-23221527.html
“Centralized global oversight and governance structures sprang up, not just for energy use but also for disease and technology standards… Nation-states lost some of their power and importance as global architecture strengthened and regional governance structures emerged. International oversight entities like the UN took on new levels of authority.”
