The UN, the Rockefellers & Digital Control with Jacob Nordangard

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
WW (00:00):
Hey.

(00:19):
And welcome to UnlimitedHangout, I'm your host. Whitney
Webb, today, throughout much ofthe world, a certain set of
overarching policy goals firstrevealed themselves during the
COVID era continue to marchforward with political parties
on the left and the rightcalling for those policies
implementation, albeit withdifferent justifications,
digital IDs and their use toaccess online services,

(00:40):
biometric control over nationalborders, unprecedented
surveillance and so calledpredictive policing, the
creation of a new carbon pricingscheme, an unprecedented effort
to merge man with machine. Theincreased militarization of
domestic policing and much moreare being rolled out in relative
lockstep globally.
However many who were againstthese measures just a few years

(01:01):
ago now seem to view themsomewhat differently, as certain
political figures have posturedthemselves as against these
policies, but in reality, onlyreally offer different sales
pitches to the public for manyof those same policies. This can
also be seen on theinternational stage, where the
apparent hostilities betweenWest and East disappear when it
comes to these same policygoals. The reason for this
likely lies in the adoption byboth the western and eastern

(01:24):
power blocks of United Nationspolicy agendas such as agenda
2030, and the so calledSustainable Development Goals,
while those goals themselves areworded to sound pleasant and as
ensuring basic rights and needs,which is, of course, aided by
the Un framing itself, ratherdisingenuously, as a place where
national governments all have anequal seat at the table, the

(01:45):
reality is really quitedifferent, as we will discuss
today. To understand where thesepolicy goals come from and who
the UN really serves, it is bestto start by examining the
genesis of that organization andits development over the past
several decades, joining metoday to dissect the history of
the UN in the current push intotechno dystopia is Dr Jacob
nordengard. Dr nordengard is aSwedish researcher and author

(02:08):
who has now written seven books,with the seventh coming out
later this year in December, onhow the incoming digital control
system developed and unfolded,with a focus on the true nature
of the United Nations and someof the most prominent oligarchs
and that organization'sdevelopment. You can find his
books in other written works atJacob nordengard.se, thanks for
joining me today, Jacob. Andwelcome to unlimited hangout.

JN (02:29):
Thanks for having me.

WW (02:30):
Well, it's absolutely my pleasure. So to start off for
most people around the world, Iwould assume the United Nations
is generally seen as a comingtogether of the national
governments of the world, whereglobal issues are addressed
collectively and every countryhas an equal seat at the table.
Why, in your view, is thisperception inaccurate?

JN (02:54):
You just have to go back to the roots of United Nations, who
were the founders, who was withorganizations set up.
It's always those who are behindthings that have a say in what
organization, organizationreally is going to do. So it's

(03:20):
a, it's a, it's like they havesold an idea of of this perfect
world order where everyone willhave have a say, but, but it's
not like that. And if you gointo to the background and how

(03:40):
United Nations came about. It'sa different story.

WW (03:46):
All right. So with that being said, one of the earlier
families, groups, oligarch,clans, perhaps you could say
that had an outsized influenceon the early development un is
the Rockefellers, which I knowis a family you've written
extensively about. So how didthe Rockefeller family and their
affiliates influence the earlyUnited Nations, and what
influence do they continue tohold over it?

JN (04:08):
Well, you can go back already to the League of
Nations, the setup of League ofNations, and the Rockefeller
family was involved in this. Andthe Under Secretary of the
League of Nations was workingwith yonder, Rockefeller Jr,
already and but as we know, theLeague of Nations was never

(04:31):
United. United States was nevera member. But they worked
Rockefeller Foundation workedvery close with the League of
Nations Health Department. Itwas like they set up everything.
They had, this InternationalHealth Division, the Rockefeller

(04:52):
Foundation, and they more orless run, ran the operations
League of Nations for a. Thehealth agenda. And the same goes
with the setup of United Nationsas we know. The League of League
of Nations was a failure, andduring the 30s, Germany and

(05:18):
Italy, they quit the membership,and the organization had had no
abilities to stop the war, butat the same time, they started
to think about the possibilitiesset up new organizations, and
this was done through the lot ofwork of the Council on Foreign

(05:42):
Relations in New York. And theCouncil on Foreign Relations, of
course, was set up by JP Morgan,and also the Rockefellers. And
the Rockefellers were huge andvery, very influential in these
organizations from the 30s andonwards, and especially after

(06:04):
the second world war, they weredominating this organization,
but But before the war, CFR,they had This War and Peace
study their way. Discussed thepossibility or how a new system

(06:26):
would arise after this more thewar that was about to start. So
it was the financial powers atthat time. We knew that the time
was more or less up for theBritish Empire, and this was a

(06:49):
preparation for what was comewould come afterwards. And so in
this study, they mentioned thenew financial institutions, like
what would become the World Bankand IMF and so on, and and also,

(07:12):
this started a process with alot of meetings during the
during the war, about a NewWorld Organization, and it was
also the fact that the alliedforces, they call themselves the

(07:34):
United Nations, so They tookthat name later and and during
the 1945 they had this bigconference in San Francisco, and
that was the kind of setup of ofeverything, and we have a big

(07:56):
influence from The Rockefellers.At that time, Nelson Rockefeller
would be vice president, was apart of this, and after they had
made the decisions to startthis, they Nelson Rockefeller

(08:17):
and the Rockefeller brothers,they became with a proposal that
the new headquarters would beplaced at their estate at Bucha
hills, outside of New York. But,but it was some of other member

(08:39):
countries that would be a partof this and other people that
was part of a new organizationsthat said it's too far away from
from the from city. We we haveto have it in. Yeah, it be it.
They said, We have to have it ininside New York. And so the

(09:04):
Rockefellers, they bought theland for the headquarters
yonder. Rockefeller then donatedthis property to the United
Nations, and the Rockefellersall also put up the
architectural team that wasresponsible for the design of

(09:29):
the headquarters, and their ownchief architect was heading this
and he was the chief architectwas also a member of both the
Rockefeller Brothers, founderand Rockefeller Foundation, the
member of Board of Trustees, soit was very, very close to to

(09:50):
home for them. And it's alsowith with Rockefellers at just
after the Second World War I.Mean they were so all the
competitors had more or lessbeen crushed by the war, but

(10:11):
they were in United States andhad so much again, so much power
and and wealth during the war.So they were very, very well
prepared to take over the whatyou could say as the great work

(10:35):
on building these new globalgovernance structures and the
United Nations, more or less,became an organization that
they, if you go into theRockefeller Capital Management,

(10:55):
they They are handling thefinancial affairs of the
Rockefeller family. They haveall these organizations that the
Rockefeller has influenced andfund founded, and among them,
they have united nations in themiddle. It's like, okay, this is

(11:19):
our organization. And so fromthe beginnings, from 1945 they
have had a very, very, very biginfluence on organization. And
also, like in 1948 we have setup of who also very, very

(11:43):
closely connected to theRockefeller Foundation and their
work, they basically to go withoperations from the from the
League of Nations, so very muchinto to steering the agenda at
that time, and they also afterthe after the Second World War

(12:09):
in the 50s, and they had theorganizations, they started to
think about how they could makeUnited Nations more more
powerful. And during the or orafter the Second World War, it

(12:31):
was a kind of a movement goingon that talked about making the
United Nations into a worldgovernment. It was the world
Federalist movement called itwas called, it still operates
today, but, but it was afailure. Couldn't convince the

(12:55):
member states of United Nationsat that time that would give up
or very sovereign sovereignty.And so they had to think about
other ways to achieve this. Andof course, we had cold war
coming, and that was actuallythe end of the idea of creating

(13:18):
a world government at the time.But the Cold War was also making
it clear for the nations thatthe atomic bomb could destroy
the whole world and andtherefore we we have to have a
kind of a global governanceregime taking care of this and

(13:38):
prevent this from happening. Anda lot of these ideas stemmed
from the University of Chicago,a university that was founded
and funded by John DRockefeller, first, John D

(13:59):
Rockefeller senior, and later,
also when, when John DRockefeller died, John de Jr was
involved and and DavidRockefeller, and the Rockefeller
money was very, very much in inthe University Chicago, and at
that university, they, theystarted something called the

(14:24):
doomsday clock. You know, overyour doomsday clock, familiar,

WW (14:30):
yeah. So basically, the alarmist group that says we're,
you know, one minute or twominutes from midnight, more or
less been a very small amount ofminutes from midnight, ever
since it was created, sort ofcreating this alarmism that's
used to manufacture consent. Iguess you could say for
solutions that people wouldotherwise not accept, that often
leads to a surrendering ofsovereignty per perceived gain

(14:53):
against whatever the threat issaid to be. Is that fair?
Exactly. Okay. I.

JN (15:01):
So, so it was set up in in 1947 they, they started this
doomstick clock. And they alsofrom this university, we have
the very important people,Robert Huns was, was the the

(15:22):
president of universe at thattime, he was involved in the
setup of the Aspen Institute inin Colorado, and the Aspen
Institute worked very close withUnited Nations agenda all and
they were searching forproblems, global problems, at

(15:50):
first, the atomic bomb, but butvery close by, we started to
Talk about the populationproblem. It's a big thing

WW (16:04):
before you go any further. Then, since we're getting into,
I guess, what is arguably theRockefeller effort to rebrand
their long interest in eugenics,unless something else entirely.
What exactly has the Rockefellerfamily? I mean, they have a long
standing history of what they'vewanted to impose on the world.

(16:25):
And obviously, from what you'vesaid thus far, have sort of
utilized entities like theUnited Nations to manufacture
consent globally for a lot ofthose things. So in addition to
sort of this, some of the thingsyou're touching on here, Could
you perhaps give an overview ofessentially what their goals
have been since it at the veryleast the early 20th century, if

(16:50):
not a little bit earlier thanthat, and how, sort of a quick
overview, perhaps, of howthey've attempted to use the
United Nations, or, you know,the NGO complex, To sort of
rebrand some of these longstanding ambitions as something
more palatable to the public.Yes,

JN (17:07):
if you go into to the Rockefeller history, it's all
about oil in the beginning. Andso Johnny Rockefeller starts
Standard Oil, the Standard OilCorporation, the more or less
biggest in the world, takes overthe oil industry almost

(17:27):
completely in the United Statesand and also becomes very, very
influential globally. And that'simportant. They are operating
globally and starting upbusiness more or less all over
the world, and also interestingin securing the oil in other

(17:50):
regions and United States aswell. So they are, it's like
they are building up the Inteltheir own intelligence service.

WW (18:02):
They did have their own intelligence service, actually,
during World War Two that waslike a competitor to the
precursor to the CIA, yes,

JN (18:11):
yes. Interesting operating from the Rockefeller Center. So,
so they start up very, veryearly. Interesting in because
they are, they are into globaltrade. That's what we're doing,
global business and and onething that they thought were

(18:35):
impractical, it was that we haveto to in order to our business,
to make contract, we have to tooperate with governments all
over the world. It's and it alsoin the United States, you have,

(18:57):
you have the you have the youcould. Couldn't do it only on
the federal level. You have tobe on the state level to and
they thought it was they wantedto bet the structure. We wanted
to. It's like, when you'relobbying, it's better to like we

(19:22):
have the is in European Unionnow, first we have the
countries. Now have Brussels,and every lobbyist in is in
Brussels and and we can the bigcorporations, they can more or
less make policy with the helpof the lobbyists and the

(19:48):
politicians, and then these willbe implemented in the member
countries. And it's that kind ofthinking that they they want
them. More efficient system forglobal business, and that's why
we want to have this and havethis on a global scale, global

(20:14):
governance. And it's like wehave used the United Nations for
and wants it to function as thisin the future?

WW (20:25):
Well, I think it absolutely has become that actually, in
some of my past work with IanDavis for unlimited hangout and
talking about the UnitedNations, we've referred to a
what we consider a ratherinfamous quote from former UN
Secretary General Kofi Annanthat he gave, of course, when he
was UN Secretary General at theend of the 1990s saying the UN

(20:45):
has undergone a quietrevolution. And I'm paraphrasing
here, but it's something to theeffect of, you know, it's not
really about the public sectorof the world anymore. It's, it's
really about business. And thebusiness of the world's
businesses is now the businessof the UN, and you know,
essentially signaling that, youknow, we serve the private
sector in the public privatepartnership model, those kind of

(21:11):
things. And it makes a lot ofsense when you consider that you
know, at the same time, theRockefellers are sort of
posturing as you know, you know,through the UN as wanting, you
know, a better, more just worldand all of this stuff. Some of
the early things they werepromoting at the UN, you know,
basically came down to increasedun interest in what is often

(21:34):
referred to, at least today, asthe global south. And so in the
case of, you know, LatinAmerica, for example, you have
the rock of David Rockefeller,for example, sponsoring the coup
in 1973 in Chile, installingPinochet, and then having their
economy be under the control ofthe university. You just
mentioned the University ofChicago, with the implementation

(21:54):
of what are known as the Chicagoboy policies. And then a lot of
efforts, and a lot of that wasfacilitated by this network of
businesses that the Rockefellerscontrolled in Latin America, and
one of their closest affiliatesin Chile, a man named Augustine
Edwards, who was a head of thisChilean banking dynasty,
basically. And the, you know,David Rockefeller, at the time,

(22:16):
was head of Chase ManhattanBank, which had very predatory
policy towards Latin Americahelps spawn the Latin America
debt crisis, which has led to alot of the issues that we're
still seeing today. Really like,you know, Argentina's political
instability, for example, hasits antecedents in that era. And
then there's this particulargroup that's, I think, very
interesting to look at as well.They were known by this acronym

(22:39):
called Adela. And Adela isactually, I know about it, yes.
Well, would you like to talkabout it? Then it did help spawn
the Club of Rome, which I knowis a comes up quite a bit in
your work. So in theRockefellers were involved in
that as well. So I'd beinterested to hear your take on
on Adela.

JN (22:58):
Yes, Adela, they worked for for more or less Latina American
integration and cooperationbetween countries. But also it
was like a lot of bank stores inPoland, yeah. And we also have,
also from my home country,Sweden, Marcus, wallenberry, the

(23:23):
Swedish Rockefellers. It'swallenbergs. I don't know how
much you have looked into tothem, but, but they were, they
had this meeting Adela in in, Idon't remember what country was
for now, but they had a meetingwith and they had this speech by

(23:48):
a man called aureli pecha. Hewas the second guy at Fiat and
at Olivetti, and also he hadstarted one of the founders of
Al Italia, and they at thisspeech, he talked about the

(24:12):
future, the future development,and how it was Important to more
or less control the future,because if, if this powerful
people wouldn't do anything, itcould spiral out of control.
And, for example, it was aboutpopulation explosion, very, very

(24:38):
topical at the time. And andalso some other kind of
environmental issues and thisand it talked about how there
was a need for more, like hightech revolution, and this. This.

(25:00):
If you read the kind of historyof the Club of Rome, they
mentioned this. We don't know ifit's exactly like this, it
happened, but they state thisand this speech to these
banksters. We had one of those,what was listening to this was

(25:24):
Dean Rusk of the RockefellerFoundation. He was, I think he
was later Secretary of State.Maybe he was, he was at this at
the time, but he had been atRockefeller foundation so very
close to the Rockefeller circleand, of course, and being part

(25:45):
of something called the specialstudies project in the 50s. And
this led up to ideas on set upkind of a think tank, think tank
for the future and futuredevelopment. And they had a

(26:10):
first meeting in Rome,

WW (26:15):
I believe, at a Rockefeller residence right in bolagia. No,
the

JN (26:19):
first was actually in Rome in okay, I don't remember the
exact play I was at this placelast year. I was invited to go
to Rome, and so I had to go tothis place. But it's a very,
very, it's the oldest Academy,more or less in the world, and

(26:47):
has also has a connection to myown home country, Sweden, with
our queen Christina, that wentand lived in that place, in the
old building of this academy.She, she, she had a resident.

(27:09):
And in that place the firstseed, it was decided to to form
this little group, the Club ofRome, and then they went to
Bellagio a couple of monthslater. And that was very, really

(27:32):
took off with a little coregroup. And this was a planning
event. It was global plannersand system theorists that were
gathered there to discuss moreor less future development and
how we can create a bettersystem to govern the world and

(28:00):
after that they we have have alot of Rockefeller people
involved in this. First it was,of course, the Bellagio Center,
run by Rockefeller Foundationand but we also have one, one of
the people in the Board ofTrustees of a Club of Rome in

(28:24):
the circle was Carol LouisWillison. He was a close friend
of Nelson Rockefeller and alsoDavid Rockefeller, and had been
involved in their specialstudies project in the 50s. But
I think it's a very, veryimportant thing with the special
status project, but the Club ofRome. Carol Louis Wilson was

(28:50):
also he was at the MIT, and hewas responsible for setting up a
study about resources, thatresources and population growth,
and how the population growthwould affect resources. It was

(29:14):
very much based on malthusianismideas and computer modeling,
that was thing. So they builtthis computer model at the MIT,
run by Jay Forrester, and thiswas the basis for the book

(29:35):
limits to growth in 1972 so

WW (29:39):
before we go farther into limits to growth. I just want to
add a few things. So first ofall, my understanding of Adela,
which helped, as you noted,helped produce the Club of Rome,
and all of this was essentiallyto invest it was basically like
Western oligarchs going to LatinAmerica and King making who

(29:59):
would become. Of the localoligarchs of those Latin
American countries, sort ofdeciding, deciding who would
become the big corporate magnetsof that region. Which is
interesting because there'sactually another group that has
followed that same model calledendeavor, and they've actually
they're mostly funded by thebronfmans, involve Reid Hoffman,

(30:22):
and also Pierre Omidyar, thefounder of eBay and and longtime
owner of PayPal, though he isnot current, doesn't currently
own PayPal anymore, but they areessentially following that same
model, but to basically Kingmake the startups and companies
that will be running all theFourth Industrial Revolution
technology in Latin America,which is interesting, but it

(30:44):
really comes down, as youpointed out, to resource
exploitation, how these peoplecan control resources in
countries that they really haveno business doing that in, if
you're coming at it from Asovereignty matters perspective,
and then also trying toessentially frame population

(31:04):
growth in these same areas likeLatin America or the global
south more broadly, as threatsto national security. So what
you were, what you justreferenced, is really at the
Club of Rome was also, you know,essentially in the same time
frame, paralleled by anotheraffiliate of the Rockefeller
family, Henry Kissinger, in anational security memorandum

(31:25):
that he put out that during theNixon administration, basically
made it US government policythat unrestrained birth rates in
Latin America and in other areasof the global south were
considered a threat to USnational security, which is
important to keep in mind in thecontext of all of this. So
ultimately, you know, there'sthe long standing Rockefeller

(31:49):
interest in eugenics, but also,you know, kind of the view that,
you know, unrestrainedpopulation growth in these areas
will essentially make it harderfor, you know, these oligarch
clans abroad to control theresources there at the end of
the day. But somehow they'vemanaged to rebrand this very
disturbing and predatoryideology as some sort of a you

(32:11):
know, as sustainability andsustainable development and and
all of that, and a lot ofenvironmentalism

JN (32:18):
and, yeah, and made made very popular among people. They
have implanted the idea among Imean, especially in Sweden, we
believe this. Everyone believes,is this dogma. So, so it's like

(32:42):
the elite view we have. We havereally taking, we have
indoctrinated the minds ofeveryone to to accept their own
view. And this has been astrategy from the beginning, but
I just wanted to do you knowabout the special studies

(33:04):
project that I mentioned,

WW (33:06):
I believe I'm familiar with it is that not where the rock of
David Rockefeller becameacquainted with Henry Kissinger
because of Kissinger'sinvolvement in that program,
yes, or it might have been aseparate thing.

JN (33:20):
Well, it was the, I think a special start is one of the key
things in my Rockefeller book,because that's when they set up
a lot of agenda that's playingout during 60s and 70s and to
this day. And this was, it wasNelson Rockefeller that wanted

(33:45):
to he had been the in the trueman administration. He had been,
also, think he was in, involvedin the, also Eisenhower and but
he stepped out of politics for awhile and wanted to become the

(34:09):
chairman the president of aRockefeller Brothers Fund,
because he had, at that time, anidea. He wanted to bring the
best minds in America togetherto discuss future problems and
possibilities. And they hadallocated funds for this. It was

(34:33):
called the special project fromthe early 50s. And they started
this in the mid 50s, 56 I think,and they recruited Henry
Kissinger for as a coordinatorand to take care of this. And we

(34:54):
have a lot of people involvedthat is very, very high up in
the. Banks and what they aredoing with this. It's a it's a
thick report. It was, it wasreleased in the end as a book in
1961 called Rockefeller panelreports. And in this they talk

(35:22):
about how to more or less createthis new world and and a global
governance system for thefuture. They actually say in
this report that their missionwas to to shape a new world

(35:46):
order in all lights, all itsdimensions, economic, political,
culture and so on. And how to dothis. They they said that
science is a method. Becausescience it's it's something we

(36:12):
have scientific cooperationbetween nations over the
borders, and we have to seek outscientific problems that are
global in scope. So in thisspecial studies project, we say

(36:33):
that, okay, we have some areasthat are more interesting to
develop than others, and some ofthese are meteorology and
oceanography, because climatespans over borders, it's a
transnational problems. And wealso say that if we somehow

(36:59):
could change the climate, itwould be a problem that would
needed. It couldn't be sold by anation alone and and the next
thing is global health. And ofcourse, the third one is the
atomic bomb, but it's so theysay they have to fund these

(37:27):
scientific areas, and they havealready been doing that, of
course, with health for a longtime, but Now in the 50s, it
becomes a priority with climateclimate change and the carbon
dioxide theory that they thatwas not a big issue at this

(37:55):
time, but It became, and theywere very, very heavily involved
in setting up this from the 50sand onwards, and then through
the Club of Rome, that was oneof the main vehicles. And as I
said before, Carol Louis Wilsonwas a part of this special

(38:22):
studies project, and he was theone that commissioned two big
conferences in the early 1970sthat talked about critical
environmental problems and man'simpact on the climate, and he

(38:43):
was a close friend of Nelson andDavid, and more or less when, if
you read what's written abouthim by the climate scientists of
that time, they say that he wasone that made us interesting
about these topics and how manwas responsible for influencing

(39:06):
climate so it came veryobviously, and it's kind of a
shock for me when I found outthis, I was, I was at the
Climate Center for ClimateScience and Policy Research in
in my home, home city here Northshopping. And it was strange to

(39:29):
see that, okay, these people,wait a minute, these, these are
the old oil men that were behindthis

WW (39:41):
so well, it kind of does make sense when you consider
that, you know, the modernenvironmental movement is almost
exclusively focused on carbonemissions, yeah, and not on the
toxic load caused by industrieslike Big Oil, for example, that
the Rockefellers made a lot oftheir wealth from. Yeah. Um, or,
for example, I mean, there's aninfinite number of major

(40:04):
environmental issues the worldfaces from, you know, just
contamination from mining, forexample, contamination from
things like hydraulicfracturing, or fracking, as it's
done in the US, which totallydestroys the water table and,
like, just pumps a ton, a ton ofreally toxic stuff that they
don't companies don't even haveto disclose, into the water and

(40:25):
into, you know, the earth andall of this stuff. And it's
essentially made it the bigissue. And of course, when you
have that extreme focus oncarbon emissions, the solutions
that have been given to us areessentially technocratic efforts
to manage people's footprintsthrough, you know, organizations
downstream of the Club of Rome,like the Global Footprint

(40:48):
Network, and then all theseefforts to create carbon pricing
schemes, which are essentiallyways to create new markets. And
basically through the thenarrative about, you know,
through this the fear generatedaround climate change, use that
as a way to impose this newmarket onto nations,

(41:10):
essentially. And it'sinteresting, because the figure
that was very important ingetting those solutions to be
the predominant, un backedsolutions for climate change and
things like that was Mariestrong. And the man that Marie
strong chose to hire to developcarbon emissions trading, and he
that he worked on, on developingthe Kyoto Protocol with, is a

(41:32):
guy named Richard Sandor, whohad previously been an executive
vice president at Drexel BurnhamLambert, which had gone, which
was at in the center of a hugefinancial scandal, just like two
years prior, basically, for thejunk bond scam. And, you know,
several people at Drexel went toprison, some became convicted
felons. And Sandor made a lot ofmoney off of that. And he's also

(41:57):
the father of financial futuresand derivatives, and a lot of
other, you know, financialinstruments that have caused
economic calamity. But he's,yeah, he's the father of of
carbon trading. And he thinksalso that we should privatize,
you know, the world's access toclean water and clean air, that
there should be a market forthat as well. And you know, this

(42:21):
is why it's very frustrating tome for people who I think are
environmentalists and are wellmotivated. You know, if the
alarm is such, as described byall of these figures and
organizations that you'reciting, why are the solutions,
all of these scammy carbonpricing schemes that don't
actually, even if you believethe official climate change

(42:42):
narrative, don't actuallyaddress that narrative at all.
You know, yeah, exactly,

JN (42:50):
yeah. It's a big scam, and it's, I think it's we, I know a
lot of people working with this,and it's not bad people. A lot
of my old colleagues from fromuniversities, so they all work
with us. They believe it. And Iguess we think I've gone crazy

(43:14):
or something, but, but it'slike, but I have tried all the
time to just show the evidence,the evidence for this, but it's
very, very, very hard forbelievers to even if you show
them this, they can, and it'slike they have invested so much

(43:36):
in in this climate narrative,but they can't. It's impossible
for them to to do other thingsor question it, if we question
it by the question the veryexistence of institutions we

(43:56):
work in. So it's, it's very,very hard to change this,
unfortunately. Well,

WW (44:04):
I think, I think it's useful to focus on the proposed
solutions from the people thatare propagating, or are the
Genesis figures in in thisnarrative, you know. So for
example, someone like BillGates, who's become relatively
notorious, you know, he says thesolution to climate change is
not to plant forests all overthe world. Don't plant trees. He

(44:24):
says, instead, he thinks it's amuch better idea to pay some
company to use, you know, fossilfuel powered large digging
machines to pull up trees in anexisting forest, and then, you
know, use untold numbers offossil fuels to then bury those
trees underground so that thecarbon is quote, unquote
sequestered, even though thetrees alive would technically

(44:47):
turn that carbon into oxygen,right? Um, and he's like, no,
no, you can't do that. We haveto, you know, these startups
that I've been investing in andfunding, we have to use. Their
solutions and things like that.And also, I think it's useful to
point out that the UN when youlook at a lot of things they're
facilitating and supporting,absolutely go against common

(45:10):
environmental sense, like theirfacilitation, for example, of
deep sea mining at a time whenthey're claiming to be extremely
worried and arguably rightly soabout the environmental crises
facing the world, world'soceans, right? But a lot of
those issues, like deep seamining or extreme plastic
pollution, have taken an extremeback seat to concerns about

(45:34):
carbon emissions, and the ideathat when you know that, takes
that the climate changenarrative seriously thinks that
that those issues could beaddressed by a carbon tax or a
carbon market? I think are, youknow, really need to look at at
what these, these solutions thatare being offered actually do,
and also the fact that peoplewho claim to be against climate

(45:57):
change, like figures relativelyclose to the Trump
administration, are, along withthe Global Footprint Network
that Club of Rome affiliate Imentioned earlier, are trying to
build a giant carbon market onLatin America, with the goal of
regionally integrating itbasically into like a Latin
American Union, and building acontinental, intercontinental

(46:18):
smart power grid connectingNorth Central and South America,
all and and then surveilling theall of the forests on the entire
continent as part of this likecarbon scheme that they call
green Plus, basically and on thesatellite company involved
intimately involves Trump'stransition transition team co

(46:40):
chair Howard lutnic, who's nowgoing to be his Commerce
Secretary, as well as his formerTreasury Secretary, Steve
Mnuchin, and the former head ofthe Joint Chiefs of Staff of the
military under Trump, JoeDunford, all on the board of
that, interestingly enough, andtheir goal is to put it all on a
Bitcoin Side Chain andessentially have these credit

(47:01):
these carbon emissions be betraded. But the local
communities it's supposed tobenefit can't actually control
the money they supposedlyreceive from it, and they only
can implement projects with itthat are approved by the Global
Footprint Network and thisother, you know, a kind of

(47:21):
overtly globalist entity calledCC 35 which is basically trying
to regionalize Latin Americaunder the guise of combating
climate change. And actually,I'm a leading figure in Naib
Bucha ladies party in ElSalvador. Mario Duran is a vice
president of that organization.So a lot of these supposed, like
right leaning figures that havebeen claiming to be right

(47:42):
leaning populace seem to be allin for the carbon trading thing,
which, you know, please explain.Explain that one you know,
against the narrative. It again,it's, it's a market, and it
seems to be big business andabout resource control at the
end of the day. And I supposewhen you're focusing on

(48:04):
emissions and global footprint,that's a very convenient way to
be able to exercise control overa country or communities
industrial activity and theirenergy usage. And there's a
direct correlation betweenenergy usage ability and family
size, which takes us sort ofback to the whole quote,
unquote, family planningendeavor,

JN (48:25):
yes, yeah, it's all connected. I mean, and carbon,
it's perfect. Carbon is life,carbon is energy. Carbon is
everything, if you and that'swhy it has become so important
for that to to make it our newreligion. Well, you know, I

WW (48:46):
also just, I mean, there's just so many examples where it
just doesn't make sense. So, youknow, why are a lot of these,
you know, big names coming outand saying, No, we can't do
small scale organic agricultureor family farms. We instead have
to have giant industrial farmsthat are managed by AI and
drones and involve no peoplelike that's the more climate
change friendly solution isthat. So I don't know. I mean, a

(49:11):
lot of these, frankly, just seemlike they're being foisted on
people who are, you know,concerned about a particular
narrative, narrative that's beenpropagated. But there seems to
be a lot of or rather a lack ofcritical thinking about these
solutions, and do they reallyaddress the problem that's been
posed to most people? And itseems like there is a massive

(49:34):
disconnect there. So maybe weshould talk a little bit about
the man that helped make thishappen. I mentioned him earlier.
His name is Marie strong, and hewas responsible for, well,
essentially, for the precursorsfor what are now the sustainable
development goals that have gonethrough a few iterations. But I
guess ultimately, go back toagenda 21 which was launched at
this Rio conference in the early1990s but Maurice Strong has an

(49:58):
interesting history. Definitelyhas a lot of Rockefeller
connections, and I was wonderingif you'd be interested in
talking about him at all. Yes.

JN (50:06):
Maurice Strong, when I read, started to read about him. He
was first a bit critical aboutRockefeller influence, but he
was kind of dragged into theVernet, and he was a lawyer, but

(50:27):
and he was came into the energybusiness side of it, and it was
kind of a strange thing. Youcould say that he was the man
the shows for the Stockholmconference in 1972 the big

(50:49):
United Nations meeting. That wasthe first that was all for the
environment, first proposed in1967 by a Swedish diplomat
called sverker Ostrom, but theyhad worked more or less behind

(51:13):
the scenes with the Americans.And the Americans were the
people from the Aspen Institute,with Joseph Slater and Robert O
Anderson. Roberto Anderson, hewas an oil executive from the
Atlantic Richfield Corporation,and they set up kind of an

(51:37):
institute, Institute ofEnvironmental Affairs,
International Institute ofEnvironmental Affairs and more
strong, came into the picture.Was recruited for this. He
hadn't been talking that muchabout environment before, but he

(52:00):
had been involved with theCanadian was called foreign aid
agency, and so, so that's thebecause this conference was a
lot about future development, orhow can we control development

(52:23):
so more strong? He was invitedto to be the Secretary General
for the conference. They hadthis American team coming to
Stockholm. They've been, it wasofficially Sweden that was, and

(52:45):
the Swedish government thatwould run this, but more strong
and the SEC, the secretariatthat was, was funded by
Rockefeller Foundation that theyalso find a lot of Rockefeller

(53:08):
connected people involved inthis. And before the stock
conference, they had had also acouple of meetings to secure the
interest or secure. He wanted toconvince the third world
countries that this was a goodidea with environment and

(53:32):
development, and to have thisbig international conference.
Because the thing they were kindof skeptical. Were very
skeptical a lot of thesecountries, because it was okay.
So now it's the old colonialpowers that are going to tell us
how we can develop in thefuture. Maybe not a good idea,

(53:54):
but more strong was sent withBarbara ward to have something
called the phonics meeting thatthey decided that we have to the
third world countries, they willbe allowed to develop. We have,

(54:15):
we have, we have development inthe mix. So these countries will
have something as well. But ofcourse, what they thought of
themselves was the resources tocontrol the resources. And in
Stockholm, it was interestingwith Maurice, because I actually

(54:37):
read, I have this, this bookthat the Swedish Foreign Office
published a couple of years agothat it's a Swedish diplomat who
writes about all the what'swhat's happening behind the
scenes from more or lessStockholm, the Stockholm. France

(55:00):
to the Rio Conference, and a lotof things with more strong and
more strong, he had actually hada close contact with the Swedish
Royals. So, so you had hadmeetings at the Swedish Royal
Castle a couple of times. Andso, very, very and it, it's,

(55:24):
it's just interesting to seethese kind of people, because
it's not like when we set upthis, this conference. We also
wanted to to make it appear likewe have this grassroot movements
that are demanding change. So atthe same time they they found

(55:52):
they founded the Friends of theEarth. Yes, the cop think it was
69 and do you know who gave themthe money to to friends of your
this environmental organizationwhere is known to be anti
capitalist and and very, veryradical. Do you know the name?

(56:17):
No, not familiar. Oh no. RobertoAnderson, the oil executive from
the Atlantic ritual Corporation,gave seed money to his little
organization and and they weremore or less created to give
this, because before this, theenvironmentalists were more in

(56:40):
the upper class, and they wereinto natural parks development,
and they were concerned aboutpopulation growth. Of course,
they were into eugenicistthoughts, and these things not
kind of a popular view, butduring the end of the 60s, they

(57:05):
changed this, and they set upFrance worth and also we have
this book, The Population Bomb,that was published in, I think
it was 69 as well. And to givethis impression that we have
this, all these grassrootsdemand, demanding that we less

(57:29):
people on earth, and that we aredestroying Earth, and Earth has
to be controlled, we also have alot of metaphors coming up at
the time, and books calledSpaceship Earth and so on. But
Earth is a little, little, smallplanet, and it has to be, have a

(57:52):
be manned by a crew that cansteer it in the right direction,
and it's so fragile andeverything so and in the middle
of this comes more strong and hethey also have, actually, in
Stockholm, a kind of a place.It's a former Air Base that set

(58:19):
up a camp with youth, and theyactually have this, Americans
coming over, like hippie types,and coming up with drugs and
stuff, yes, Yes to to make itthis, like youth rebellion

(58:42):
movement and and more strongcomes out and talks to these
used and everything and cameraseverywhere, yes, to give his
impression. And more strong, heeffectively manage this
conference and the conference,at the end, they decide that

(59:08):
Morris will head a newenvironmental Bureau the United
Nations Environmental Program.So and this was also a goal from
the from the this AspenInstitute and international,

(59:36):
environmental, environmental, Iforgot name, Aspen Institute,
verobito Anderson and JosephSlater and all these people,
very, very well connected to theoil industry, everybody. It's
kind of, it's kind of funny,just and after this, well,

WW (59:58):
it continues today. I. Mean some of the biggest promoters
currently, of you know, carbonoffsets, carbon emissions
trading, and a lot of theseproposed solutions are big oil
and big gas and some of thebiggest benefactors from the
Biden administration's verycontroversial inflation
Reduction Act, which was largelyclimate change, quote, unquote

(01:00:21):
related legislation wereactually oil companies,
including one that backed Trumpvery heavily, called Occidental
Petroleum, which has a verycontroversial history because of
it's a very intelligenceconnected long time head, a guy
named Armand Hammer, and hisinvolvement with people like
Samuel pisar of the RobertMaxwell network. And their goal,

(01:00:42):
along with, you know, they wereaffiliated with Kissinger and
largely this Rockefeller groupas well, to create basically the
world of the trans ideologicalCorporation, as how peace are
put it basically like knittingtogether.

JN (01:00:54):
They said, you said the occidental was it? Occidental
patrol? Yeah, Nelson Rockefellerwas a part of it, right, right?

WW (01:01:03):
Well, Al Gore, yeah, not surprising, either. But
basically, they've become a hugebenefactor of, you know, carbon
sequestration subsidies andthings of that nature. And a lot
of you know, the, I think, thebiggest lobbying group for
carbon emissions trading theoldest one, it's called i eta.
It's all the big, biggest oilcompanies in the world are

(01:01:27):
there. So the idea that big oiland big gas are against these
kind of solutions. I mean, asyou've been pointing out,
they've really been behind thisshift in environmental
consciousness, you know, for avery long time, and they stand
to arguably benefit the mostfrom what's being described as a
post oil era. But they designedthe post oil era. Yeah, they

JN (01:01:47):
did. That's the thing. What surprised me, I was once an
environmentalist. I was once amember of the Green Party in
Sweden and everything, and Ithought at that time that, okay,
it's the environmental movement.They have actually changed
things. They started to complainabout how these big corporations

(01:02:12):
were polluting the environmentand doing all these bad stuff.
But when I really starteddigging into it. It was, oh no,
they actually started theenvironmental movement.

WW (01:02:27):
Well, I think there were environmental movements, you
know, before this era, and youhad people focused on, at least
the United States, a lot ofchemical issues, for example, or
like, use of pesticides thatwere killing off, yes, native
wildlife and things like that.And now that has, as I said
earlier, has completely takenthe back seat to this other

(01:02:48):
stuff. And I think it absolutelyis possible to be an
environmentalist without, youknow, supporting carbon
emissions trading or a carbontax or carbon pricing schemes, I

JN (01:02:59):
would say, say that the difference is that we have local
environmental problems and wehave local groups, and these
have been always and now we haveand real environmentalists that
they they're worried about thebig wind farms and destroy this

(01:03:25):
destruction of the environmentand the forest in Sweden to
build this. But these are localgroups. But what I talk about is
the global, the

WW (01:03:36):
the big, the moneyed environmental. Mean,

JN (01:03:40):
we have a big it's like they are more like transnational
companies themselves, like whatGreenpeace became, and France
VR, they have these offices inAmsterdam, and they always only
talk about the big globalproblems. They don't talk about
small local problems. But we cando something about but really

(01:04:03):
affects people in the dailylife. It's just this big
problems that you don't can see,you can see how the climate,
that's invisible threats. Soit's a difference. So of course,
we always, we have realenvironmentalists. I would say

(01:04:25):
that I, myself is a realenvironmentalist, but I was kind
of scared of seeing that a lotof things that I believed in, it
was no problems, it was no realproblems, and that the real
problems was kind of, no, that'snot important. And I, and I
witnessed the change in in inthe Green Party in Sweden as

(01:04:49):
well. And they suddenly, atfirst, they were very much into
to local solutions and andcaring about. These small
problems that were close topeople, and instead, only
started to talk about climatechange and also start to say

(01:05:12):
that, no, before, we wereagainst the European Union, but
But now, because of the climate,climate we have to be a part of
the European Union. So theyabandoned every criticism at
that time. So and also thepeople involved in the party,

(01:05:37):
they started to talk abouttechnocratic solutions. It was
like they were totally hijacked.And now I think a lot of these
people that were involved havequit the party and now in the
more alternative movement. Yeah,

WW (01:05:55):
well, that would that that kind of makes sense, honestly,
because it is very frustratingto see a lot of things happen
and what are sold as solutionsto environmental crises, and
they're flagrantly predatory,and there's really no pushback
on them at all, except for, youknow, the the handful of us that
write about green finance andalternative media, like as an

(01:06:16):
example, one of the, you know,most frequently floated
solutions these days, and that'ssupported by these predatory
multilateral bankinginstitutions like the World Bank
and the IMF and what have youare things like climate debt for
climate swaps, you know, debtfor nature swaps, where,
essentially, you know, thesemultilateral development banking

(01:06:36):
institutions that were created,you know, at the same time the
UN essentially was created atthe close of the World War by
again, a lot of the same peopleinvolved there have been used to
essentially attack less wealthycountries with a form of debt
slavery, and now they're usingthat debt slavery to get people
to essentially give away theirNatural Resources to either

(01:07:00):
foreign banks or foreigncorporations or foreign NGOs
under the guise of conservation.But that's really not what's
happening at all, because it's ait's a retooling of something
that was pitched in the 1980sthe debt for land swap, which
was is basically just a way tosteal land, and Argentina in
particular, has been a bigtarget of that for some time,

(01:07:23):
but it's also, you know, reallyLatin American wide. And
essentially all of thoseprograms have been beta tested
most extensively in LatinAmerica, but of course, also in
Africa as well, which is anothermajor target of it. And
essentially what happens whenthese agreements happen is that
locals are unable to access theenvironment. So, for example, a
lot of the coastal ones thatmanage, like coastal marine

(01:07:46):
environments as part of thesedebt for climate swaps prevent
locals from accessing the beachat all, or engaging in local
fishing or anything like that.And they're essentially designed
to, you know, force locals outof the way they've been living
for a very long time, which isarguably sustainable, right,

(01:08:06):
but, but sort of force theminto, you know, other means, and
allow a lot of these big banksthat are ultimately behind a lot
of the stuff to sort of price,to sort of sell These ecosystems
as blue carbon credits whenthey're marine ecosystems, or
green carbon credits whenthey're forests. And all of this

(01:08:27):
as part of these sort of, youknow, efforts to sort of add
what they call natural assetsto, you know, their balance
sheets and what have you since,allow, you know, as I've written
before, you know, there's thisidea of, and it comes downstream
of the Rockefeller Foundation aswell, this whole idea of, for
example, the natural assetCorporation and taking control

(01:08:49):
of natural assets that werepreviously part of the public
commons. You know, the the goalis to essentially financialize
nature, but have it essentiallybe bought by people who don't
live there. And this has beengetting really crazy, to the
point where you now have acompany that's run by a former
Black Rock executive thatinvented exchange traded funds
or ETFs. Is has is turning eachhectare of the Amazon rainforest

(01:09:13):
into a security that you can buywith a guy that used to be a
board member of Trump's truthsocial parent company, and
essentially what they're doingto locals is that they have
local indigenous groups livingin the Amazon sign these
contracts in exchange for what'sessentially very little money.

(01:09:35):
In terms of what they're givingaway. I think it's like $10,000
and they lose sovereignty overtheir land. The company doing
the securitization of theAmazon, which is called one
Amazon, can bring any group theywant into the forest without the
local people knowing or havingto give their consent. They're
under constant surveillance,surveillance because one Amazon

(01:09:58):
is also aiming to. Wire up theentire Amazon to some sort of
internet grid that they call theInternet of forests. So like the
internet of things, but for theInternet of trees, basically.
And they say it's aboutconservation, but they also say
in a separate white paper thatit's about harvesting the
biological data from the treesand then monetizing that so they

(01:10:20):
can make more money. Andessentially, these indigenous
people lose their sovereigntyand are under constant
surveillance from from foreignpowers, really, in exchange for
a one time payment of like,$10,000 while these guys are
going to laugh all the way tothe bank by securitizing the
whole rainforest and covering itwith sensors and stuff and drone

(01:10:41):
swarms. Doesn't that soundenvironmentally friendly? Yeah,
so,

JN (01:10:45):
of course,

WW (01:10:48):
but this is, unfortunately, what a lot of people are
getting. And I do get frustratedwith people who are very
unwilling to question thesolutions that are being foisted
upon us, because for people thatare concerned about the
environment. How do you not seethat? It's absolutely bonkers.
And so I hope someday people onthe left will start to figure it

(01:11:09):
out. I mean, there's plenty ofpeople on the right that have
figured things out to an extent,but again, there's a lot of
prominent right wing figures, atleast with the incoming Trump
administration in the US. Youknow, there are figures that are
set to serve in thatadministration that are openly
committed to implementing theSDGs, like Howard, let me I
mentioned earlier, his company,Cantor Fitzgerald has a whole

(01:11:30):
fund dedicated to SDGimplementation and, quote,
unquote, sustainability. And youknow, Elon Musk, for example, a
big proponent of carbon taxesfor a very long time, and, of
course, an electoral electricvehicle magnet. Yeah, he

JN (01:11:47):
has earned a fortune on on climate policy, yeah, so we've
changing the cars to to electricone. So it's right,

WW (01:11:58):
which comes with a major environmental cost as well. All
of the mining for the cobalt,the nickel in the lithium,
required that that environmentalcost is very substantial and
doesn't really get discussedvery often, does it? But I
suspect there's going to be aneffort, even even though Trump
is has framed himself in thepast as a climate skeptic,
pulling out of the ParisAgreement and things like that.

(01:12:19):
It seems like the I think it'svery likely that in the next
administration, you're going tosee some form of carbon pricing
or carbon emissions trading,which were originally Republican
ideas. Anyway, it was George H WBush,

JN (01:12:31):
and this time, has Trump talked anything about the Paris
Agreement? This time? No.

WW (01:12:39):
And actually, Elon Musk quit the advisory boards he was on in
the previous Trumpadministration, saying, You
quit, Paris, I quit. You toTrump. But they've teamed up
again. So I guess theirdifferences there must have
been. They have already playedthat

JN (01:12:53):
card. Yes. And

WW (01:12:54):
then Howard lutnic, who I mentioned earlier, who's
essentially helped chosen theentire Trump cabinet and is now
going to serve in it. It was oneof the earliest pioneers of
carbon emissions trading, andalso it's precursor sulfur
emissions trading under the thefirst Bush administration. But,
you know, they had a theycreated a whole electronic
carbon trading platform, like assoon as the Kyoto Protocol was

(01:13:17):
signed in the late 90s, andhave, you know, operated that
ever since. So we'll see whathappens. Anyway, I there are
some other things in your workthat I do want to cover before
we run out of time. So if wecould pivot to some other things
that are related to the UnitedNations, but not necessarily its

(01:13:38):
role in hijacking, hijacking,modern environmentalism, I would
like to do that, if that's okaywith you. Yeah, great. So you've
written a good bit on some ofthe recent UN packs and
documents that have come out,one of which is the UN our
common agenda document, and thatreveals what some of the UN's

(01:13:59):
policy goals are, if the UNsucceeds in obtaining what it
calls multilateralism withteeth, meaning the power to
enforce its policies on memberstates, whether they want it or
not. And these include auniversal digital ID, an apex
body for the global economy,behavioral design, techniques,

(01:14:20):
space technology to monitorcarbon emissions, which we
talked about a minute ago, amongothers. So in my opinion, in the
US and beyond, we're seeing aneffort to sell a lot of these
policies to both left and right,including to those who were
concerned just a few years agowhen, you know, during the COVID
era, and there was the formalannouncement of the great reset

(01:14:40):
and so on. So what are yourfeelings about that? Do you
think that's happening as well,or do you think there is some
sort of force that's publiclynot pushing to implement these
policies?

JN (01:14:51):
Yes, I can't see that. We have some someone that really is
pushing against this. And. Uh,if you look into to the this
process with our common agenda,it's been going on for a long
time, and we had this packed forthe future in just two months

(01:15:14):
ago, almost to the day,actually. And it was very, very
little resistance to this andand this was a document agreed
upon before it was no vote onthe outcome document. There were

(01:15:36):
some countries that have someconcerns about it, but in the
end, they gave in, and maybesome of the things included in
the pact or proposed were notpart of the end document. But
it's not like, it's not, butit's, it's a tiny part, but the

(01:16:02):
pact is huge. It's a lot ofthings covered in this. So, so a
lot of these, they have alreadyagreed upon. And it's, it's a,
and I say, this is a Fabianmethod, with all these small
steps all the time. So,gradualism, gradualism, yeah,

(01:16:22):
exactly. And, and also it'slike, when, when you negotiate,
you aim for a lot, you said youand you say, I want. It's like
Donald Trump is doingnegotiating. He aims very high.

(01:16:46):
And both in the other end of anegotiation, they go the middle
way and they feel okay. Wedidn't get that the most bad
things in the end, but they got,they got a lot, because that's
how you do it. When younegotiate, you come up with all

(01:17:09):
these solutions that can feellike far out ideas, but and
you're open and feel that theyhave won something. So I see
that everything that also hasbeen proposed will come back at

(01:17:32):
a later time. It's like they hadthis, one of the one of the big
things in in our common agendaand the pack for future is the
emergency platform. I thinkthat's the one of the most
dangerous things they have comeup with, which is essentially

(01:17:58):
giving United Nations SecretaryGeneral, the right to declare a
global emergency, and that willmake and their predetermined
actors that they have they havedecided upon, big corporations

(01:18:20):
and governments and andinstitutions and academia and
NGOs, a group, a network thatwill act upon command When this
emergency is declared, andfollowing protocols to the data

(01:18:41):
and and not tolerating anyopposing view. That's that's
very, very, really scary shit.And they actually wanted to to
have the Club of Rome, and thesepeople something called the
climate governance commission, alot of Club of Rome people, and

(01:19:04):
also try out through commission,people involved. They wanted to
to have this declaration aglobal emergency already two
months ago, at this summit ofthe future didn't happen, but,
but it's like, but they preparethe world for such an event. Now

(01:19:29):
they have forced people to talkabout they have the United
Nations system is adjustingitself, preparing and all in the
background, we all have allthese things happening and and

(01:19:50):
also, I was just reading througha document from my from the
Swedish government, because theyare preparing change and
becomes. Institution that givesthe government the right to
declare an emergency without theparliament involved. So and

(01:20:15):
this, and that's that's also areason that Sweden were kind of
more soft in their approachduring the pandemic. We didn't
have that those tools for thefor the government always based
on recommendations, but now theyare preparing for so I think

(01:20:36):
this, but we said we want aglobal emergency declared now.
Okay, but the nations are notcompletely ready, because they
have to have legislation inplace for so this emergency
platform that wasn't part of thepact. It was just United Nations

(01:20:59):
will come up with proposals onhow to solve a big global
emergency if it comes, and wewill decide later it's like, I
think it will spring up at alater date, perhaps. And I have

(01:21:22):
written about this in in in acouple of articles about this
summit of the future, of apacked food future that the
incoming Trump administration,and also the new European Union
Administration, they will haveto deal with a couple of global

(01:21:43):
crisis, maybe, but they refer toas poly crisis, yeah. So, so it
will be okay. We didn't get whatwe wanted this time. But, and I
think even if they had had thisemergency platform established

(01:22:07):
now, they would still haveglobal emergency it's and to
test it, but this time, we don'thave it. So now we have to have
this global polar crisis to showthe world the need for VISTA

(01:22:28):
modulus platform. So that's oneof the big things. So if you
actually look into all thepolitical processes that is
going on around like the UnitedNations, you can see that they
all have prepared a lot ofthings already for the next step

(01:22:52):
in this. And for example, theyhave, they decided upon a change
in organization United Nations,2.0 that is, and that's you
talked a lot about this withwith surveilling the forest and

(01:23:15):
so on. And that's comes intothis, because it's essentially
about this construction of theworld brain, written a lot about
it. And I, actually we, I wrotean article in the same solar
report that you did about theworld brain, the digital world

(01:23:37):
brain, and that's what I see, isthe goal that is the end goal,
to have this more or lessperfect system that gives these,
these people with billionairePeople, with United Nations

(01:23:58):
bureaucrats and the thetechnocrats, and the possibility
to to actually look into thefuture with a collection of
every data and all the data,yes, all the data and and also
this with, there's A lot ofpreparation now for for

(01:24:21):
artificial intelligence the nextstep?

WW (01:24:23):
Oh, absolutely, yeah. And I think there's going to be an
unprecedented effort to sell itin certain countries differently
as well. So I think you'reabsolutely right about the goal
for the UN to be sort of a defacto digital world brain.
Because ultimately, a lot of thework that I've done, most of it
in collaboration with Ian Davis,has focused on how a lot of the

(01:24:46):
efforts to, for example, marketdigital IDs is going to be
framing it as decentralized andvendor agnostic. But ultimately,
the standards of all the digitalIDs are going to be the same
globally, and they can exporttheir data. Data in the same
format, and certain entities,generally, the UN or groups like

(01:25:06):
the World Bank affiliates, aregoing to be housing the bulk of
that data for all the countries.So maybe so the idea, as it
appears right now, is to sort ofgive the appearance that it's
not the same system, but thedata will be harvested and sent
to the same place and then used,you know, by that whatever

(01:25:28):
entity is housing it to youknow, to be analyzed, to develop
certain AI algorithms and to youknow, make, you know, policy,
technocratic policy decisionsfrom that data, and then have
them be sold elsewhere. And Ithink they're going to try, and
I don't know, market those underdifferent metrics to different

(01:25:50):
populations. So obviously theway they'd market it in China
versus the United States, Ithink, is going to be, you know,
quite different and so and but Ithink you can see sort of what
the marketing pitches are fordigital ID. If you look at the
five eyes countries, forexample, which you know the
which is basically the Englishspeaking world. So in places

(01:26:12):
like the United Kingdom orAustralia, when you know the
current Australian government ispushing through, you know,
digital ID for verification toaccess social media under the
guise of protecting kids fromonline harm. It's very similar
the argument in Britain as well,at least when it's the Labor
Party doing the talking, orthey'll say it's hate speech as

(01:26:35):
well, protecting me from hatespeech. But in you know, the
conservatives, the opposition,ostensible opposition, in
Britain, for example, marketedthe same policy, essentially,
but as a solution to illegalimmigration, right and so
obviously, right leaning basesin the West are concerned about
illegal immigration, which hasbeen allowed by both left and

(01:26:55):
right to happen, and they arguethat that is the only solution
for that. And that is true alsoin the United States, where
Donald Trump has proposed abiometric Entry Exit tracking
system that he says is veryprecise for anyone that's coming
into or out of the US, whichincludes any American citizen
that wants to travel abroad, sonot just foreigners. Yes, and

(01:27:19):
that this would be a way tocontrol illegal immigration, but
ultimately, it's the samepolicy. You get stuck with the
same crap at the end of the day,but the way it's being sold to
you is different, and I think,meant to appeal to different
demographics, particularly thosewho might resist that policy
more. Yeah,

JN (01:27:38):
exactly. I mean, it's, it's the same in Sweden, we had, we
had a Conservative government,like 10 years ago, and we had
the Prime Minister, he said, wehave to open our hearts. We have

(01:28:01):
to let all of these people inSweden and be generous. And when
he left the office, and theSocial Democrats came to power,
a new prime minister, and thenwe had this big refugee crisis,
and it was so problematiceverywhere. And a couple of

(01:28:25):
years later, we had lots ofcriminality, lots of problem,
lots of shootings, bombings andeverything, things that happened
in Sweden before, and even in myhome city, it's gangs shooting
at each other, and outside mygrocery store that I go to

(01:28:50):
almost every day, a young boywas shot to death, and it was
such horrible things going onand and the social democrat
government, they couldn't handleit. And they said, Okay, we have
to stop immigration, so we haveto do something. And it became

(01:29:15):
problematic with the government,possibly Green Party wouldn't,
didn't like this. They wantedthe immigrants to come to Sweden
and so and then a new, theSocial Democrats lost power
because of this, and instead,the new, the Conservatives came

(01:29:35):
to power again. Remember now theprime minister before the
conservative he said, open yourhearts, let the people in when
the problem hit. And then comesthe New Conservative Party, not
the same Prime Minister as thattime, but a new and he says, Now

(01:29:58):
we're going to take care of. Isthe immigrants. We're going to
the criminality and and theydecided very, very quickly when
we came to power, together witha populist party in Sweden
called Sweden Democrats that gota huge following of the people

(01:30:19):
that were tired of whathappening with the immigrant
wave, and now we said we'regoing to now we're going to have
more policing, we're going tohave more surveillance and put
cameras everywhere. So now theyhad this decision earlier this

(01:30:43):
year, or it was later last yearthat now it's allowed to have
this security zones and also putup cameras on the streets. But
we didn't have before, and ittook two days and before they

(01:31:03):
put up this new security allover the town. So so it's it's
obvious how they are doing thisand and also how it doesn't
matter who's in power, who's incharge, the left or the right.

(01:31:28):
The left, of course, they willuse the digital ID for for the
environmental concerns or orhealth concerns, and the right
will do it out of concern of thepeople, the immigrants. So

WW (01:31:48):
Well, I think once it's there, they're going to try and
mix them all together. So likethe World Bank, for example, is
poised right now, at least,seemingly, to be one of the main
data depositories for digital IDglobally, with its ID 40
database, and they're also inthe process of developing
blockchain based climatewallets. Isn't that nice? So, so

(01:32:10):
it seems like the goal is sortof to link them together. And
there's also, you know, I thinkone thing that gets left at the
equation, because there's plentyof people that talk about the
digitalization of of money, butit really goes hand in hand with
the efforts to, you know,financialize nature and turn
nature into tradable financialproducts under the guise of

(01:32:31):
combating climate change,because then there can be
monetary incentives for you tohave your climate wallet you can
get, who knows what token that'sbased on. I mean, the scammy guy
that used to run we work, right,came back with a carbon market
scam and produced the goddessnature token, right? So you can,
you know, hold some of those andfeel like you're saving the

(01:32:53):
environment and whatever, whileyou get your de facto cbdc and
things like that. And I thinkit's important to keep in mind
in discussing all of this, thatthe name of the game, and the UN
has said it itself, is thepublic private partnership. And
just like they like to ping pongus around by going from left to
right whenever it suits them, orwhenever people get tired and

(01:33:15):
fed up with one of the sides,they do that too with the public
private thing. And so I thinkyou know, concerns, for example,
about a central bank digitalcurrency, which would be a
public sector, right? Digitalcurrency, there's been a lot of
a dramatic lack of focus onprivate sector digital
currencies that are just asOrwellian and surveillance and
programmable as CBDCs would be.And, you know, stable coins, for

(01:33:38):
example. And how these arebeing, you know, pushed around
under similar metrics and couldeasily be interfaced with some
sort of, you know, carbonemission, carbon limiting, you
know, finance edict that'seventually foisted upon us. But
really, I think, you know, thecornerstone of a lot of these
agendas are digital ID. Youknow, I think about roughly half

(01:34:00):
of all of the SDG indicatorscan't be implemented without a
digital ID, which is why I thinkit's so important to opt out of
that, and that people shouldreally be focusing on that
instead of, you know, whatcertain politicians are saying
and doing, because they seem toall agree on the policy agendas
at least once they're in power.And you know, even though they
frame it under differentmetrics, perhaps, and have

(01:34:22):
different sales pitches. But ifdigital ID fails to be widely
adopted, then you know thiswhole agenda, essentially, will
have a lot of difficulty goingforward, and they have to sell
it as voluntary, at least atfirst. So I think there's a lot
of hope in that endeavor. Sobefore we run out of time, I did
want to touch base about acouple other things that you've

(01:34:42):
brought up in the context ofyour work on the global digital
brain and things of that nature.So in some of your work, you've
mapped out the effort ofunlinked figures over the
decades that have called for adevelopment of a new global
consciousness, and along withit, an effort to sort of
homogenize thought and culture.Sure. So, how did this techno
spiritual policy develop, andwhat is the end goal? And do you

(01:35:05):
see this homogenization,homogenization as already
happening to some degree?

JN (01:35:10):
Well, this, this ideas sprang out of the Club of Rome
and guy called Ervin lasslo,that's a system theorist and
heavily involved in UnitedNations, and was responsible for
the new international economicorder project at the United

(01:35:34):
Nations in the 70s, and theydiscussed at the Club of Rome
how we could develop a newglobal consciousness and and he
came up with the idea in andstarted a organization called
the club of Budapest in 1992 or19 three, right after the Rio

(01:36:02):
meeting in Rio de Janeiro, themeeting that was headed by more
strong and the and the agenda 21that when the agenda 21 doctrine
was born, and Laszlo and theclub of Bucha pest, they started

(01:36:25):
to work with a lot ofinfluential people, and among
them were Michel Gorbachev, theformer leader of the Soviet
Union. And they also started,they contacted a lot of people
involved in culture, of course,and also religious leaders, to

(01:36:50):
to fuse together these ideas,and then started to talk about
how global culture couldflourish, and they also were on
board, a lot of these people insomething called the Great
Transition Initiative thatessentially talked about, how

(01:37:17):
can we create this new planetarysociety with this global
consciousness, we released areport in in 2002 called the
Great Transition. Funding camefrom the Rockefeller Foundation,
United environmental program,and also, as always, as I cover

(01:37:43):
a lot of in my my Rockefellerbook and other books a very
close Swedish connection with aStockholm Environment Institute.
And they said that in order toto create this new planetary
civilization, we have to have amovement. We have to create a

(01:38:05):
movement of people that havethis new identity, but don't
have the national identities.They have to have a new common
global identity. And theystarted to fund a lot of NGOs

(01:38:27):
that were operating to changepeople and also to connect
people with these ideas. Andthis was called the widening
circle. And started in, I thinkit was in 2006 and was

(01:38:50):
interesting, also, with thisglobal transition, it was that
they said that, in order tochange, there will be a lot of
crisis coming, and we know whathappened in 2001 just before
this report came out, or vilaslaactually wrote and published a

(01:39:14):
book called macro shift in twothe ninth September of 2001 and
at the same day, we had ameeting in in Vermont. There
they had, we celebrated theearth shorter at that meeting,

(01:39:42):
and they had an artist that hadcreated a new like the Ark of a
covenant, but where they placedthis earth shorter, and that's
kind of this global.Consciousness, mindset and these

(01:40:03):
ideas, and they placed it inthis New Covenant. And when the
911 attack happened, theydecided to take this covenant in
a procession go taking a walkall the way from Vermont to New

(01:40:28):
York. And they wanted to placeit in United Nations
Headquarters, but for somereason, it was not possible to
put it there at that time. Sothey so they put it in the guard
box. And the guard box, that'sthe nickname of the interfaith

(01:40:50):
house in very close MorningsideHeights, Morningside driver, I
think it's called very close toColumbia University, and that's
where the Rockefeller BrothersFund her office. So we put this
new company up there and and ifyou go into the Irving lasslo,

(01:41:16):
and because it's a lot of otherthings that's happening there,
they also talk about technologyand how we're going to to create
this global consciousness.Because one thing has been
through the internet. Internethas been the first part of this,

(01:41:38):
bringing people together fromall over the world and and
through that, you can start tochange the mindset. But the next
step also is, is kind of connecteveryone through the internet of
everything, and that's when itcomes really scary. They

(01:42:01):
actually was involved in in aproject called the nose for
project that discusses the braincomputer interfaces and how
people would be connected tothis in the future. And we
started some pilot projects. Soit's and it's very, very, very

(01:42:24):
strange things. When I found outthis, like in I think it's 2010
I was starting to investigatethis about the nose forum and
but since things has happened,and as we know with the Fourth
Industrial Revolution, all thesetechnologies that were more or

(01:42:46):
less sci fi and far out, theywere now on the table and and
now we have Elon Musk with hishis hubris projects promoting
these, uh, these things as well.Yeah,

WW (01:43:04):
yeah. Well, um, in your work, you sort of link, uh, a
lot of what you discussed aboutdeveloping this new global
consciousness. A lot of thefigures involved in that you've
noted have argued that humanitymust merge with technology in
order to survive. And of course,one of the most well known
recent proponents of that viewis Elon Musk. So can you expand

(01:43:26):
on sort of that particularviewpoint in the context of this
and how it might differ fromtranshumanism, and what it
ultimately leads to, in yourview?

JN (01:43:35):
Well, this is Elon Musk. He has talked for a long time about
the threat of artificialintelligence that

WW (01:43:44):
he's helping develop. Yes,

JN (01:43:48):
exactly so. But in order to survive from the threat of AI,
it's better to fuse with it,become one with AI so we can
stand a chance. I think that'sthe most stupid things I ever
heard

WW (01:44:09):
with you. And also

JN (01:44:11):
the thing with Elon Musk as the savior now and the
alternative world of Hooray Elonis is coming here as a
superhero, and

WW (01:44:27):
also he was placed in the Iron Man movies. Yeah, the Iron
Man movies had a significantcontract with the Pentagon,
actually, as part of producingthose movies. And at the time,
Elon Musk was already a pentagoncontractor. You find that
overlap interesting.

JN (01:44:46):
You wouldn't come that far and be that rich if you weren't
well connected to that systemfrom the beginning. So, yeah,

WW (01:44:55):
something like that. Yeah. So anyway. Do you Do you think
it ties in? I know that some ofyour work on this also has sort
of tied in with the new agemovement, and connections to
that of this effort to develop aglobal consciousness as well.
And where do you see sort ofthis transhumanist style thing

(01:45:16):
we have to merge with machine tosurvive? Does it connect at all
with, you know that sort ofrelated New Age movement that's
also tied to some of theseentities? Yeah,

JN (01:45:25):
it does. It does a very if you go into, I've written a lot
of this in my my book The Globalcoup d'etat. That's, that's,
that's another book that waspublished this autumn by sky
horse and I wrote a lot aboutthe New Age movement and how

(01:45:49):
they are. It's kind of they giveanother version of the Klaus
Schwab world the the fourthindustrial revolution. They they
have their own kind of Hip, hiptechnocracy, and and and hip and
space technocracy. So you alwaysend up with this. If you go into

(01:46:15):
to the proponents of these inNew Age ideas, it's always about
fantastic space technologies.That's going to say we asked,
rebranded the Fourth IndustrialRevolution and given a more
fluffy way. But we can also findin New Age. I mean, new age

(01:46:38):
comes from something comes fromthe occult world. It's a lot of
women about the term New Age.It's Alice Bailey and the
theosophy. And we findconnection also to Crowley and a
lot of that's what I write aboutin my book that comes out in

(01:47:02):
December, the book called Templeof Solomon, but I explain the
occult background to all ofthese ideas, and That's
basically the transhuman ideas.It's about perfecting,
perfecting yourself become abetter person. And that's, of

(01:47:27):
course, that can be a goodthing. Everybody. Everybody
wants to be a better person, butit's very and I state that in
the book, it's impossible tobecome perfect, but with the
help of technology this has wecan find it in like Freemasonry,
for example, and and other withsecret societies to talk about

(01:47:53):
this and and we have also offersthat has connected With with
technology development that goeshand in hand with this ideas,
with philosophies of of ofperfection and and how it can be
achieved. So so I have that hasbeen one, one of the things that

(01:48:15):
I want to do for a long time,because I started, started very
like 15 years ago withenvironmental movement and how
we were funded by the oilindustry. But I soon found out
that there was a lot of thingsgoing on connected to the New
Age world and with occultsignificance and and also that

(01:48:42):
the techno technologicaldevelopment of the world has
almost also be, almost alwaysbeen very close to to occult
ideas. And we can take example,Nikola Tesla and so on. Where we
have, they had people that hashave almost occult abilities

(01:49:06):
also? So it's a, it's a very,very I found, I found, when I
was doing research, a very, veryinteresting story that goes back
a long time.

WW (01:49:22):
Great. Well, thanks for sharing that. I definitely think
it's worth looking into,especially in the context of the
whole temple of Solomon thing.Because I think it's I was
really interested to read inyour work the I forget exactly
who it was, what a particularfigure, in his view, felt that
the rebuilding of the so calledThird Temple, Temple of Solomon,

(01:49:43):
was to have essentially all ofhumanity, like linked up through
technological means and sort ofdevelop some sort of, like
shared hive mind. Yeah,

JN (01:49:52):
yeah. That's, that's Oliver Reiser. But I have been written
a lot about and Oliver Reiser,um. Had some students. One of
them was Ovid Laszlo that Imentioned. Yeah,

WW (01:50:06):
I just find that interesting in the context of a lot of
what's going on right now, forexample, in Israel and
Palestine, and even a lot ofappointees in the incoming Trump
administration rather openlysignaling their desire to see
the Third Temple rebuilt, andalso figures in the current
Netanyahu led Israeli governmentsaying that as well. And a lot

(01:50:28):
of what that the significancethat would have an eschatology
and sort of this other viewpropagated here about the idea
that it's really about creatinglike this internet of bodies,
Fourth Industrial Revolution,kind of it is a hive mind
paradigm. And it's interestingwhen you consider too that the

(01:50:50):
first prime minister of Israel,David Ben Gurion, was predicted,
quote, unquote, in the 1960sthat the future, a future world
government would emerge inJerusalem would be its capital,
and sort of he also hadinteresting views on the quote,
unquote, Third Temple and whatthat would mean. So definitely a

(01:51:11):
lot to consider there,especially when you consider
that there's a lot of overtsignaling from people like Peter
Thiel and figures that he fundsand alternative media about the
age of the Antichrist is here,and things of that nature and
how things are going, I thinkpeople are going to be taken for
quite the ride. If thatindicates anything. I mean, if

(01:51:37):
you've someone like Peter Thiel,a you know, steering committee
guy on Bilderberg and, yeah, anda big backer of, you know, the
current incoming Vice Presidentof the United States and things
like that, openly saying, youknow, the Antichrist is almost
here. Guys, yes, it's verystrange times. So definitely

(01:51:59):
interesting to consider. Some ofthese occult things too, and
also, you know, in terms of justthe development of of Zionism in
general, it's interesting thatTheodore Herzl, who's often
considered the father ofZionism, he was actually in his
early days, anyway, promotingZionism really sort of handled

(01:52:20):
by a British diplomat who, Ibelieve his name was William
heckler, who happened to be aFreemason obsessed with
rebuilding Solomon's temple inthe Middle East. So there's a
lot of history there. I guess

JN (01:52:33):
it's connections to the round table, the movement. Yeah,

WW (01:52:37):
right. So I think anyone interested in that should
definitely check out your bookin December, and I've written
some some on these issues in thepast, and we'll put that in the
in the show notes as well, foranyone interested. So thanks so
much for your time today, Jacoband I was wondering if you could
share with my audience wherethey can find your books and
your work and how they cansupport you.

JN (01:52:57):
Yes, well, you can find some of our books and the new one at
my own web store. Can find itthrough jacobnordangard.sc but
you can also find my books atthe enemy store. I'm a song or

(01:53:21):
sky, or directly from Sky horse.And I have two books out that is
released in United States now.That's Rockefeller controlling
the game and the global coupd'etat. And this third one can
only be bought directly from me,because it's a very, very
special book, limited editionand and also contains, actually

(01:53:46):
a soundtrack by my own band. Itry to do. It's a kind of an art
project as well, and I havewanted to kind of express I've
worked with an with an artist,an illustrator, and wanted to
make something that is generallycreative, instead with, instead

(01:54:14):
of this AI stuff that it'scoming all the time now and yes
yes, to to promote truehumanity. And so, so that's I
wanted to, I've always wanted toconnect these things, but
remember my writing things withmy artistic side. So, so that's,

(01:54:34):
it's a special product that'sbeen a very, very

WW (01:54:37):
commendable, and I think a model that other people in media
should follow, and instead ofembracing the quote, unquote,
convenience of AI generatedproducts as much as possible

JN (01:54:51):
and also support people that that's one of the things that I
want to do, I want to supportother artistic people and give.
The chance to to come up with,come out with a work and
actually earn something from it.So I think it's important, but
we help each other with this aswell. Well,

WW (01:55:11):
I definitely agree with that. You. Thank you so much for
your time, and thank you toeveryone who tuned into this
episode. If you enjoyed it,please share it around, and
please consider supporting thispodcast, we couldn't do it
without you. Thanks so mucheverybody and catch You all in
The next episode.

Unknown (01:55:42):
You

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

Stuff You Should Know

Dateline NBC

24/7 News: The Latest

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}The UN, the Rockefellers & Digital Control with Jacob Nordangard

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

.css-r6mb8g{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:1;overflow:hidden;}Stuff You Should Know

Dateline NBC

24/7 News: The Latest

All Episodes

The UN, the Rockefellers & Digital Control with Jacob Nordangard

Stuff You Should Know