PDF Version: Sandi Adams & Brian Gerrish – Agenda 21_2030 Analysis Part 1

Part 2 link.

SPEAKERS

Sandi Adams, Brian Gerrish

Brian Gerrish  00:31

Good morning. It is Tuesday the 6th of September 2022. I’m here in the UK Column studio. And I’m delighted to be joined by Sandi Adams today. Now I’ve known Sandi for a long time, a long time. And in that time, she has been doing some really great work researching, well initially Agenda 21. But that transformed, I’m gonna use that word deliberately, transformed into Agenda 2030. So we’re gonna have a very interesting interview today. And Sandi, welcome to the UK Column studio.

Sandi Adams  01:11

Thank you, Brian. It’s great to be here. Thank you.

Brian Gerrish  01:14

Okay. All right. Well, we’ve got a huge subject. And you have done a huge amount of research. You’ve given me for today, a really comprehensive package of slides, and we’re gonna choose some of those to emphasise what we’re talking about. But first of all, for the audience as a whole, just give us a little bit of background about yourself. And really, who are you? What have you done in your life? And how did you go from being a normal person, let’s use that expression. How did you go from being a normal person, to a deep researcher in all matters to do with Agenda 21 and 2030?

Sandi Adams  01:56

Well, it’s interesting, my journey really started, I mean I started off my life at art school. I was really into, I was very creative. And I went and studied set design, and I became a set designer in the theatre, and I worked at the Old Vic and the National Theatre, and loved working in theatre, it was very arty, it was all lovely. And then as my life progressed, I found myself in television a little bit, and film and music videos and stuff. But when I had my children, you know, it’s the same thing, you get saffed with a mortgage, you have to earn money to keep your family and I migrated, sadly, into corporate live events. And that’s where my big awakening came because I started working with all the, you know, designing live events for people like Google, GlaxoSmithKline, Microsoft, and I encountered these people, and I had this almost visceral, you know, sort of aversion to what I was doing. And it really came to me when I was working for Microsoft, because I did actually meet Bill Gates once, when he was with Microsoft, and he was creating infrastructure to go into the home and our world and I had to create a whole, if you like, an experience, it was a walk through experience in Chelsea, and it was called Microsoft Life. And it was bringing all this technology into, I had to create a London Square, it was called London, it was called Microsoft Life. And I was a designer on it. And I had to put, all the techie guys came and put all the infrastructure in, and I had to create a an intelligent cafe, an intelligent business and intelligence, there were vehicles in the square that were intelligent, all this technology had gone into it.  And Trevor McDonald came and interviewed Bill Gates in the home, we had an intelligent home as well. And interviewed him on the sofa about this whole installation that would actually become a reality. And that’s when I started thinking, this is awful. This is not the way, I could somehow see the future and how far it might go.  And then I worked for Google and they were doing very, very strange things. And I met Eric Schmidt, didn’t like him. I met him in a bar once on a job in Dublin. And you know, he was bragging about having, you know, breakfast with George Bush every week, he and Jared Cohen, and I just thought these people and they were very entitled, and I had to get out of it. And I had such an aversion to the work I was doing. I simply, I had a bit of a breakthrough, break down, whatever you want to call it. I decided I didn’t want to work in that industry anymore. And it caused the break up of my marriage, it caused me to flee to the West Country, where I started really researching Agenda 21, and then saw it in action when the levels flooded in 2014.  And then I started doing talks on it and really went deep into Agenda 21. And at that point, I thought it was all to do with climate change, and that they would bring in all this draconian and all these draconian measures, through climate change by making us feel guilty about the planet. Didn’t realise it would go way beyond that, and that we’d end up in the metaverse.

Brian Gerrish  05:36

My goodness you have given us some fascinating stuff there. Just, I gotta ask, so what did you think of Bill Gates?

Sandi Adams  05:44

It was very, very strange. He was chauffeured into Chelsea from Battersea, he had helicoptered from, I suppose Heathrow, ahe was there all day, because he was doing these interviews with the BBC. And we had to meet him and I had to, I shook his hand and it was clammy, I got an absolute awful feeling about him. I don’t know. That’s all I can say is I didn’t like him. And he was very odd. He didn’t eat anything all day, but had lots of PAs, you know, attending to all his needs. And all he wanted was crisps and Coca Cola. And it was very odd. Yeah, very strange.

Brian Gerrish  06:29

And just remind me, what date was that roughly?

Sandi Adams  06:34

That’s what I’m trying to remember, now Microsoft life must have been around 2003 or 2004. I can’t remember. It was early 2000s. It was early 2000s. It’s all a bit of a blur now. I’ve still got all the pictures of what I did, you know, the installation and how we took over an old school and turned it into this installation. It was a school in Chelsea.

Brian Gerrish  07:01

When you talk about the intelligence set. So you mentioned an intelligent home and a cafe and intelligent vehicles. What did that mean? What were you actually demonstrating to the public under the label of intelligent?

Sandi Adams  07:20

Well, prior to Microsoft Life, we’ve done Microsoft home, which he [Bill Gates] didn’t come to, that was in Notting Hill, and we took over a big house. And it  was simple things like, on the walls they had digi frames, where, you know, your pictures changed on a circuit. You had an intelligent fridge that told you when you were running out of things. You had intelligent heating that would come on, [and] as you’re driving home, you could run yourself a bath and stuff like that. It was all things that sounded really nice, you know, and simplified your life. It was just all that techy stuff coming into the home. The fridge would tell you if you’re running out of food or, or would make a list for you. And it was all, you know, sort of an intelligent hub that was in the house. And then it progressed to you know, the life the Microsoft Life, which is what we created in Chelsea. So in the cafe, you had digi frames. Everything was digitalized. You had no cash. It was all digitalized, you know all that kind of stuff. And there was an intelligent business that happened to be a printer. I was dealing with the design. So I didn’t really get into all the techie stuff, to be honest, I wasn’t really interested in it at that point.  But I could see that, and obviously in the square you had vehicles that had sat nav, which to us at that point was unbelievable that you would have sat nav, and you’d have a car that was intelligent, that would be telling you what it needed and what you know, it would talk to you stuff like that. So it was yeah, it was quite, for that time it was because really, the real sort of if you’d like the internet, had only come in in the 90s and we were in the early 2000s. And this technology seemed unbelievable, at the time,

Brian Gerrish  09:21

Isn’t that fantastic? And of course you’re now in the position you can look back. You can see what’s around you now and you can look back and of course, if we just take one of those things, the intelligent vehicles they are now testing driverless cars and driverless lorries, and I believe in America, they are also testing linked lorries. So it’s not just one driverless vehicle. It’s towing several trailer like a road train. And these are happening. And of course, they can only happen with the use of GPS or sat nav, but of course they’re also putting out microwave transmissions, because the vehicle has got to know its distance from everything around it. So there’s quite a lot of really interesting, and I would say worrying, techie stuff around that.  But isn’t that a fantastic start? You’ve actually shaken the hand of Mr. Bill Gates, and it didn’t give you a good feeling. Yeah. So you moved on, and you started research. Now, one of the things that I remember you telling me, probably several years ago was about the fact that you paid to get a copy of one of the UN’s first books about all things to do with Agenda 21, was it?

Sandi Adams  10:46

Yes.

Brian Gerrish  10:47

And you told me how many pages it had. And this was one of the things that impressed me about your research was that you didn’t mess around? You got the source document from the UN. And it was extremely fat. Maybe you can remember how many pages it had.

Sandi Adams  11:06

This is it. It’s huge. It’s called the Global Biodiversity Assessment Global_Bio_Ass.  And it has well over 1000 pages. And it really was, it was a blueprint, it was the action plan of Agenda 21. I mean, Agenda 21 is just, this is the plan [shows Agenda 21 book], you know, and this is available on their website. But the Global [Bio]diversity Assessment I had to really, really look for because they’ve taken it out of print, and I bought it on Amazon, easily a good, well, when I saw you, it must have been over 10 years ago, I don’t know. But I bought it then because I realised how rare it would become. You cannot get it now. I paid 50 pounds, which 10 years ago was quite a lot of money to buy a research document. And I thought, oh, you know, and also I’d impoverish myself by running away to the West Country and becoming a sort of truther.  But I, you know, I mean I can’t get a copy of this now, I don’t know whether anyone else can. This came from the United States. I got it from Ade? books at the time. And really it goes into everything. It goes into the financialization of nature, it talks about what we now call smart cities, which in this they call human settlements zones, which is even more dystopian. And they talk about how you will have the people living in the human settlements zones. And the corridors in between that will just be federal and military access. And that this is all because we have destroyed the planet, we awful human beings have, we don’t deserve to be in nature, we have to be corralled into urban human settlement zones. So that was a big, you know, and it’s literally categorises. And it’s a blueprint of how to manage every single resource on the planet. That’s exactly what this document is all, I mean, I call it a document, this huge tome is all about. So it’s, and I believe that you cannot get hold of this, I don’t know, I’ve tried and I can’t get hold of another copy. And it would seem that the UN have now, they don’t acknowledge that it exists anymore. Because I think it’s the information in it. Yeah.

Brian Gerrish  13:26

But the key bit there, Sandi, is that you are sitting talking to me with the evidential documents sitting on the table beside you. And this is so important, because we are putting out information, obviously to our viewers and listeners, they want to know that what we, what you are talking about is factual. And you can do no better than say, here at my right hand side, I have their own document, and this is what it says.  Very interesting that you’re saying you’re finding it difficult to to get another copy or see where you can get another copy. But this seems to happen so often with these documents that once people discover them, they seem to drift off the internet. And I can reinforce that with the example of a particular book that I have a copy, of course I’m gonna embarrass myself now by not exactly remembering the name of it, but it was written by three university professors, and it’s all about the use of applied behavioural psychology in the UK Government. Very detailed document, lots of footnotes, very well written, an amazing book. I bought it for about 16 pounds, and now I can’t find it on Amazon anymore. I can’t find it on the internet. It seems to have disappeared. And I think it’s disappeared because actually unwittingly, those university professors were actually exposing something which they weren’t supposed to expose, which was, I use the word malicious when I say this, malicious applied Psychology, but just to reinforce what you’ve told us that you think the book is disappeared.  So you, I know, got reading that book, and you were astonished at what you started to read. And correct me if my memory is wrong here, because it was quite some time ago. But you were also saying that as you read into it, you found that what it was describing became more and more horrific, because it indicated that there was going to be an astonishing level of control over every aspect of our lives. So this is some document.

Sandi Adams  15:47

Yes, I mean, it really went into just about every area. I mean, it was a plan really to control every resource, whether it be sea, land, trees, animals, literally it was an inventory and a control directory on how they were gonna roll this whole thing out. And, you know, now you realise how it’s gone beyond that, you know, and it’s the whole AI thing has come into it. So it’s, you know, from those early days, you know, I didn’t realise that. And it’s quite astonishing how it’s all linking up now to this bigger agenda, which has been there for eons, but we just didn’t know about it.

Brian Gerrish  16:38

Yes. And the fact that the document is so thick, and so comprehensive, you’re saying over 1000 pages means that there was a huge amount of work that went into bringing that information together in the book. And I remember you commenting to me about this, that it must have taken a vast team of analysts and people handling data and consultants in order to have done the research in the separate areas. And then ultimately, to bring it together into such a huge tome, as you’ve described it, this was a massive undertaking in even producing the book that you’ve got beside you.

Sandi Adams  17:29

Yeah, so I mean if you look at the fact that the Agenda 21 was launched at the summit in 1992, and this was published in 1997. So it took five, you know, maybe they just took five years to compile this, but to me, it looks like a massive amount of work. I think they were working on that way before then. And, you know, it’s a bit like the, you know, the whole great reset thing, suddenly, wham, it’s their COVID 19, the great reset. They planned it, you know, it didn’t just appear out of nowhere. And in the Global [Bio]diversity Assessment, they actually say, and I can’t remember which page it is, but I will try and get it up. They say it’s a 200 year agenda. 200 years. So they said this plan will take 200 years, to literally, you know, it will be ongoing for the next 200 years. And I thought, well that’s ridiculous that they’re looking that far ahead. You know, this is almost not a human agenda, if you like, it’s into, you know, intergenerational. And this is the way these people work. Unbelievably, this is the way they work.

Brian Gerrish  18:47

Sandy that’s quite a statement, quite an observation, isn’t it, that if you have people who are looking, they’re so confidence they can create a plan that’s gonna go 200 years into the future. These are obviously minds that are working very, very differently to people who get up in the morning and think that they’ve got to go to work, and they’ve got to earn some money to look after their families. And probably a future event is that there’s gonna be a family birthday, or there’s gonna be a holiday with friends and family. That’s what the average person thinks about to enjoy their life. But these people are thinking about a plan to change and control the whole of the planet and the whole of society, and they are assured enough, they’re arrogant enough to say, we can do this over 200 years. And I’ll just throw this little one in, is that a human mind creating that agenda? Or is there something a bit darker?

Sandi Adams  19:54

Well, you know, the way things are going, if you’d asked me when we used to talk about this over 10 years ago, if you’d asked me then I would have said it’s a human agenda. It’s just a bunch of very, very entitled people, you know, billionaires, cabal, whatever you want to call it, just playing God. But now, I’m just wondering what is happening? Because it is so anti human and anti nature? Who are these people? Who are they? And I have to question whether they’re entirely with us as human beings. They can’t be.

Brian Gerrish  20:31

Yeah, they can’t be, I think there’s a very astute statement. Well, I thought we would move on to having a little look at the UN because this whole plan stems, at least from the UN as an organisation, people behind it, but from the UN. And a lot of people think that the UN is such a wonderful organisation, because of course, there its first sort of peace and to get human beings working and cooperating together to bring the nations together to work alongside each other. So the image that the UN sells is a very positive one. Here, you’ve labelled it the Unaccountable United Nations.

Sandi Adams  21:16

Yes.

Brian Gerrish  21:17

Tell us tell us why you are more suspicious of the UN?

Sandi Adams  21:23

They have a disclaimer on their website, which literally makes them totally unaccountable. And they say, you know, we can move gold and currency around the world with unlimited, sort of without restriction, and they can bring prosecution to any corporation or individual, but you cannot prosecute the United Nations. And they are, the more you look at what the United Nations get up to, when they’re supposedly peacekeeping. And we know that they and the WEF [World Economic Forum], and all the nefarious groups that they are aligned to, are really in control of our destiny. And we didn’t elect them, we didn’t elect any of these people. So they are acting in a totally unaccountable way.

Brian Gerrish  22:23

And that’s an interesting statement, what medially comes to my mind is that it mimics the situation with the world banking system, because if we take the Bank of International Settlements, which clearly holds immense power, as being the controlling organisation for the whole of the world’s banking system, they are also unaccountable. So they are a sconce there in Switzerland, but you can’t go on the property, you can’t call them to account. I just throw that in because of course, if you have a 200 year plan, you’re going to need money to carry it out. And [in] my mind, a little bit of common sense says, well, the next people who’ve got to be alongside them are the bankers. Now, we haven’t got time today to head off in that little direction, but I just thought I’d throw it in to get our viewers and listeners thinking.  But if you get inside the UN, and the image we’re just about to bring up on screen is a very interesting one. Here we go. This is the prayer room. I have also seen this image and I was very surprised the first time I saw it, and I did not get a good feeling about it. You obviously have pulled this image out because you think it’s strange. What do you think about the style of the UN’s prayer room?

Sandi Adams  23:52

Well, the stone in the middle is made of magnetite. It was a gift from Sweden in, I don’t know when, I think in probably the 70s and magnetite is associated with Saturn, it’s quite saturnic. And it weighs 6.66 tonnes currently, which is quite interesting. But the way they describe it, cos I thought well what’s their take on it? Because to me, that is not a prayer room. It almost looks a bit like the stone at the hatch, and I don’t quite know what that’s all about either. But it was, they say we may see it as an altar, empty, not because there is no God, not that it is an altar to an unknown God. But that is it is dedicated to the God who man worships in many forms. So really, it’s almost like a pantheistic altar. You know, it can be whatever. You can worship Lucifer, Satan in there you can worship you know the man down the road, you can worship anything there, which isn’t really I mean, it looks very sparse. And the fact that they have that stone there, and it is saturnic is very, very strange. I don’t like it at all, gives me a very bad feeling.

Brian Gerrish  25:19

It’s when you look into the image, you look in there, there is something oppressive about it, to my mind something, I don’t get a warm feeling about looking at a black stone like that. But of course, the other thing that many people don’t know is the UN, certainly in its early days, also used to run the Lucifer Publishing company. And not surprisingly, you’ve highlighted this. Tell us a bit about what you discovered in relation to this.

Sandi Adams  25:55

Basically, The Lucis Trust was set up. Now when was it set up? I think it was 1920s. Oh, yeah, here we go. The Lucis Trust was 1922. It works with the UN and it was formerly The Lucifer Trust in 1921. They changed it because they obviously, you can’t call something The Lucifer Trust. So they changed it to The Lucis Trust. And it really is a way of, I think, what they do is that they’ve got, they published all their their stuff through The Lucis Trust. And it’s got, I mean when you listen to somebody like David Spangler, who was the United Nations Director of Planetary Initiative, I find that all very odd. This was quite a while ago, he said, “no one will enter the New World Order, unless he or she will make a pledge to worship Lucifer. No one will enter the new age unless he will take a Luciferian initiation.” And when you see what is going on right now, you realise that it is a very dark, satanic Luciferian, whatever you want to call it, agenda led by the United Nations. And there’s no, there’s no doubt whatsoever in my mind, what they’re up to. It’s godless. It’s playing. Well, It’s diabolical. What’s going on is diabolical?

Brian Gerrish  27:32

Yeah. And I’m very interesting that we’re having the interview today. But on Sunday, we were assisting with a day of talks for Alternative View. And it was just fascinating that the speakers were all talking about various agendas and political events, or medical events, some of it quite deeply economic. So different subjects, different speakers, but they were all saying that they were perceiving an undertone of policies that were coming, being enacted by governments around the world. Sometimes those policies are clearly pan global policies, because the same country adopts the same policy, but they regarded the policies as being very dark. And I’ll say lacking human kindness.

Sandi Adams  27:33

That’s all I can say.

Brian Gerrish  28:31

And so I think this is quite important to point out that actually, there are a lot of questions to be asked exactly about what the UN is and whether we should trust it. And you’ve produced here a timeline of globalist organisations, which we can just have a look on. So we’ve got the Rockefeller Foundation, we’ve got the Council on Foreign Relations. So you started out with Rockefeller in 1913. You got The Lucis Trust here 1922, formely The Lucifer trust in 1921. Rockefeller Brothers funds, United Nations 1948, the Club of Rome, the World Economic Forum. Now, that’s certainly come to prominence in recent years, but you’ve also got the Trilateral Commission. So what’s your take on these? I nearly said nefarious groups, but let’s just call them groups at the moment.

Sandi Adams  29:27

Yeah, well I think basically, in my view, everything has been born from the Rockefeller Foundation in 1913. And 1913, was quite a key time really. If anybody’s ever read the Creature from Jekyll Island, and I would honestly get, you know, I would say if anybody really wants to know what happened around that time with the Federal Reserve and the banking system. It’s really all about money. And the Rockefeller Foundation really gave birth to the Council on Foreign Relations, the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, the United Nations, the Club of Rome, the World Economic Forum and the Trilateral Commission. And I would imagine the company of 300, all of those are under that umbrella. And they’re very clever at setting up all these branches so that it never really traces back to them. But from my research, it all comes from the Rockefeller Foundation.

Brian Gerrish  30:35

Right? And, of course, you have started to research these particular areas, because your interest was triggered from that original big fat document. So just for the audience to, to keep them just moving along the little path, as we go through this discussion, is that you start off looking at a plan, that plan is unbelievable because of its size and scope, and the fact it’s gonna take 200 years. And then you ask, probably a very simple question, well who created this lot, and that’s led you through these organisations.  And I would say, for our audience, these are organisations which are largely hidden in plain sight, because you can put any of those names into the search engine, and you will come up with information, you probably come up with information about the organisation and when it was formed. You will usually come up with names of people who are involved with the organization’s, not always, but usually you will. But then you’re left with a question, well who are these people, and what gives them the power to come together to decide how the world should be in the future? That’s how I look at it. I don’t know whether you’d agree with that Sandi?

Sandi Adams  31:59

Absolutely. I mean, these people are highly entitled, they feel that human beings really are useless eaters. They’ve said that. There was an amazing whistleblower, a guy called George Hunt at the original Earth Summit. And he was there, he was a businessman, and he was there, his son had died, and he was there to promote promote environmentalism, because that’s what his son worked in. And he went, and he witnessed bankers calling us cannon fodder, and it’s all on the web. If you look for, I think it’s George Hunt whistleblower at the Unced Conference, because they also called it the Unced Conference, UNCED. And he explains, and he spent all of his life trying to explain that the Earth Summit was a really bad thing. They put it over as something wonderful to save the planet. It wasn’t it was all about the control of the human being. And everything on the earth. Yeah.

Brian Gerrish  33:06

Right. That’s quite a scope, isn’t it? Well, we are going to look in a little bit of detail at the UN’s Agenda 21/2030 itself. But before we do that, since we’ve covered some of these other organisations, the World Economic Forum, Trilateral Commission, the Club of Rome, you’ve got some other documents here, which show at least the involvement of these organisations in the general theme around Agenda 21. So the first one we’ve got on the screen here is The First Global Revolution, a report for the Council of the Club of Rome. Put that alongside summit Agenda 21. But what can you tell us about this report for the Club of Rome?

Sandi Adams  33:59

Well, interestingly this was the last club, there’s three main Club of Rome reports that are really the bones of Agenda 21, the Earth Summit document. And working backwards, this was the one that was published just before the Earth Summit in 1991. And it was written by Alexander King and Bertrand Schneider. And they worked in the Club of Rome, which was really a crisis think tank. It was the way they could create a crisis that would have to be overcome by a global response. And really, it was all about trying to find a crisis that would unite humanity under one umbrella, and they decided that climate change or what they called then, global warming, would fit the bill. And it is actually written in here that they were looking for an enemy to unite humanity, because basically the Cold War was over. All the world wars were over. The wall had just come down in 1989. And they thought bankers need enemies, in order to make money.  And so they actually said “the need for enemies seems to be a common historical factor. States have striven to overcome domestic failure and internal contradictions by designating external enemies. When things become too difficult at home, divert attention by adventure abroad. Bring the divided nation together to face an outside enemy.” So that’s on page 108.  But then, on page 115, and I have it here, they say, “the common enemy of humanity is man”, so they made us the enemy, “in searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine, and the like, would fit the bill.” Right? “In their totality, and in their interactions, these phenomena do constitute a common threat, which demands the solidarity of all people. All these dangers are caused by human intervention. And it’s only through changed attitudes and behaviour that they can be overcome. The real enemy, then is humanity itself.”  And that is what they’ve done. They’ve made us the enemy of the whole world. And we’re not, you know, they are. But they’ve designated us as the enemy, and identified us as the enemy, and have guilt tripped at the Earth Summit, they guilt tripped 178 leaders of countries to sign up to Agenda 21 at the Earth Summit. I mean, unbelievable. That’s exactly what they did, to try and pull humanity together under a common threat. And to make us believe that it was our fault that this has all happened.

Brian Gerrish  37:07

Sandy you’ve done a brilliant job there again, because of course you’ve used the source document, and you’re quoting from the Club of Rome itself as to what the intention was. So there’s no ifs and buts about this, that is what they said. And ultimately, you can then see the policy following through. You said they, and of course, this is a critical thing. Are you able to tell us any more about who the they in the Club of Rome is?

Sandi Adams  37:36

Well, if you look at the Club of Rome, I don’t know whether they publish, obviously, you’ve got world leaders, you’ve got people like Zbigniew Brzezinski, all the movers and shakers that were all behind, all in the World Economic Forum. All of these people are the same, they all belong to the same club, if you like, it is a club, you know, the Club of Rome is a club, and you only get invited into the Club of Rome, if you actually are for this agenda.  And the Club of Rome it was formed by the United Nations. It actually was used by the United Nations to create the documents that would then become Agenda 21. So they use world leaders, all sorts of people are in the Club of Rome. And I think you can look up people in the Club of Rome, but most of them were the people at the Earth Summit. And, people like Maurice Strong, Al Gore, all those people that pulled this whole thing together. Yeah.

Brian Gerrish  38:44

And those people, the people in the Club of Rome, have got immense power. If they are, I’m going to say they are in the background. But they are able to put their finger on world leaders, encourage them, bring them forward in order to get involved and ultimately join and promote their agenda. So these figures in the background, some of them are named, but they clearly have immense power because they appear to be moving the political leaders to their will, rather than the elected political leaders using other people to deliver the will of the people. It’s got to be Klaus Schwab from the World Economic Forum who jumps into my mind at the moment because that man seems to have unbelievable power, directing what the political leaders and nation states are going to do and get involved in and say.

Sandi Adams  39:41

Hmm. Absolutely. You know, they all seemed to also go through a lot of these people that are the movers and shakers of this whole agenda right now. And I don’t know whether we’ll get onto that later. They all seemed to have gone through this kind of education, if you like, at Columbia University, which is a hotbed of technocratic thinking, and I don’t know whether you looked at my stuff, but you’ve got a whole raft of technocracy, technocratic thinking that started off in the 1930s, which has been brought forward and all those people, you know, George Soros, Amitai Etzioni, the communterian, the man that really put forward the communitarian agenda. Klaus Schwab, all of these people, even what’s his name, Elon Musk’s grandfather, they were all on this technocratic mission from Columbia University.

Brian Gerrish  40:50

Yes. Once we start to be able to name individuals and have a look into their background, it’s fascinating how web spreads, the network spreads. Let’s bring up these two on screen because you’d sent over to me Our Common Future, the World Commission on Environment and Development, and also Limits to Growth. So the one on the right, The Limits to Growth is another report of the Club of Rome. What can you tell us about these two?

Sandi Adams  41:22

Well, this covered, I mean, if you think that really the Earth Summit, the main challenges there were population and financial, shifting financial power across the globe. And obviously climate, what they called then global warming. The Limits to Growth was firmly about the fact that, in their view, there are no finite, you know the resources are finite, and that there is not enough resources to go around. It was written in 1971. So really, there was a massive push at that point, to put into the psyche of the people that there’s not enough to go round, that there isn’t an abundant planet, and that we would have to depopulate in some way, using at that point they were talking about, you know, health, reproductive health, the pill, all that sort of thing they were bringing that into the psyche of contraception, and limiting people having children. And there was a lot of that thinking going around then, there was a guy called Paul Ehrlich, who wrote a book at the same time called The Population Bomb, making wild predictions, again computer modelled predictions about how, by 1980, we wouldn’t have enough food to feed anybody on the planet, and that we had to do something about population. So all of this was going around in the globalists heads then in 1971. And so they’ve, they’ve pushed all of that agenda. And of course, The Population Bomb never exploded. Those computer models were flawed, obviously, like all computer models are, that’s why we’re in the mess we’re in now, because everything’s been put on to computer models, and we know they don’t work. But they were doing it then. And this was clearly about, you know, there’s not enough to go round. That’s what that book was about that Club of Rome report was about, and something must be done. And behind the scenes, the whole depopulation agenda has been working, but they haven’t been as vocal about it, as we know. Yes And you earlier, you indicated that in putting forward the agenda, it was very much a fear agenda was based on fear, we have to do this because climate change, or there’s gonna be too many people in the world and we won’t be able to feed ourselves. So the undertone of the agenda that they were pushing was fear based. Yeah, exactly as it is now and as it as it will continue to be. They’re just trying to, they feed on fear, they love us being fearful.

Brian Gerrish  44:15

Yes, because the state of anxiety then makes it easier to control people, and they become more susceptible to suggested policy. And at the moment, it’s fascinating that we’ve now got qualified professionals so psychologists, psychotherapists, even some psychiatrists who are now starting to look at political use of applied psychology and say, this is wrong. This is harming people as opposed to helping them, so we really have moved into Agenda 21’s future and you’ve given us a fantastic lead into this.  This Agenda 21, which was the first agenda. And if I pop these up on screen, you did mention these earlier, but let’s recap on them, because what are they looking at in the policy? Well, everything – all land, water, minerals, construction, means of production, plants, animals, education, energy, information, human beings, control of all religious doctrine. And the last two should really grab people’s attention that every human being is to be controlled.

Sandi Adams  45:36

Absolutely. Yeah.

Brian Gerrish  45:38

And this is Maurice Strong. So you’ve selected him as one individual to talk about. But what made you choose Maurice Strong out of all the people you could have?

Sandi Adams  45:52

Mainly because he was the grandfather of Agenda 21. He really got it going. He was a secretary general of the United Nations at the time in 1992, and before, and he’s quite an interesting character, because he worked for the Rockefellers for many years. He was an oil billionaire himself. And he’s been involved in all sorts of crime. I mean, he was involved in the oil for food scandal with Adnan Khashoggi when there was that awful oil for food thing going on. And he was exiled to China, because he was going to be put in prison in the US. So he went to live in China, and he loves China, his sister lived with Chairman Mao. And he was totally sold on the way the Chinese social credit system would work. And he believed that that was the way forward with human beings and that they had to be managed, and that all the resources then would be managed, and there’d be enough to go round. But he’s not an honest man. I mean, when he was in China, he set up a car manufacturing company with George Soros called Chrey. And they were shipping carbon unfriendly cars to America to sell. So he’d do anything for money. He’s just like all the rest of them, it’s just a means of control, and to be one of the elite, to be a global elite who will actually control everything. And it’s a very different story for the rest of us. So he’s not somebody to be trusted. And he set up the whole Earth Summit.  He employed I mean, obviously, at the Earth Summit, there was David Rockefeller. There was the Edmond de Rothschild was there. These are all the movers and shakers of the United Nations. These people are all billionaires, by the way. And when they realised that they could actually convince 178 countries to sign up to this, you know, they were chinking their glasses on yachts in Rio de Janeiro harbour, saying, Yeah, we did it, we did it, we got the whole world to sign up to Agenda 21. So basically, you know, we’re in control now. And you know, Prince Charles was there on Britannia, they will drinking their champagne glasses.  I mean, it’s quite hideous really. But he is the grandfather of Agenda. 21. Yeah. And he also wanted to bring in a new world religion. And he worked on that he had a big ranch in America called the Barker ranch. And he invited sort of  religious leaders to come to try and suss out kind of which religion would be the best religion for the world. And, the thought that people couldn’t have a choice is unbelievable. But there you are, that’s the kind of person he is.

Brian Gerrish  49:06

I’ll add to that straightaway, of course, Prince Charles was a key figure in saying, well, I’m not going to defend Christianity in UK, I’m going to become leader of the faiths but of course, what many people didn’t realise was his involvement in this kind of globalist policy where they were planning to effectively create a one world religion. So we’ve got a really poisonous mix developing, haven’t we? Because we’ve got a very powerful policy to change the whole world. We can now see as the years gone by that many of the strands of that policy have started to come to fruition. We’ve mentioned the intelligent vehicles, but of course, we’ve now got the idea of chipping people in order to allow them to have access to cashless bank accounts by their finger or their wrist or the back of their hand, whatever it is.  And we’ve seen with the COVID pandemic, the government using policies to really control people, whether you can come out of your house or not, who you can have in your house, whether you can socialise with people, and which people you can socialise with. So I think that a lot of people need to have a good hard look at the COVID-19 and the lockdown policies against the background of what you’re talking about here with the Agenda 2030 programme, because I think the control over society that we’ve experienced in the last two years seems to fit uncannily well with where Agenda 2030 wanted to go.  You put down some points, key points of what Agenda 21 sought to achieve? If you can see those on screen? Would you like to just take us through those? And then we’ve got a summary, haven’t we, of the key areas?

Sandi Adams  51:10

Yes, I mean, it’s top down global governance really, and what they they aim to do is to bring everybody into concentrated urban areas, or human settlement, zones near train lines. And as we know, Boris Johnson even said this morning, when he had his resignation speech, that they’re investing in these high speed train lines in between cities, and it is a kind of, I don’t want to liken it to the Hunger Games, but it is a bit like that. You’ve got these key cities that are smart cities, and the train lines, link them up. And so it’s, it’s a bit like a Hunger Games situation where, if push came to shove, you could be locked into your city, you don’t need to leave, everything’s there. And you only get there because there’s no cars, there’s no planes, in their eyes, this is their future, not ours. But that, you know, they want to shut every airport by 2030. I don’t think that can happen, but it might, they’ll do everything they can to make it happen, and to get rid of cars.  So they don’t want any cars or air travel, every human action surveilled in carbon tax, you know, that’s where we get the surveillance capitalism coming in. And I didn’t realise initially when I started researching this, that it was all going to be linked up with the monetary system with the digital ID in those days, when I first started researching this, I had no idea but it’s suddenly that the veil has been lifted over and over again, as this progresses, and you realise that surveillance capitalism is is happening. They’re looking at all your data. And all of that will be linked to whether you can access your money, if you don’t go along with the agenda, you can be sanctioned. All of that. So every human action is surveilled and carbon taxed, they’ve got the carbon taxing going as well. So you have an allotted amount of carbon credits. And once those have gone, those are gone. If you’ve switched your heating on too much, or if you’ve eaten too much meat one week, or if you’ve eaten too much sugar, whatever it might be whatever they feel that they can sanction you on, they will. And you know, the concentration of wealth and power goes to the surveillance state. You are kept in poverty, you won’t own anything and you’ll be happy. Yeah.

Brian Gerrish  53:35

And we can bring in China again here because, of course, this social credit and locking everybody into the state, you’ve got to behave yourself, you mustn’t say the wrong things. Because if you’re naughty, or you say the wrong things, then you’re gonna lose credits. And that is gonna affect what you can do in your life. So for me, it’s easy to see how Mr. Strong got very excited with what was happening in China, because in China, amongst a vast population, it was being demonstrated how you could exert control over each individual by this system. And of course, as we’ve witnessed more of the artificial intelligence, the high technology coming in, it’s becoming easier to see how this can impact on each and every individual, even if you’re ultimately dealing with billions of people.  So, Club of Rome, we’ll just mention again, because you’ve got a little paragraph here which was, which was an overview. Let’s read it out for listeners. “The Club of Rome is a global think tank that deals with crisis creation and response and international and political issues. Founded in 1968 at the Academia del Lincel, if I pronounced that correctly, Rome by Auello Pecce an Italian Industrialist.”

Sandi Adams  55:08

Actually it’s Auralio Peccei, sorry that’s a typo.

Brian Gerrish  55:11

“Auralio Peccei an Italian industrialist, the Council of Rome, sorry the Club of Rome describes itself “a group of world citizens sharing a common concern for the future of humanity.” Now I’ve started laughing there, because I’ve got so used to the fact that when you go into these organisations, they are so good. They’re just ordinary people. They’re ordinary citizens of the world. They’ve got a bit of an idea, they’ve come together with a common purpose. Trust us, we’re independent. We’re going to change your world for the better. I’m sorry to be really cynical there. But that’s how I always see it. And I haven’t been disappointed with the Club of Rome. Am I being unfair?

Sandi Adams  55:55

No, no, you have every right to be cynical, because everything that they push out, they say is for the greater good. It’s for your good, it’s for your benefit. And the proof is in the pudding. When you look at the dystopian future that they have in mind for us, we know that they’re not good. It’s not good at all. They just are out for their own backs. And we can just go to hell in a handbasket. They don’t care about us at all.

Brian Gerrish  56:22

Yeah, yeah. And, well, here we’ve got the UN, but you’ve brought in the Pope alongside the UN image. And what is all this about? Where does the Pope fit into this?

Sandi Adams  56:39

Well, it’s interesting that the Vatican is so enmeshed in all of this. You know, it’s my belief that the Vatican is not godly at all. I’m sorry, I’m gonna upset a lot of Catholics by saying that, and I’m sorry about that. But from my research and how the Pope has got totally embroiled with the United Nations in the Agenda 2030. Unless he’s very stupid, which I don’t think he is, Pope Francis really got totally involved with it and backed it. And it is interesting that the Vatican called in all their assets last week, it’s almost like they’re pulling up the drawbridge. They pulled in all their assets to be pulled in by the 20th of September. They know what’s coming. And basically the most unreported story of 2015 was that in the last week of September, in 2015, Pope Francis met President Obama to make his keynote speech to the UN General Assembly on the future of the world, and to unveil Agenda 2030. So he’s effectively making the Catholic Church, the UN servant on Earth. I mean, they are totally beholden to the United Nations in pushing this agenda forward. And of course, a lot of the Catholic countries thought, Oh, this is amazing. This must be good. They’ve got that sort of Catholic thing going there. So they think that because the Pope’s endorsed it, it must be good for humanity. And I don’t believe that Pope Francis is unaware of the agenda. Personally, I might be wrong. But personally, I don’t think he is unaware.

Brian Gerrish  58:34

Well we’re talking about the Pope, and to make sure everything’s fair and aboveboard, I’m going to say many years ago, I gave a talk in Ireland, and I was asked whether I was a Catholic or a Protestant. And I said, I think I would have to say I’m a Protestant. I was then asked what I thought of the Pope. And I said, Well, I don’t think the Pope is a particularly nice person. I don’t think the agenda at high level is an agenda which is ultimately gonna help mankind. I was in a big hall, and there was quite a reasonable audience. And I can still remember the hush that descended over the audience, and you could feel a palpable tension in the air. And that was because principally the audience was Catholic. And I was in Southern Ireland.  And I said, but before you judge me too harshly, let me tell you, I am very, very sure that the Church of England is run by Satanists. And there was an immediate lifting of the mood in the hall. And very interesting that after I’d given my talk, I was surrounded by quite a few people. And we had a very interesting discussion about this aspect I’m gonna say of religion. Now we’re not going to talk about religion in this discussion, but you’ve brought in the Pope and you’re saying you don’t get warm feelings for what’s happening at a high level in the Vatican in relation to these plans. But of course, we’ve had exactly the same type of input from the Church of England, where we’ve had the highest levels, the Archbishop of Canterbury mixing with Christine Lagarde and the Bank of England, with glasses of champagne in their hands. And also the UK column was able to expose, I can say about a year ago probably, that the Church of England had been working with global bankers in order to assemble a fund of some, if I remember correctly, 10 trillion, but I think it was more than 10 trillion pounds, which was going to be used to push the global green agenda. And our point in reporting this was that it was fascinating at a time when people couldn’t feed themselves in UK, let alone the rest of the world, that the leader of the Church of England would be mixing and socialising with high level bankers, not to solve the hunger on his doorstep or on their doorstep, but to progress these globalist plans, which clearly to my mind, linked into the Agenda 2030, which you’re describing? Yes, Sandy, absolutely brilliant, introduced introduction to this subject.

Sandi Adams  1:01:26

Yes.

Brian Gerrish  1:01:27

Sandi, absolutely brilliant introduction to this subject. And of course, as always, we have to watch the clock. I think you’ve covered so much material, I have so many questions still to ask you. How would you feel about making this into a two part interview? Would you be able to give us some time, maybe in a few days, and we’ll record a part two? Is that possible?

Sandi Adams  1:01:54

Absolutely. No, I think that’s a really good idea. Yeah, so we can get it all together because it goes further, doesn’t it? And we need to wrap it up in  maybe two parts. That’d be fantastic.

Brian Gerrish  1:02:06

Well, we’ve given a little snapshot CV really of Agenda 2030. And we don’t want to spoil it by rushing because we’re clock watching. So I think that would be fascinating. And so I’m going to say to our viewers and listeners, I very much hope you’ve enjoyed this first parts of Agenda 2030 with Sandi Adams, and she’s agreed on camera so you can’t get away from it, Sandi, you’ve agreed on camera to come back. But we will do a part two, we will drill down into the detail around this plan and what it really means for all of us on the planet. So Sandi, I’m going to say to you thank you very, very much for joining us this morning. I look forward to you coming back.

Sandi Adams  1:02:54

And thank you so much for for having me on. Thank you.

Brian Gerrish  1:02:58

Okay, wonderful.