Conservation and Global Surveillance
I’ve received requests for executive summaries of past articles, especially in the context of GEMS, GEOSS, and the Convention on Biological Diversity. So here it is, and let me start off by providing an executive summary wrt the article itself -
They are running Global Surveillance on you this very minute, and using said to facilitate the eventual 4th industrial revolution, and your planned return to feudalism - all for sakes of allegedly wanting to save the planet.
Sounds crazy? Well, all of this is fully sourced.
-
In 1971, Maurice Strong commissioned the ‘Scientific Committee On Problems of the Environment‘ - SCOPE in short - to write a report, for sakes of the upcoming 1972 United Nations Conference on the Human Environment. The report was titled ‘Global Environmental Monitoring’.
Post-conference, a second topical report was commissioned, which led to SCOPE’s 3rd report, titled ‘Global Environmental Monitoring System’ - GEMS.
Global Surveillance. Allegedly for sakes of environmental health, ie biodiversity.
You can find the details here -
And though it claimed to be about the environment, human health was included in deliberations, and during early UNEP meetings, mission creep on the express way arrived - as per usual. By 1974, human health was solidly on the agenda, expressly detailed by UNEP/GC/24 (which took me hours and hours to track down)
My third article on the topic was titled ‘Michael Gwynne‘, because the attachment of his name to searches led me to a wealth of articles, which google previously claimed ignorance of. The article details that by 1985, GRID - the ‘Global Resource Information Database‘ - came into being, essentially a global database storing surveillance information, and from an article from 1990 we know that satellite information was part of said data. And a 1984 IUCN document further adds (and I quote) -
‘The GEMS programme is large, involving some 30 global networks in the areas of climate, long-range transport of air pollution, health, oceans, and renewable natural resources. It is a very active programme in which most nations of the world participate.‘
In other words, not only were global leaders at the time complicit, by 1984 they had 30 separate global surveillance data already, and in the following year, all of this data was sent to a central, global database titled ‘GRID', which for the record also included socio-economic data, ie, the Determinants of Health.
And the article finished off by showing that by 2002, input data from GEMS was being inserted into EU policy legislation titled Biodiversity Action Plan.
And finally, I attached a couple of wikileaks from 1974 and 1979 - the former dragging Henry Kissinger into the mix, and the latter dragging in Rockefeller.
My fourth article on the topic goes through what little documentation exists on the topic of GEMS. See, in spite of clearly existing, they were very, very careful about releasing information in this regard - for obvious reasons, really. People might have been a little annoyed, would they have found out that most of the governments in the world were collaborating on a project, spying on their citizens using even satellite data.
Documents include the 1987 Brundtland Report, actual Agenda 21 documents from Rio 1992, and even information from the mid-1990s issued by highest authorities clearly detailing that the initiative should be expanded upon. But suddenly, all trace disappeared. GEMS vanished into thin air.
The reason being that GEMS allegedly splintered into separate components under the GOS umbrella late in the 90s, only then to reappear in the 2003-5 timeframe, but now titled the ‘Group on Earth Observations System of Systems’ - GEOSS. But this time, public health surveillance is repeatedly dragged onto the centre stage along with all the biodiversity stuff. Oh yeah, and space agencies. All of that is expressly outlined by the 2019 Canberra Declaration.
Oh, and did I tell you that the GEOSS page was only recently removed, and that Google still had a copy in search results at the time I penned the article?
So, at the dawn of the scamdemic, not only had they run multi-variable global surveillance on us including satellite feeds since 1975, but they had wrapped it all up in one tight, neat little package, just waiting for use.
And that’s where the Convention on Biological Diversity enters the frame. But before we get to that, another topic of importance needs addressing - the topic of information.
See, the GEMS program was not the only to be launched in the 1970s. The International Referral System was as well, later renamed INFOTERRA. And they are an information clearinghouse.
In detail, we see how said clearinghouse is inserted optimally to influence government policy, and further used to ‘inform’ the public. In other words, should you not wish for the public - or even the representatives - to know details, better make sure to remove ‘misinformation’ in that regard.
But it also details how they, behind the scenes, manipulated the political process, and progressively conspired to intentionally conflate health and environment, for reasons which in contemporary society should be clear.
It moves on to detail how this is inserted into EU policy, and also casts light upon what exactly is meant by ‘environmental justice’ - making the people sue governments to enforce legally binding international standards, which impose further restrictions upon emissions. And the hands of politicians and judges are tied, because these laws came into being 30 years ago. It’s absolutely evil.
Rio 1992 also gave birth to side agreements, one of which is the Convention on Biological Diversity. And their primary aim is to push the feelgood titled ‘Ecosystem Approach’. But the title is seriously misleading, because what it actually describes is a return to feudalism, where the peasants are stripped of land ownership rights, and ‘the science’ will become your new religion. And all, for sakes of ‘saving the environment’.
I know all of this sounds insane, but every claim is sourced.
The next article details how GEOSS/GEMS (global surveillance) is progressively integrated with the Convention on Biological Diversity, and further with the One Health Approach - which, in short, boils down to surveillance, vaccines, and the occasional dash of culling of ‘wildlife species, more broadly’, should a ‘wildlife specie, more broadly’ threaten biodiversity - language which closely resemble what you find in recent drafts of the currently negotiated Pandemic Treaty.
It also drags in blended finance, private equity, and all those other terms you generally don’t appreciate being lumped in with ‘public health’.
And next, the article titled ‘The Convention on Biological Diversity’ outlines how the same person who pushed the Ecosystem Approach behind the scenes was instrumental in the creation of GEOSS/GEMS.
It then details that already by 2005, cooperation with the 3 side programs of Rio (of which the Convention on Biological Diversity is one) is very much the intent, and further that the GEOSS program has affiliate programs, one of which is titled GEO BON - Group on Earth Observations Biodiversity Observation Network - under the concept of ‘Societal Benefit Areas’.
And GEO BON is global surveillance for sakes of the environment, and the CBD Aichi targets dictate 100 indicators, which are used for the purpose of the CBD program, ie the Ecosystem Approach.
In very short, the Ecosystem Approach performs global biodiversity surveillance to save the planet… and as humans are considered part of said ‘biodiversity’…
But it gets worse - because other affiliate GEOSS programs include EO4HEALTH, HUMAN-PLANET and GEO-CITSCI. The first of these was used during Covid-19 (yes, really) for sakes of global public health surveillance, the second monitors resource use and human presence (those resources include renewables, ie biodiversity), and the final on ‘citizen science’ details surveillance data include social media data.
Seriously.
Finally, we round up by connecting all of this to Lancet-Rockefeller’s 2015 initiative, ‘Planetary Health’, along with ‘social justice’, more One Health and CBD links, and drags in Al Gore being a primary US driver behind this initiative, along with John Kerry, the Club of Madrid, the Global Environment Facility, and a number of politicians who used to be in the Russian Duma.
And finally, it sheds a light upon a speech delivered October, 2021 at the CBD Conference of Parties, delivered by… Vladimir Putin.
And we’re really not done with the topic, as my Twitter feed should conclusively prove.
-
My article on the Determinants on Health can be located here, but in short, it’s another vector of enforced compliance through global surveillance -
I’ve written so many article on One Health, but here’s one of the more recent -
And finally, let’s not forget about the Department of Defense -
