Potential loss of millions of fruit trees

[felipe]

For those interested in what the UN is really doing look at the latest set of goals aimed at helping humankind enjoy a better lifestyle. It will take many years but progress has already been made since the first set of goals set down in 2000 / 2001.
https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/sdgs

[felipe]

It is quite amazing how some people can read my post differently and twist around to suit their beliefs. Where have I inbdicated that I was referring to Agenda21 as a past thing or that it was only UK based. Totally ignoring this comment:

"Many parts of the world were moving to a mono-culture method of farming. Where they only grew one crop. Farmers were encouraged to return to the old style of farming that saw crop rotation in fields, leaving one field fallow for a year before reusing it. This meant better quality and variety food crops was produce rather than huge volumes of one crop, much of which was wasted."

The fact that I used the UK as an example is just that. But typical of some, they see it differently and twist it to suit their argument. How dare you accuse me of living in the past. You do not know what I do in my spare time, what books I read what research I am doing.

Where do you get this idea that the UN goal is that there will be no property rights? Who said so? Provide proof that Agenda21 is affecting people, their land, their homes their water supply. Where is it happening?

You accuse me of being swayed by TV reports WRONG you do not know my viewing habits or what I research. I make up my own mind on what I research not what some news reporter tells me.

As yet not one person that believes in this conspiracy has provided any evidence or example of where Agenda21 is causing people to move off their land. Or answered my question re cloud seeding to prevent rainfall on a nice sunny day. Or acknowledged that seeding aids rainfall.

Taken from the UN website on Sustainable Development.

Despite the fact that the global poverty rate has been halved since 2000, intensified efforts are required to boost the incomes, alleviate the suffering and build the resilience of those individuals still living in extreme poverty, in particular in sub-Saharan Africa. Social protection systems need to be expanded and risks need to be mitigated for disaster-prone countries, which also tend to be the most impoverished.
In 2013, an estimated 767 million people lived below the international poverty line of $1.90 a day — down from 1.7 billion people in 1999. That figure reflects a decrease in the global poverty rate from 28 per cent in 1999 to 11 per cent in 2013. The most significant progress was seen in Eastern and SouthEastern Asia, where the rate declined from 35 per cent in 1999 to 3 per cent in 2013. In contrast, 42 per cent of people in sub-Saharan Africa continued to subsist in conditions of extreme poverty in 2013.

[zilnor]

Macc.
You are just another poster who does not seem to consider that other people have different opinions to yours. Yawn ,
yawn,

[macc]

Zilnor, you might be prepared to consider another persons views, that's nice, now that really says it all. A BA degree in Humanities  :13: Don't worry RTIS, there is no applecart. :13:

[zilnor]

sssa

Oh dear ! You really don't seem to like people furthering their education do you ?

Quote : " many other  self proclaimed intellectuals with bits of paper saying so from the government"

Quote :  " as you are a self proclaimed intellectual " .

Quote : " the supposed pseudo intellectual cream of the mainly retired British doubters that are proud to shout about their degrees in Humanity etc " .

Perhaps if you refrained from statements that show contempt for other posters we might be prepared to consider your views.

[solarsolutionsalmeria]

To those that are REALLY interested in this cloud dispersing lark. the company that does it is in (was?) murcia.  as of 3yrs ago they charged approx 1000euros to disperse clouds around the area where i am.  one of the three pilots then was english building hours for a commercial licence training. they get paid by the growers around pulpi and surrounding areas. when it rains in the almanzora valley, all that water runs down into the commercial growers of pulpi, etc and washes their crops away. loss of tens of thousands of euros if not more. IF you are in the area that they fly into, you cannot miss it. rain forcast, dark cloulds building then you see a clear blue sky area growing like a drop of fairy liquid in a pan of oily water. you'll hear the plane and probably see it. my local area is turning into a desert. all orange trees are gone except for those with irrigation from private wells. (3 out of the 5 wells in my area are dry)

unless you have land with olive/almond/orange trees etc. and rely on them its of no consequence to you whether they do it or not so not need to get worked up. there was a protest planned in albox a few months ago from all the local farmers because they were losing their livelihood (and substinence). that got pretty much cancelled in torrential rain. on the other side, a national sporting event was due to finish in a torrential downpour, the sun came out in places with hardly any rain.

if you are interested, ask your local spanish farmer who has to rely on driving around with a 1000 ltr container in his van/trailer looking for fuentes to suck water out of. he'll tell you as it is.

sssa,  i dont know about agenda 21 and have no real interest (sorry!) in conspiracy theories. i'm sure i'm not the only one who doesn't bother opening links and reading 500 word copy and paste but you are obviously affected by the lack of water in your area. no point preaching to those that are not affected and actually prefer it not to rain.

with the current rumblings in arboleas town hall, i think this and brexit will be taking a back seat in the forum now that the green monster has seen the messiah as a political threat.  

hi thanks for the positive input
you do realise that you will be now slagged off as ,according to the "enlightened ones" here on the forum ,what you are saying isnt true as it it doesnt exist as its a "conspiracy theory" and that they know best coz its not in the main stream media news.
there was a peticion in this part of the valley to get the spanish government to stop this practice of chem trailing and raise this issue in their parliment which (i find) interesting as thousands of spanish signed it from teenagers to the nearly dead and that they are fully aware of chemtrailing...they called it the "avioneta"
so why do the farmers here in the least prosporous part of spain know more about it and therefore are more informed than the supposed pseudo intellectual cream of the mainly retired british doubters that are proud to shout about their degrees in humanity etc?

i know what my conclusions are.

[pinoy]

To those that are REALLY interested in this cloud dispersing lark. the company that does it is in (was?) murcia.  as of 3yrs ago they charged approx 1000euros to disperse clouds around the area where i am.  one of the three pilots then was english building hours for a commercial licence training. they get paid by the growers around pulpi and surrounding areas. when it rains in the almanzora valley, all that water runs down into the commercial growers of pulpi, etc and washes their crops away. loss of tens of thousands of euros if not more. IF you are in the area that they fly into, you cannot miss it. rain forcast, dark cloulds building then you see a clear blue sky area growing like a drop of fairy liquid in a pan of oily water. you'll hear the plane and probably see it. my local area is turning into a desert. all orange trees are gone except for those with irrigation from private wells. (3 out of the 5 wells in my area are dry)

unless you have land with olive/almond/orange trees etc. and rely on them its of no consequence to you whether they do it or not so not need to get worked up. there was a protest planned in albox a few months ago from all the local farmers because they were losing their livelihood (and substinence). that got pretty much cancelled in torrential rain. on the other side, a national sporting event was due to finish in a torrential downpour, the sun came out in places with hardly any rain.

if you are interested, ask your local spanish farmer who has to rely on driving around with a 1000 ltr container in his van/trailer looking for fuentes to suck water out of. he'll tell you as it is.

sssa,  i dont know about agenda 21 and have no real interest (sorry!) in conspiracy theories. i'm sure i'm not the only one who doesn't bother opening links and reading 500 word copy and paste but you are obviously affected by the lack of water in your area. no point preaching to those that are not affected and actually prefer it not to rain.

with the current rumblings in arboleas town hall, i think this and brexit will be taking a back seat in the forum now that the green monster has seen the messiah as a political threat.  

[solarsolutionsalmeria]

felipe ,your original post was about your concern over the lack of water and 1 million fruit trees dying as a consequence. i have agreed that it is indeed a grave problem and provided you with information as to part of the reason why this is happening, yet you have stated you have no interest in researching said given information which i find strange as you (as many other self proclaimed "intellectuals with bits of paper saying so from the government" that also posted) have no intellectual interest in other points of view and facts that stray from their areas and yours of "expertise", which in your case as you stated was agenda 21

i said that chem trails were to PREVENT rainfall, not encourage it, yet you replied saying it was nonsense as clouds cause rain, therefore how could cloud seeding cause drought.obviously you didnt read my post properly and obviously hadnt researched my previously posted links to provide you with that information.

as you are a self proclaimed intellectual i find this kind of dismissive negative response quite disturbing as it should be the academics bringing this kind of information to the forum and indeed the world to further discussion and debate on what is an extremely serious issue globally that affects us all .

[solarsolutionsalmeria]

http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/category/drought-2/

[solarsolutionsalmeria]

ok FELIPE
heres a link to multiple white papers and government,university and coorporate documents.

http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/documents-2/

if you wish to pursue me further on the subject please read these papers first and then you will have your answers and perhaps be more aware of what is going on.
this should take you several days to read and digest and review,due to the VAST amount of published material in the link, not just a reply in 5 minutes asking me to prove it. I have given you the proof via the link.

i just dont understand why everyone is so dismissive without reviewing and researching firstly and also why everyone with a conspiracy theory rebuke by proxy is saying that they trust governments and politicians who historically since man could write books have done almost nothing good for the common man and generally have killed thousands of millions of their own citizens including the UK in the 1st and 2nd world wars let alone all the wars before them and since whilst profiting for themselves in the process of "justified genocide" over the centuries. Like the queen pops round to have a cup of tea with you !!!!!!!!!

that is why there is no famine anywhere,everyone eats 3 nutritious meals a day,babies dont die from easily treatable diseases,we all benefit from free clean energy,we all have a home to live in,there is a cure for cancer,we dont have wars anywhere ever,nobody is in prison because humans are all morally perfect,no one is better off than anyone else, no need for nuclear weapons,there is enough water for everyone always,no adverts on the tv asking for donations for people in africa the middle east
etc, politicians have never lied or been corrupt (especially in spain), everyone has a garuenteed job,medical care,pension and people are just damn real nice to everyone else,free QUALITY education worldwide and there is no generally accepted 6-10% of the population medically defined as psycotic/psycopathic (about the same percentage of politicians to the general population) it goes on and on and on and on.

[Rtis]

Well ! Sorry if we have upset the applecart, only just replying to a post about the trails in the sky !

[macc]

Macc:

"Agenda blah blah" wasn't displaying my ignorance of A21 but was – I thought rather obviously – showing my disdain for the repetitive waving of the great conspiracy flag. Perhaps I should try to keep my comments a little more easy to translate, eh?

So – Agenda 21 lays out non-binding guidelines for promoting economic growth, environmental protection and social equality. Basically, it is a recipe for living within our means today, so that we do not pass along to our children a degraded economy, environment and society. It addresses topics as various as toxic waste, biotechnology, conservation and green transportation, all with the goal of helping poor countries develop economies — in large part, by encouraging wealthy countries to dial back in sensible ways on their consumption of resources. Planners help communities find common-sense, constructive ways of using limited resources wisely. It looks for ways to make transportation inexpensive and keep energy plentiful.

OK so far?

Now, amongst others, there's a chap called Glenn Beck who bought the rights to a NOVEL – yup, a novel – written by a lady named Harriet Parke. He then tweaked it a little, had his name placed on the cover as author (with the well-paid Ms Parke noted as a ghost writer) and promoted this novel as a work of fact, portraying a dystopian future where we sheeple are controlled by faceless powers-that-be. He's making a lot of money out of this scare-mongering with TV appearances, book sales, magazine and newspaper articles etc.

Other modern day 'pundits' who decry Agenda 21 generally focus on chapter 4 and take some lines from it out of context to 'prove' their unscientific posturing. Given that the agenda is 40 chapters  in length I would surmise that it's as easy to take something out of context as it is from, say, any of the 'Holy' books.

So...no, I'm not ignorant of the facts surrounding A21, Chemtrails, cloud seeding, UFOs and whatever other malarkey those who have the new religion which is called Conspiracy. I suppose trying to explain scientific rigour, cognitive dissonance or even belief bubbles to a 'believer' is truly a waste of time; it's about as difficult as explaining evolution to a Creationist ("but it's only a THEORY...") but, hey ho, one has to try.

Enjoy your day, even as you gaze into the skies wailing "Woe, woe and thrice woe!!"

J

As twojays said, Agenda blah blah" wasn't displaying my ignorance of A21 but was – I thought rather obviously – showing my disdain for the repetitive waving of the great conspiracy flag. Perhaps I should try to keep my comments a little more easy to translate, eh?                                                                                                                                                                             Just give me a minute, let me google what Agenda 21 is. :93: :93: and this is the best you can come up with Twojays. A book review by Sarah Sypher from 2012, well that is well informed on 21.  :bravo_2: https://www.goodreads.com/review/show/446114856?book_show_action=true  You are not ignorant of the facts, TRUE, but that is only because you know nothing of the facts, probably a little like RTIS, why comment on something you know nothing about, whats the point.

[Rtis]

The airforce were around Thursday their  trails were about for a very long time, we have seen many airliners leave a trail for at least 30 minutes,we even know the airlines as we use our telescope to view them,as for someone in this area trying to stop rain, that is plain stupid !!

[felipe]

Sorry, but that is absolute nonsense. Where are they geoengineering the rainfall to force people off their land?

Can you explain why they would spray like this when the sky is clear of clouds and highly unlikely to rain. The idea of cloud seeding is to either reduce the amount of rain that could potentially fall from a violent storm or to actually help it rain where there are a few clouds about to seed. It is not actually used when there are clear blue skies with no rain or cloud forecast.

So, IF, they are doing as you say and seeding blue skies then they are most likely trying to force clouds to form and consequently generate rainfall. Rain forms through minute dust or pollen particles in the atmosphere captured by water droplets. These then fall as rain because the additional weight of the droplet. So without dust or pollen particles in the air it will not rain.

To that end your claim about aluminium being dispersed would mean that there are small particles of that metal released whereby aiding the building of clouds for rain and not preventing rainfall.

[solarsolutionsalmeria]

felipe
its a copy and paste of the text of the official declassified cia document 1035-960 which porports that any time the official narrative is questioned by people that dont believe everything the government tells them,they should be called a conspiracy theorist in order to silence them from being heard by primarily through ridicule by the masses that dont have the intelligence to ask questions to the contrary. here is a link which has a copy of the ORIGINAL CIA DOCUMENT. its not a conspiracy theory or conspiracy website as you wrongly stated ,its a fact.there are hundreds of links to this US government if you can be bothered to spend 5 seconds looking

https://steemit.com/conspiracy/@bitcoinnational/cia-document-1035-960

second

one can argue the point that agenda 21 wants to "zone" people away from the land and into controlable "cities" and one of the tactics to achieve this is by following traditional warefare strategy of siege mentality. like in medieval and modern times the first thing you do is to cut off the essential supplies to the population by withdrawing their access to food,water,medicine,oil and fuels,transport etc.

in this case geoengineering the weather to stop rain and preticipation via chemicals dispersed into the atmosphere in targeted areas
very simple
no rain equals no water equals no crops equals no food equals no animals etc equals people leaving the land to find other sustainable areas which in this scenario the caring and loving government will provide for you.

what truly amazes me is that ignorance truly seems to be bliss amongst the many doubters on this forum of anything that isnt "mainstream" propoganda.
in the case of chem trails it only takes 5 minutes on the internet, to find countless government,military ,university and private coorparate white papers all discussing weather control and admitting that it is being carried out globally and indeed has been for many many years.
as i write this there are planes chem trailing. vapour trails dissapear ,chem trails remain,spread and appear to form "clouds". all you have to do is look up at the sky and watch it in process.another method to back this up is get on the government sites which shows all the commercial plane flights and see that commercial traffic here is but a few flights a day over our region.remember commercial flights leave no lasting trails as they are water vapour which evapourates within a couple of minutes and then count the amount of trails that dont dissapate and you will be able to calculate that there are many more flights than listed on the commercial routes. so for people to say they are just vapour trails from commercial flights literally doesnt add up.so what are these many "extra non listed daily flights" and what is the purpose of planes non listed that are  flying back and forth spewing out behind them something that isnt water vapour? my wife and i have counted 8 planes in one day operating at the same time,all visible to the naked eye doing just that and afterwards what was a clear blue sky became a hazy white mush. 

[felipe]

But that has nothing to do with agenda21. Give examples of where this is happening. And not Almeria. Where is it that people are leaving the land because of lack of crops? Not East Africa either as droughts have been ongoing there for centuries. I am not debating cloud seeding as I have no knowledge about the topic and interest in researching it.

This region had the wettest winter for many years. The summer has been pretty much as normal. But the issue for local farmers is that because they have been planting more and more fruit trees in the region the demand for water has increased. See the swathes of new trees near Ballabona. New plantations of olive trees are also on the increase locally. 

[solarsolutionsalmeria]

felipe this is the link to a site that shows the original cia document 1035-960. its not a conspiracy theory or web site its their own  CIA declassified document

https://steemit.com/conspiracy/@bitcoinnational/cia-document-1035-960

secondly it can be argued that through weather modification using chemicals dispersed strategically in the atmosphere causing lack of preticipation or rainfall, that  desired specific areas can be targeted therefore causing forced droughts (and the people off the land as a consequence) .

no rain no food grows, quite simple really

no different to any warefare modern or ancient (siege) . first step is to cut off the enemies vital supplies...food,water,fuel,commodoties etc

[solarsolutionsalmeria]

that is a copy and paste of the official declassified cia document 1035-960 its not from a conspiracy site its official from the cia, go look it up for yourself takes about 2 seconds to find

here is some more official info for the non believers below regarding weather modification so people can go check it for themselves, which it seems to me that people cant be bothered to do their own research and prefer the ignorance of saying "conspiracy theory" as it makes them feel "cleverer" than those that are informed through research...




In 1996 the US Air Force 2025 think tank announced that by the eponymous year, the United States will 'own the weather' by injecting 'chemical vapors' into the atmosphere. [2] A timetable of current–to future capabilities is provided in the document, including 'Chemicals' and 'Delivery vehicles'. The programme is actually operational, and is referred to in other, unclassified US Air Force papers discussed below. Furthermore, the 'owning the weather' document not only proves the existence of chemtrails, but mentions their use in then current weather modification operations.

The Air Force 2025 stated that by that year, the weather will be weaponised by numerous methods, 'including injection of chemical vapors and heating or charging via electromagnetic radiation or particle beams (such as ions, neutral particles, xrays, MeV particles, and energetic electrons)'. On the confirmation of chemicals and current deployments, the paper states: 'If clouds were seeded (using chemical nuclei similar to those used today or perhaps a more effective agent discovered through continued research) before their downwind arrival to a desired location, the result could be a suppression of precipitation' (emphasis added).[3]

Further evidence of the existence of chemtrails can be found in a document published by the Air Force Phillips Laboratory and the Air Force Materiel Command (which has no disclaimer about 'fictional scenarios') which stated:

   'Measurements of effluent plumes and chemical clouds by ground-based and airborne Lidar [Light detection and ranging] will continue through FY99'.[4]

1999 was the year in which Sonoma State University's Project Censored named chemtrails one of the most underreported stories of the year. [5]

According to US Air Force Colonel William Scott Bell, writing in 2008, 'Today, NASA and several other organizations use space-based LIDAR to analyze cloud formations and atmospheric aerosols'. (empasis added) [6] Given that Patrick Minnis works for NASA, specifically the Langley Institute which uses satellites to monitor (what it claims are condensation) trails,[7] it is clear why Minnis is the media's favoured spokesman.

The Air Force Phillips-Materiel Command document added that the Air Force's aims were to 'Develop accurate and validated cloud and weather simulation for any world-wide location to support acquisition, training and war-gaming', [8] which explains why chemtrails have been observed all over the world. The four main countries in which chemtrails first appeared – US, UK, Canada, and Australia – have a history of working together on classified weather modification and biochemical warfare trial projects, according to the World Meteorological Organization [9] and the UK Ministry of Defence. [10] After 1999, however, people in other countries, including European and North African states, began to notice the chemtrails.

US Congressman Dennis Kucinich's Space Preservation Act (2001) listed 'chemtrails' as 'an exotic weapons system'. [11] Few chemtrail debunkers cite Kucinich's bill. The Wikipedia entry on chemtrails does mention the Kucinich bill, but attempts to discredit the bill by inferring that the bill was subjected to ridicule in Congress before being quashed, and that it refers to 'extraterrestrial' and 'tectonic' weapons, so by definition it must be frivolous. [12] In reality, 'extraterrestrial' means weapons placed in the space medium (not 'alien' technology), and the existence of tectonic weapons was confirmed in 1997 by then US Defense Secretary Bill Cohen, who admitted that he and his Pentagon cronies were 'intensify[ing] our efforts' to 'set off volcanoes, tsunamis using electromagnetic waves', [13] echoing the work of President Johnson's science advisor, Gordon MacDonald, in the late-1960s on earthquake weapons. [14]

Further evidence of the existence of not only chemtrails but the operational validity of the 'owning the weather' programme can be found in a US Air Force paper, circa 1999:

   'The joint Army/AF [Air Force] OTW [Owning the Weather] initiative will provide knowledge of current and forecast battlefield environment conditions, along with their effects on systems, soldiers, operations, and tactics, to contribute to the Army's decisive advantage over its opponents. Within the DOD [Department of Defense], BE [the Battlefield Environment division] is the lead agency for multi-service R&D programs in transport and dispersion modelling..... [T]he Dugway Meteorology and Obscurants Division's Modeling and Assessment Branch provides......prototype development of virtual proving ground meteorological support. Division members also serve on various national and international committees addressing issues related to meteorological measurements and atmospheric dispersion modeling'. [15]

This paper has not been cited by those seeking to debunk the 'chemtrail conspiracy'. Aerosol obscuration is achieved by the creation of artificial cirrus clouds which originate as 'contrails' emitted from specialised aircraft. These operations have their origins in the US Air Force's 1940s' Project Cirrus. [16] Shortly after it was recognised that the energy in the ionosphere could be harnessed for electromagnetic warfare. US Navy documents from the 1960s discuss injecting energy into the ionosphere in order to release more power. The Advanced Research Projects Agency began a project, titled 'Some Upper Atmosphere Aspects of Chemical Geophysical Warfare'. [17] Around that time, the US military began experimenting with atmospheric barium releases.

Barium is a piezoelectric substance: i.e. it generates an electric field or electric potential in response to applied mechancial and electromagnetic stress; e.g. the stress of the Earth's electromagnetic fields. A paper published in the Journal of Atmospheric and Terrestrial Physics, archived by the military, noted 'The use of high altitude releases of barium vapor for the production of visible plasma clouds'. [18] The global releases of barium as a means of altering the Earth's magnetic field lines for the purpose of energy transfer found its way into the patents of Bernard Eastlund, [19] an 'inventor' credited with designing the early phases of the High-Frequency Active Auroral Research Programme (HAARP). [20]

Based in Alaska, HAARP is a 180-antenna array which modifies the ionosphere for experimental purposes. It has been condemned by the European Parliament for its potential 'manipulation of global weather patterns'. [21] More than this, however, the HAARP can act as one of a dozen or so groundbased lasers that charge the barium particles present in chemtrails. [22]

An Air Force Phillips-Materiel Command symposium held in 1997 listed 'Cloud modification – surveillance/coverage/ Hole Boring/Create/suppress Cirrus/contrails/Ionospheric modification' on the same page. Why would the document list 'contrails' unless it referred to a modified form of contrail (i.e. an aerosol/chemtrail) which, the document acknowledged, the Air Force can 'Create/suppress' in relation to 'Cirrus' clouds and 'Ionospheric modification'? [23] This fits the cited 1996 plan, which admitted that the Air Force analyses 'chemical clouds' (quoted above). Most of the chemtrails documented by global citizens expand into cirrus clouds. There is also a picture of HAARP in the symposium slideshow. A SPACECAST 2020 paper published around 1994 explained:

   'This technology will involve temporarily modifying the ionosphere through insertion of gaseous compounds......at certain altitudes and locations to increase the neutral and electron density.....This effect, however, can also be enhanced by shooting a high energy laser, microwave, or particle beam (wavelength will be dependent on gaseous compounds used) into the chemical insertion region to accelerate the photoionization and dissociative recombination processes. End result from the chemical insertion will be increased electron density having a jamming effect on the enemy's radio wave propagation capability due to absorption of the wave energy by the charged particles in the enhanced ionosphere. The downside is that your own communications can be affected as well.' [24]

The last sentence is no longer applicable due to HAARP, which communicates within Ultra-, Very-, and Extremely-low frequencies. The Air Force Materiel-Phillips Lab document also mentions the dispersal of 'chemical clouds' in relation to HAARP: 'Chemical and other techniques to mitigate deleterious ionization effects on GPS transmission will be tested and evaluated in FY97-99', [25] again, the years in which chemtrails were seen to be intensifying.

The 'owning the weather' paper, which, as noted, at least two other Air Force publications acknowledge to be authentic and operational, notes that operations range

   'From enhancing friendly operations or disrupting those of the enemy via small-scale tailoring of natural weather patterns to complete dominance of global communications and counterspace control.' [26]

Likewise, the UK MoD in a thirty-year projection stated that 'Weather modification will continue to be explored' and the effects might be to 'disrupt lines of communication'. [27]

Because civilian infrastructure is dependent upon space for telecommunications, the internet, banking, GPS, weather and climate prediction and analysis, etc., the goal of the Pentagon is to 'dominat[e] the space dimension' in order to 'protect' 'dual-use', civilian-military hardware and software from counter-space attacks, solar flares (space weather), and other damaging effects. By covering the troposphere in a blanket of artificial clouds, the Pentagon can disrupt Russian, Chinese, and other military and civilian communications, while maintaining its own and 'protecting' those of its allies. This will lead to Full Spectrum Dominance, as the Pentagon explains:

   'Information superiority relies heavily upon space capabilities to collect, process, and disseminate an uninterrupted flow of information while denying an adversary's ability to fully leverage the same.... [T]he military must preserve certain core space capabilities, e.g., missile warning, assured space communications, and large portions of ISR [intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance]. Other space capabilities, once the domain of the military, can reasonably migrate to the civil and commercial sectors, e.g., weather, GPS, and multispectral imagery.' [28]

Biochemical nanotech

Aside from modifying the ionosphere for the purposes of 'info dominance', weather weaponisation, and geophysical warfare, chemtrails also play a part in biochemical warfare analysis, trials, and possibly binary nanotech. according to the journal of Science and Engineering Ethics,

   'Passive observation of people could.....be complemented by actively manipulating them – for instance, if it would be possible to gain direct technical access to their nervous system or brain......
   Nanoparticles could eventually be transported as aerosols over great distances and be distributed diffusely. They could enter the human body by way of the lungs, through the skin, or the digestive tract'. [29]

As noted, NASA's Langley Institute has been assigned to analyse the cloud formations and track the biochemical agents using infrared and ultraviolet LIDAR. In 2001, a PowerPoint presentation was given to delegates from the US Air Force 2025 (the 'owning the weather' team), DARPA, CIA, FBI, et al., attending a NASA Langley Institute meeting. Relative to chemtrails, the presentation included as the 'Major Influences of IT/Bio/Nano Upon Future Warfare':

   'Ubiquitous miniaturized/networked multi-physics, hyperspectral sensors......Wonderous [sic: wandering?] /Ubiquitous land/sea/air/space multiphysics, hyperspectral sensor swarms (military/commercial/scientific)..... Robotic/swarm technologies primarily commercial/endemic worldwide....."Volumetric" weaponry.....fuel/air dust/air....Isomers [nuclei, which the Owning the Weather document confirmed are needed for cloud creation]......Carbon fibres.'

(The Owning the Weather document also mentioned the use of carbon black nano-dust.) The presentation also included a discussion on:

   'Airborne varieties of Ebola, Lassa, etc.....Aflatoxin ("natural," parts-per-billion carcinogen[)].... Binary bio into nation's agric./food distrib. system (every home/foxhole).....Genomicaly (individual/society) targeted pathogens.....Ubiquitous/Cheap micro-to-nano EVERYTHING......precision strike, volumetric warfare, "swarms".......Binary bio (anti-functional/fauna)..... Inexp. Binary Bio into Food Supply.' [30]

The report listed 'Vulnerabilities: Visual, lidar, IR [infrared], biolum [bio-luminescent?], turbidity.' Why would 'turbidity', which means thickness and density, particularly in relation to atmospheric processes, be discussed unless it referred to purposefully created, wind-blown aerosols? The biochemical agents being released via chemtrails are therefore not only designed to monitor the health of targeted populations exposed to the pathogens, but also to test the efficacy of the LIDAR systems in preparation for 'volumetric' attacks on other countries. As the presentation clarified, this is an operation 'endemic worldwide'.'

In 2007, the UK Ministry of Defence confirmed that

   'Certain sensitive applications, such as decisive or revolutionary systems and weapons, especially those associated with deterrence and mass effect, will increasingly be developed in discreet (and discrete) partnerships. Specific national or closely allied expertise and investment will be required to address, for example nuclear, counter-terrorism and chemical and biological defence.' [31]

The 'defence' tag-on can be discounted because the 1940-79 biochemical-nuclear trials on the British public were also labelled 'defensive'. [32] In this MOD document we find the following:

   'In these cases, the supplier is likely to remain inhouse to Defence, or government-to-government. Direct investment will also remain important where there is no civilian counterpart, such as high-performance explosives, certain protection and guidance systems, and specific sensors......Military and civilian applications that require range and visibility, particularly sensing applications, are currently moving from ground to airborne use and, as they become practically and economically viable, many of these applications will be increasingly exploited either in the high atmosphere or in space.' (Emphases in bold in original) [33]

The reference to the 'high atmosphere' is key because that is where the chemtrails are being sprayed, according to the 'owning the weather' document, in relation to ionospheric weaponisation. Aside from 'owning the weather', the chemtrails being sprayed today are a continuation of this type of research. The US Air Force explained:

   'the Boundary Layer Meteorology and Aerosol Research Branch conducts a research program in the micrometeorological processes and structure of the atmospheric boundary layer. This program focuses on the interaction of the land-air interface with wind fields, turbulence, and fluxes and on optical methods of detection of aerosols (primarily chemical-biological agents) and the modeling of their transport and dispersion in the tactical environment'. [34]

According to Bradford University's Neil Davison, 'the Ministry of Defence and the US Department of Defense have collaborated on "non-lethal" weapons, including related wargaming, through a Memorandum of Understanding signed in February 1998' — around the time that chemtrailing intensified in the UK. As the Air Force Materiel Command listed 'chemical clouds' as part of its 'wargaming' programme which continued until at least 1999 (and in real terms far after), could these joint 'exercises' have involved chemtrails?

In 1999, the year that the Air Force Material Command announced expanded operations,

   'A proposal to develop an Overhead Chemical Agent Dispersion System (OCADS) was accepted for funding....under the Joint Non-Lethal Weapons Directorate's (JNLWD) Technology Investment Program (TIP).'

The purpose of the development effort was to provide the US military with:

   '.....the ability to rapidly disperse chemical agents over large areas. The dispersed agents can be used for crowd control or to provide a remotely generated protective barrier.'





   

[felipe]

But you still have not explained your conclusion how agenda21 has caused the increase in food deprivation.

All you have done is copy and paste a document from a conspiracy website about Kennedy´s assassination.

[solarsolutionsalmeria]

The CIA Coined the Term Conspiracy Theorist In 1967

That all changed in the 1960s.

Specifically, in April 1967, the CIA wrote a dispatch which coined the term "conspiracy theories" ... and recommended methods for discrediting such theories.  The dispatch was marked "psych" –  short for "psychological operations" or disinformation –  and "CS" for the CIA's "Clandestine Services" unit.

The dispatch was produced in responses to a Freedom of Information Act request by the New York Times in 1976.

The dispatch states:

    2. This trend of opinion is a matter of concern to the U.S. government, including our organization.

     

    ***

     

    The aim of this dispatch is to provide material countering and discrediting the claims of the conspiracy theorists, so as to inhibit the circulation of such claims in other countries. Background information is supplied in a classified section and in a number of unclassified attachments.

     

    3. Action. We do not recommend that discussion of the [conspiracy] question be initiated where it is not already taking place. Where discussion is active addresses are requested:

     

    a. To discuss the publicity problem with and friendly elite contacts (especially politicians and editors) , pointing out that the [official investigation of the relevant event] made as thorough an investigation as humanly possible, that the charges of the critics are without serious foundation, and that further speculative discussion only plays into the hands of the opposition. Point out also that parts of the conspiracy talk appear to be deliberately generated by ...  propagandists. Urge them to use their influence to discourage unfounded and irresponsible speculation.

     

    b. To employ propaganda assets to and refute the attacks of the critics. Book reviews and feature articles are particularly appropriate for this purpose. The unclassified attachments to this guidance should provide useful background material for passing to assets. Our ploy should point out, as applicable, that the critics are (I) wedded to theories adopted before the evidence was in, (II) politically interested, (III) financially interested, (IV) hasty and inaccurate in their research, or (V) infatuated with their own theories.

     

    ***

     

    4. In private to media discussions not directed at any particular writer, or in attacking publications which may be yet forthcoming, the following arguments should be useful:

     

    a. No significant new evidence has emerged which the Commission did not consider.

     

    ***

     

    b. Critics usually overvalue particular items and ignore others. They tend to place more emphasis on the recollections of individual witnesses (which are less reliable and more divergent–and hence offer more hand-holds for criticism) ...

     

    ***

     

    c. Conspiracy on the large scale often suggested would be impossible to conceal in the United States, esp. since informants could expect to receive large royalties, etc.

     

    ***

     

    d. Critics have often been enticed by a form of intellectual pride: they light on some theory and fall in love with it; they also scoff at the Commission because it did not always answer every question with a flat decision one way or the other.

     

    ***

     

    f. As to charges that the Commission's report was a rush job, it emerged three months after the deadline originally set. But to the degree that the Commission tried to speed up its reporting, this was largely due to the pressure of irresponsible speculation already appearing, in some cases coming from the same critics who, refusing to admit their errors, are now putting out new criticisms.

     

    g. Such vague accusations as that "more than ten people have died mysteriously" can always be explained in some natural way ....

     

    5. Where possible, counter speculation by encouraging reference to the Commission's Report itself. Open-minded foreign readers should still be impressed by the care, thoroughness, objectivity and speed with which the Commission worked. Reviewers of other books might be encouraged to add to their account the idea that, checking back with the report itself, they found it far superior to the work of its critics.

Here are screenshots of part of the memo:

CIA conspiracyCIA conspiracy2

Summarizing the tactics which the CIA dispatch recommended:

    Claim that it would be impossible for so many people would keep quiet about such a big conspiracy

    Have people friendly to the CIA attack the claims, and point back to "official" reports

    Claim that eyewitness testimony is unreliable

    Claim that this is all old news, as "no significant new evidence has emerged"

    Ignore conspiracy claims unless discussion about them is already too active

    Claim that it's irresponsible to speculate

    Accuse theorists of being wedded to and infatuated with their theories

    Accuse theorists of being politically motivated

    Accuse theorists of having financial interests in promoting conspiracy theories

In other words, the CIA's clandestine services unit created the arguments for attacking conspiracy theories as unreliable in the 1960s as part of its psychological warfare operations.

CIA Document 1035-960
Concerning Criticism of the Warren Report

CIA Document #1035-960

RE: Concerning Criticism of the Warren Report

1. Our Concern. From the day of President Kennedy's assassination on, there has been speculation about the responsibility for his murder. Although this was stemmed for a time by the Warren Commission report, (which appeared at the end of September 1964), various writers have now had time to scan the Commission's published report and documents for new pretexts for questioning, and there has been a new wave of books and articles criticizing the Commission's findings. In most cases the critics have speculated as to the existence of some kind of conspiracy, and often they have implied that the Commission itself was involved. Presumably as a result of the increasing challenge to the Warren Commission's report, a public opinion poll recently indicated that 46% of the American public did not think that Oswald acted alone, while more than half of those polled thought that the Commission had left some questions unresolved. Doubtless polls abroad would show similar, or possibly more adverse results.

2. This trend of opinion is a matter of concern to the U.S. government, including our organization. The members of the Warren Commission were naturally chosen for their integrity, experience and prominence. They represented both major parties, and they and their staff were deliberately drawn from all sections of the country. Just because of the standing of the Commissioners, efforts to impugn their rectitude and wisdom tend to cast doubt on the whole leadership of American society. Moreover, there seems to be an increasing tendency to hint that President Johnson himself, as the one person who might be said to have benefited, was in some way responsible for the assassination.

Innuendo of such seriousness affects not only the individual concerned, but also the whole reputation of the American government. Our organization itself is directly involved: among other facts, we contributed information to the investigation. Conspiracy theories have frequently thrown suspicion on our organization, for example by falsely alleging that Lee Harvey Oswald worked for us. The aim of this dispatch is to provide material countering and discrediting the claims of the conspiracy theorists, so as to inhibit the circulation of such claims in other countries. Background information is supplied in a classified section and in a number of unclassified attachments.

3. Action. We do not recommend that discussion of the assassination question be initiated where it is not already taking place. Where discussion is active [business] addresses are requested:

    a. To discuss the publicity problem with [?] and friendly elite contacts (especially politicians and editors), pointing out that the Warren Commission made as thorough an investigation as humanly possible, that the charges of the critics are without serious foundation, and that further speculative discussion only plays into the hands of the opposition. Point out also that parts of the conspiracy talk appear to be deliberately generated by Communist propagandists. Urge them to use their influence to discourage unfounded and irresponsible speculation.

    b. To employ propaganda assets to [negate] and refute the attacks of the critics. Book reviews and feature articles are particularly appropriate for this purpose. The unclassified attachments to this guidance should provide useful background material for passing to assets. Our ploy should point out, as applicable, that the critics are (I) wedded to theories adopted before the evidence was in, (I) politically interested, (III) financially interested, (IV) hasty and inaccurate in their research, or (V) infatuated with their own theories. In the course of discussions of the whole phenomenon of criticism, a useful strategy may be to single out Epstein's theory for attack, using the attached Fletcher [?] article and Spectator piece for background. (Although Mark Lane's book is much less convincing that Epstein's and comes off badly where confronted by knowledgeable critics, it is also much more difficult to answer as a whole, as one becomes lost in a morass of unrelated details.)

4. In private to media discussions not directed at any particular writer, or in attacking publications which may be yet forthcoming, the following arguments should be useful:

    a. No significant new evidence has emerged which the Commission did not consider. The assassination is sometimes compared (e.g., by Joachim Joesten and Bertrand Russell) with the Dreyfus case; however, unlike that case, the attack on the Warren Commission have produced no new evidence, no new culprits have been convincingly identified, and there is no agreement among the critics. (A better parallel, though an imperfect one, might be with the Reichstag fire of 1933, which some competent historians (Fritz Tobias, AJ.P. Taylor, D.C. Watt) now believe was set by Vander Lubbe on his own initiative, without acting for either Nazis or Communists; the Nazis tried to pin the blame on the Communists, but the latter have been more successful in convincing the world that the Nazis were to blame.)

    b. Critics usually overvalue particular items and ignore others. They tend to place more emphasis on the recollections of individual witnesses (which are less reliable and more divergent--and hence offer more hand-holds for criticism) and less on ballistics, autopsy, and photographic evidence. A close examination of the Commission's records will usually show that the conflicting eyewitness accounts are quoted out of context, or were discarded by the Commission for good and sufficient reason.

    c. Conspiracy on the large scale often suggested would be impossible to conceal in the United States, esp. since informants could expect to receive large royalties, etc. Note that Robert Kennedy, Attorney General at the time and John F. Kennedy's brother, would be the last man to overlook or conceal any conspiracy. And as one reviewer pointed out, Congressman Gerald R. Ford would hardly have held his tongue for the sake of the Democratic administration, and Senator Russell would have had every political interest in exposing any misdeeds on the part of Chief Justice Warren. A conspirator moreover would hardly choose a location for a shooting where so much depended on conditions beyond his control: the route, the speed of the cars, the moving target, the risk that the assassin would be discovered. A group of wealthy conspirators could have arranged much more secure conditions.

    d. Critics have often been enticed by a form of intellectual pride: they light on some theory and fall in love with it; they also scoff at the Commission because it did not always answer every question with a flat decision one way or the other. Actually, the make-up of the Commission and its staff was an excellent safeguard against over-commitment to any one theory, or against the illicit transformation of probabilities into certainties.

    e. Oswald would not have been any sensible person's choice for a co-conspirator. He was a "loner," mixed up, of questionable reliability and an unknown quantity to any professional intelligence service.

    f. As to charges that the Commission's report was a rush job, it emerged three months after the deadline originally set. But to the degree that the Commission tried to speed up its reporting, this was largely due to the pressure of irresponsible speculation already appearing, in some cases coming from the same critics who, refusing to admit their errors, are now putting out new criticisms.

    g. Such vague accusations as that "more than ten people have died mysteriously" can always be explained in some natural way e.g.: the individuals concerned have for the most part died of natural causes; the Commission staff questioned 418 witnesses (the FBI interviewed far more people, conduction 25,000 interviews and re interviews), and in such a large group, a certain number of deaths are to be expected. (When Penn Jones, one of the originators of the "ten mysterious deaths" line, appeared on television, it emerged that two of the deaths on his list were from heart attacks, one from cancer, one was from a head-on collision on a bridge, and one occurred when a driver drifted into a bridge abutment.)

5. Where possible, counter speculation by encouraging reference to the Commission's Report itself. Open-minded foreign readers should still be impressed by the care, thoroughness, objectivity and speed with which the Commission worked. Reviewers of other books might be encouraged to add to their account the idea that, checking back with the report itself, they found it far superior to the work of its critics.

[Tetley]

Just to help us dim folks out a bit.   :welcome:

does this chem trail lark make people internet,phone,social media & forums Addicted and argumentative  ?

if it does

i recon there could be somthing in it.


Morning mi EU Luvlies   :039: x

[twojaysalmeria]

Macc:

"Agenda blah blah" wasn't displaying my ignorance of A21 but was – I thought rather obviously – showing my disdain for the repetitive waving of the great conspiracy flag. Perhaps I should try to keep my comments a little more easy to translate, eh?

So – Agenda 21 lays out non-binding guidelines for promoting economic growth, environmental protection and social equality. Basically, it is a recipe for living within our means today, so that we do not pass along to our children a degraded economy, environment and society. It addresses topics as various as toxic waste, biotechnology, conservation and green transportation, all with the goal of helping poor countries develop economies — in large part, by encouraging wealthy countries to dial back in sensible ways on their consumption of resources. Planners help communities find common-sense, constructive ways of using limited resources wisely. It looks for ways to make transportation inexpensive and keep energy plentiful.

OK so far?

Now, amongst others, there's a chap called Glenn Beck who bought the rights to a NOVEL – yup, a novel – written by a lady named Harriet Parke. He then tweaked it a little, had his name placed on the cover as author (with the well-paid Ms Parke noted as a ghost writer) and promoted this novel as a work of fact, portraying a dystopian future where we sheeple are controlled by faceless powers-that-be. He's making a lot of money out of this scare-mongering with TV appearances, book sales, magazine and newspaper articles etc.

Other modern day 'pundits' who decry Agenda 21 generally focus on chapter 4 and take some lines from it out of context to 'prove' their unscientific posturing. Given that the agenda is 40 chapters  in length I would surmise that it's as easy to take something out of context as it is from, say, any of the 'Holy' books.

So...no, I'm not ignorant of the facts surrounding A21, Chemtrails, cloud seeding, UFOs and whatever other malarkey those who have the new religion which is called Conspiracy. I suppose trying to explain scientific rigour, cognitive dissonance or even belief bubbles to a 'believer' is truly a waste of time; it's about as difficult as explaining evolution to a Creationist ("but it's only a THEORY...") but, hey ho, one has to try.

Enjoy your day, even as you gaze into the skies wailing "Woe, woe and thrice woe!!"

J

[Floss]

At last a topic which i for one have enjoyed reading and has not been hijacked in someway or other reminds me of the Forum of old. :c017:

[macc]

Most people have never even heard of Agenda 21 even though it,s been around since 1993 and Felipe you speak of agenda 21 as if it is something from the past and only applied to the UK. You are so out of touch with the reality of A21 it's unreal, and you say it is something you studied for an undergraduate degree and also taught about it. The blind leading the blind comes to mind.  The Sustainable Development methods of agenda 21 are fact, not fiction, and were initially non binding, but they are again slowly and by stealth changing this, and they are a definite assault on property rights, and as SSSA says, all the info is there to be read The UN goal is that there will be no property rights.  They will control all land, all water, all resources, and all people. All you need to do to verify this is go to the UN website, but you should know this alreadfy. I think you have it backwards Felipe. MSM and TV has people like you programmed to dismiss any idea they don't like based on nothing more than their calling it a "conspiracy theory".  With 21 our freedoms are taken away slowly one by one, not all at once, so you might say, well there goes another freedom.  But if it happened all at once, it would cause huge problems. Agenda 21 makes the plans Hitler had sound whimsical.  Take just one thing they really want to do, control all water supplies, and this goes back to the OP, once they control the water, we are all screwed. Agenda 21, sustainable development, even the title seems weird, i thought sustain meant to stay the same, as for chemtrails, if ignorant people, and i'm being real polite when i just say ignorant, prefer not to err on the side of caution, i have no problems with that. Twojays and agenda whatever blah blah,  :bravo_2: ehhhh what is agenda 21 by the way twojays, just because you know nothing doesn't mean you should knock it, but it's normal on here. Hogs at least has done a little research, so thinking can be a good thing. :051bye:

[Tetley]

According to a 2015 poll, 45% of Americans believe
that extra-terrestrials have visited the earth. :a102:
:57:
Oh dear !

and 52 % of Brits think they then moved to the UK   :57: xx

[twojaysalmeria]

Oh please - give it enough time and then re-run the nonsense about chemtrails and agenda whatever blah blah. This was all discussed on this forum some months ago - when serious and thoughtful arguments with science and LOADS of references were made to refute the pseudo-science claims about all this clap-trap, the proponents for the 'uber-government agencies working on destroying we poor proles' went quiet.

So much of the rubbish about control of the ionosphere, control of rainfall, control of our brain patterns, control of our libidos etc etc etc etc ad nauseum is based on nonsense based on a novel stolen from a female author for money which was then promoted as reality in order to sell more copies.

If in doubt - put a tin-foil hat on to shield your thoughts OR.....have a few beers.

However, it has to be said, trying to convince a conspiracy nut of the facts of life is as unlikely as trying to convince a creationist that Dawkins is a right-minded person.

Oh .... it's INDEPENDENT. No A in the word, even for 'self-educated' individuals.

J

[Angleseyite]

Hogs
I totally agree, a bit of brainwashing going on in my opinion. Might be wrong of course, but don't think so as of yet.  :08:

[felipe]

You have only come to a conclusion that agenda21 is the cause from a Spanish news item.  Did the report actually state that ag21 was the cause. I am not repeating what I was taught. It is through research, reading and writing over several years. You cannot possibly conclude from just one report you need detailed proof from extensive research.

Furthermore, a report about the increase in not enough food for some peoples is primarily down to the proliferation of violent conflict and climatic disasters. Details here http://www.thedailystar.net/backpage/244m-not-getting-enough-food-1463107

So nothing to do with agenda 21.

[solarsolutionsalmeria]

here is your requested link

http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/

they have the registered US patents for the chemical mixtures on this site

also dont forget about all those weapons of mass destruction they never found in iraq

i trust the bushes and the clintons, cnn the bbc and of course all politicians and governments,just like all you guys

try looking up and you can see for yourself

[Jo-JoB]

sssa,
Your comment
''no one is taking into consideration the massive chem trail/strategic aerosol spraying program/cloud seeding(all the same stuff,just different names) that is evident over our region on an almost daily basis, (as well as on a global level,all admitted in government documents)''.

I would be interested to see these ''Government documents'' that admit chem trail seeding is happening.

Please provide a link so I can read this.

[solarsolutionsalmeria]

felipe
so why is it on the spanish news a couple of weeks ago they stated that the for the first time in 10 or so years the amount of people not getting enough or no food has risen by over 15% on a global level, so that suggests that
your agenda 21 doesnt appear to be having the desired effect that you were taught to repeat and it seems my agenda 21 is taking effect ?

interesting that no one has broached the chem trail issue which as stated is designed to prevent rain fall (part of the original post).its on record that the chinese government used it for the opening and closing ceremonys of their olympics to ensure that rain didnt spoil these money making events

also it amazes me that people seem to believe everything that the governments tell them. what ever happened to independant thought?

mao,stalin,lennin,khymer rouge,north korea,stasi,chinese communist party are good examples of how governments dont lie and have the interests of their people at heart (just to mention a few)
communism/socialism governments were responsible for more deaths (over 200 million) in the 20th century than all the wars in the same period put together, i know who i dont believe

[ghostrider1611]

Only last week driving down the motorway past the ballabona service station I was amazed at the huge area of land being cleared for growing and thinking how the hell are they going to find the water for them   the area is desperate for a desalination plant preferably one tha t works

[felipe]

As I studied Agenda21 when I did my undergraduate degree and also taught about it, I am interested in how you reach the conclusion that Agenda21 caused people to be driven off their land. When it comes to the farming element of AG21, farmers were encouraged to develop new methods of farming that was more SUSTAINABLE than the methods they were currently using.

Many parts of the world were moving to a mono-culture method of farming. Where they only grew one crop. Farmers were encouraged to return to the old style of farming that saw crop rotation in fields, leaving one field fallow for a year before reusing it. This meant better quality and variety food crops was produce rather than huge volumes of one crop, much of which was wasted.

The purpose of Agenda21 was to aid sustainable development. Where everyone, not just farmers, could work towards providing a better natural environment for future generations. To help aid the reduction in species of flora and fauna being exterminated through poor farming methods. There is a unique interaction between insects, small mammals, birds and crops. In many case if one of them is removed the others suffer. These are called communities and as such rely on each other to provide food for one species or another. A micro food chain that helps farmers yield better crops.

Following the introduction of Agenda21 in the mid 1990s farmers in the UK were encouraged to start introducing areas around their fields called buffer zones. These zones were up to 2mtrs wide and provided space for insects a small mammals to breed and feed. The result was that the farmers had a substantial increase in the yield. The problem was that before, when they farmed up to the extremities of the field, insects that ate crop killing aphids and beetles were not breeding. Thus killing off much of their crops. The introduction of buffer zones helped alleviate this.

So, far from being used to drive farmers off their land Agenda21 benefited them, if they took note of it and incorporated it into their farming methods. Agenda21 was never a law of farming that farmers had to follow the non-binding UN agreement.

Your claim is pure conspiracy beliefs. Far from promoting international governance, for example, it calls for greater local government involvement in sustainable agricultural and urban development. The complete opposite of what you claim.

[Tetley]

Do not forget the massive increase in population  over the 20 years. Most new houses have a pool with an average 60000 ltrs of water.

itrestng comment Phil,ive been going through some old vhs videos from 1999/2000 in Arboleas and there was very very few new builds to consume the water,

infact i genral/local on one of me vids,2 of us had a night out for 4 quid that bought nine tubos.....happy days...befor it all got over complicated.....

[345 Challenger]

In the UK it can take up to 30,000 gallons to build an average 3 bed house, I'm guessing Spain will be on par with the UK. Just working on our frugle use of water we used 96,000 litres on average a year and we never had a pool.......bearing in mind last year or the year before the rainfall for I believe for 11 months was just 43 mm, and the yearly average for the region is 345mm per annum. I'd be uneasy about the usage of non renewable subterranean resources, which took many centuries to fill.