We are witnessing the end of the world as we’ve known it. I am not being hyperbolic. Things are moving so quickly now it is extremely difficult to keep up. The changes being deployed through surveillance technologies around the world will forever change what life looks like and how the world operates if we don’t get a handle on this now. There’s not a second to wait. We must act quickly to shut down these tracking systems, or we will forever pay the price.
What follows is a deep dive into these systems and the people who are ushering this new layer of surveillance to allow the new world order agenda to take place. It is detailed and it is necessary for you to know. Every person reading this needs to understand what is being built around you without your knowledge or consent and how to fight back.
Let’s get started.
On July 23, 2026, Donald Trump stood at EPA headquarters and told a group of governors the quiet part out loud. He was not there to debate data centers. The debate was over. You can’t fight it, he said. You have to go with it. Then he told the tech companies present, to go sell their own communities on how great this all was, while he dangled the payoff in the same breath. You’ll make a tremendous amount of money. Your taxes will go down. Take the deal.
Read that again. What would we expect from the supposed “Master Negotiator”. A president just told the American people that resistance to a nationwide buildout of AI surveillance infrastructure is pointless, and the only correct response is to accept it and be grateful for the money you will make. That is not a leader who is listening to public concern. That is a businessman delivering a verdict that was decided quietly in his business dealings long before he stepped up to that podium and wrapped it up as a business opportunity that would bring benefit to the community, so people swallow it without a fight.
But, Mr. President, the people are not going to choke this down. Gallup is showing us the numbers. Overwhelming majorities, Republican and Democrat alike, oppose these data centers going up in their own backyards. In Florida, the fight has torn the Republican coalition apart, local officials against the federal machine. This was never a partisan fight. It is the public against the infrastructure, and the infrastructure just got the President of the United States to stand up and tell the public to sit down.
The public is accelerating their fight; I want you to know the other side of this disturbing story, most people never report on. We are winning!! In 2023, two data center projects were canceled because communities organized and fought back. In 2024 that number was six. In 2025 it was twenty-five, with twenty-one of those happening in the second half of the year as people learned from each other, shared legal strategies, and built regional coalitions that turned isolated local complaints into coordinated campaigns. Then the first quarter of 2026 arrived and seventy-five projects worth more than $130 billion were blocked or delayed in ninety days, a number that matched the entire scale of 2025 in a single quarter. Active opposition groups doubled from 396 to 833 across 49 states in that same period. The mere rumor of a data center is now enough to trigger organized resistance in communities that have watched what happened to their neighbors. At least $85 billion in projects have been outright canceled over three years. A dozen states have introduced construction moratoriums and New York passed one. The resistance is real. It is bipartisan, it is growing faster than the companies can manage, and the president telling people they cannot fight it is watching communities across forty-nine states prove him wrong one canceled project at a time. We need to continue the pressure by fighting every single new surveillance program our communities consider. We need to be vigilant.
This did not start with his recent speech at the EPA. It started in July 2025 when Trump signed an executive order fast-tracking federal permitting for data centers requiring more than 100 megawatts of electricity or costing at least $500 million, backing it with loans, grants, and tax incentives to break ground faster. Senate Democrats warned the order could let projects skip individual environmental review entirely under the Clean Water Act. The order came first, then the concrete. Then, the speech convincing people to accept it came a full year after the decision had already been made and the building had already begun. That is a done deal wrapped up wearing a ribbon pretending to be consensus.
The NDA Playbook: Gag the Officials, Hide the Plans, Build It Before Anyone Knows
Here is the part most people will never hear, and it connects the data center buildout directly to the Flock Safety surveillance playbook because they are using the same mechanism. Move in before the public knows what is happening. Bind the officials with NDAs to silence them, build fast in secret and by the time anyone figures out what’s been built in their community the concrete is already poured, and the cameras are already running.
Public officials across the country are signing nondisclosure agreements with data center developers, locking communities out of decisions that will directly affect their lives, utility bills, water supply, property values, and their health. In Virginia, home to the world’s largest concentration of data centers, 80 percent of localities with proposed or existing data centers have NDAs in place. An NBC News investigation examined 30 data center projects across 14 states and found in most of them local officials signed NDAs and worked with shell companies to conceal the identity of the company behind the project. In Arkansas, a Google NDA did not even name Google. The confidential information clause covered anything not ascertainable from the public and the agreement carved out an exemption from Freedom of Information Act requests. A city official agreed to keep a $4 billion project secret from the people who elected them because the company asked them to and they said yes.
A St. Louis County Minnesota commissioner was shocked to learn her colleagues had known about a massive proposed data center six months before the public did. She has since been working to make these agreements illegal, and a bipartisan bill to ban local government NDAs with data center developers has been moving through the state legislature. In Wisconsin, five communities signed NDAs with Microsoft. Then Microsoft announced in March 2026 it was ending the practice with local governments. Their corporate general counsel stated publicly that their neighbors deserve to know when they are coming to their community. Making this type of announcement publicly suggests that for quite a while they did not operate as though their neighbors deserved to know anything.
Unfortunately, Louisiana went the other direction. In 2024 the state passed a law making it easier for governments to keep development documents confidential if local officials argue their release would have a detrimental effect on business negotiations. The public’s right to know about infrastructure being built in their communities was subordinated by state law to a corporation’s interest in keeping its plans private. Lawmakers voted for it. These actions in multiple states shows at the very least that our conversations and questions during local elections needs to become extremely specific to find out what a candidates opinions are on these behaviors of public officials.
If these data centers create the jobs and tax revenue they claim, they shouldn’t need to arrive in secret. They wouldn’t need shell companies to conceal who is behind them, or NDAs to gag the elected officials approving them. The reason they operate this way is that they know what these communities would say if they were told the truth before the shovels went in, and they have calculated that it is easier to build first and manage the outrage afterward than to seek genuine public consent and risk hearing no. That is exactly what Flock Safety calculated too.
Comments
Nothing yet. Say the first thing.
Sign in to join the conversation.