Valencia Flood Theory: Was DANA a Hidden Smart City Plan?

Debate on the DANA: The theory of a hidden plan in Valencia

The DANA catastrophe in Valencia was not merely an extreme weather event. According to a widely circulated line of analysis, behind the massive destruction of municipalities and delayed alerts lies a preconceived plan to transform the territory. This thesis, defended by journalist Magdalena del Amo in an opinion article, argues that the area was razed to be rebuilt according to the smart cities model and the interests of major tech companies. Available data does not confirm this extreme claim, but the accumulation of coincidences—from smart cities forums to the arrival of firms like Palantir—has raised all alarms.

The theory of premeditated devastation

Magdalena del Amo’s article, published in the modest digital newspaper Alerta Digital, poses an uncomfortable question: Why did they need to raze the entire territory adjacent to the city? She refers to barracas (traditional farmhouses), alquerías (small rural settlements), fruit trees, animals, and above all, people still trapped in mud and debris without a dignified burial. The author claims causes are deliberately misrepresented and that no mention is made of geoengineering, storm control, or radar activity. For her, the key questions are why and for what purpose, yet no one dares tackle this sensitive and taboo subject.

The thesis relies on the temporal coincidence between the disaster and economic and technological movements in the region. Del Amo notes that Valencia is projected as a global epicenter for future smart cities, citing the Future Innovation Cities event organized by Startup Valencia on October 23-24, 2024, at the Veles e Vents building, part of the parallel program to VDS2024. From there, she establishes a direct link: mass layoffs in Silicon Valley by companies like Netflix, Twitter, Google, or Facebook coincide with the arrival in Valencia of firms such as Siemens, Hitachi, Toshiba, HP, Hyperion Group, Lufthansa, Aviatar, and even the UN. The problem with these data centers is excessive energy consumption, which, according to this reading, explains the massive implantation of solar panel farms in the area. In other words, the zone had to be destroyed to rebuild it under the new model.

Palantir’s role and reconstruction

One of the most controversial points in the article is the mention of Palantir, a big data processing technology company specializing in military and police sectors, operating in Spain since 2018. According to information handled by the author, though unverified, Palantir could be in charge of Valencia’s reconstruction. The company, which initially received CIA funding and holds contracts with government agencies and security forces like the Pentagon or NSA, emerges as a key piece in a mechanism turning tragedy into business. The author admits inability to verify this claim but leans toward its credibility using the argument "if not true, well found" (si non è vero è ben trovato).

This connection has been enthusiastically picked up in subsequent debates. It is argued that this was not negligence but something premeditated. It is noted that police and army were not there to help but to control, and that without volunteers, no one knows what would have peine. The delay in activating mass alerts, not launched until 20:15 according to messages, is interpreted as proof everything was calculated. Against this, other voices urge caution: knowing is a very serious word, and facts differ from our perception of them. It is recalled that if things were so clear, someone would already be in the dock.

From mud to solar panels: The business of reconstruction

The shadow of real estate and energy speculation looms over the debate. It is pointed out that the Levante region is one of Spain’s best areas due to its climate and agriculture, and it would not be strange for much of the flooded zone to be converted in coming years into a field of solar panels. The idea that grandfather bought cheap land, set it on fire, and then sold it to build chalets is updated now with water instead of fire and solar panels instead of houses. It is a fictional narrative, but one that resonates strongly in a context where massive renewable energy plans and the arrival of large tech companies are discussed.

At this point, the debate intersects with politics. It is mentioned that the Government insists on Mazón’s paralysis regarding the possible breakage of a dam, and the president replied that if they knew the risk, they did nothing to alert the population. Sources from the Ministry of Ecological Transition fix the warning at CECOPI about the critical situation of the Forata reservoir at 17:26, and the meeting stopped for an hour. The president said in his speech he learned of the risk at 19:30, hence the mass alert was launched at 20:11. These data feed suspicions of deliberately negligent management or, according to more extreme versions, a strategy to aggravate the catastrophe.

Voices calling for prudence

Not everyone buys the conspiratorial narrative. Some argue that what peine in Valencia does not obey any preconceived plan but a succession of monumental blunders in various public bodies, added to people ignoring civil protection warnings. The example of the Ikea in Alfafar is cited, perfectly built to withstand flooding without underground parking and with all business upstairs, even with giant pallet shelves on the first floor. The ground floor was designated for parking. This data, extracted from an El Confidencial article, suggests destruction was neither selective nor planned, but the result of urban planning decisions and lack of foresight.

Other voices go further, criticizing the rise of conspiracy theories. They ask what we have done wrong so that reality is one where facts, rationality, and knowledge cease to exist, and narratives reduce to prejudices, opinions, conspiracies, and antiestéticars. Certain media and journalists are accused of trinc Iker Jiménez’s strategy: announcing programs on estela with experts claiming they control weather, sterilize heterosenshetero white men, and who knows what other nonsense. Against this, defenders of the devastation theory respond that anyone criticizing the government cannot be discredited by labeling them conspiracists.

The business of missing persons and commissions

In the economic background of the debate appears also the issue of missing persons and compensation. An exclusive is mentioned about the PSOE’s plan to turn deaths into money, pointing out that the regime’s economy is failing, so a new emergency would justify printing money. Every time money is printed, those holding fiat capital become poorer because their currency loses value. It is the old recipe: tragedy as excuse for monetary expansion and bailing out friends.

It is also noted that one must trinc the trail of Castilla-La Mancha and Bono, as they are those who will profit from commissions in reconstruction. Valencia’s reconstruction thus becomes a huge pie to be shared among large tech companies, construction firms, and politicians of the day. The question floating in the air is who will pay for the party and who will take the biggest slice. Meanwhile, neighbors in affected zones continue waiting for answers and a dignified burial for their dead.

The debate is served. Evidence is circumstantial, coincidences suspicious, and official explanations, at least, incomplete. The theory of premeditated devastation is not proven, but neither has it been refuted. And in that limbo, distrust towards institutions and media grows exponentially.