The
Population Control Agenda Of The Radical Humanists Who Would Love For You And I
To Die
http://albertpeia.com/allfornaught.htm
[ And such would be all for
naught, in any event. CNN: Your Behavior Will Be Controlled by a Brain Chip Paul
Joseph Watson | Smart phone will be implanted within 75 years. { 75 years? This
world ain’t got 75 years … decades at best! For those
‘glass-half-full-reality-be-damned’ types, the bright side is that there will
still be that desolate ‘third rock from the sun’; which, like ‘old man river’,
will just keep rollin’ along (around the sun). } ]
By Michael, on October 11th, 2012
‘Billions of dollars is being
poured into an effort to reduce population growth all over the world, and most
people do not even know that it is happening. These efforts are often
promoted under such labels as "family planning", "abortion
rights" and "public health programs", but the primary goal is
always to get women to have less children. This population control agenda
has millions upon millions of supporters all over the planet and it is gaining
even more adherents with each passing day. It is being taught in
colleges, universities and schools all over the globe. It is being promoted
by radical humanists who are completely and totally convinced that the core
crisis that humanity is facing today is that there are way too many people
living on this planet. They fully believe that overpopulation is the root
cause of most of our economic, social, political and environmental
problems. In fact, the truth is that many of them actually believe that
they are literally in a "life or death" race to save the
planet. Many of the "true believers" are entirely convinced
that if human population numbers are not greatly reduced from where they are
now, the planet we are living on will be completely destroyed. That is
why many of these radical humanists would absolutely love for you and I to
die. From their perspective, the less people the better.
Many that write about the
population control agenda make it sound as if there is just a "tiny
elite" that is promoting this philosophy. Sadly, that is simply not
accurate. The truth is that this twisted agenda is being taught at the
majority of the colleges and universities in the United States. It is
being promoted in our television shows and in our movies. It is even
being taught to elementary school children.
As a result, more Americans that
ever are embracing this philosophy. You would be surprised how many
people actually believe that our growing population will soon cause major
shortages of food, water, oil and other important resources.
For example, the following is an
excerpt from one comment that was left on one of my previous articles about
population control....
It is undeniable, the
earth is being completely destroyed and while the planet could theoretically
sustain probably between 13 to 16 billion people, this would require 2
developments to occur:
1. There would have to be
a global resource-rational production & distribution scheme which would
ensure that each person could have enough air, water & food, in an
environment where, due to the resulting scarcity on clean resources, excess
& hoarding would be directly correlated with human death.
2. There would have to be
a dramatic reduction in the quality of life for a dramatically higher
percentage of the world’s population than currently experience miserable lives.
Rather than accept these
awful outcomes of unfettered industrialization, let us instead embark on a
course to drastically limit the global population to around 500 million.
Does that figure sound familiar?
It should. That is the
exact target number for the global human population that we find on
the Georgia Guidestones.
But when the population of the
earth was back at 500 million did we still have poverty, war, famines and other
similar problems?
Of course we did.
Reducing the population of the
planet by more than 90 percent would not wipe out any of our problems.
But this sick agenda is being
endlessly promoted in the mainstream media. For example, during a recent
radio interview HBO personality Bill Maher stated that he is "consistently
pro-death" and that he wants society to find ways to get more people to
die off...
"I’m pro-choice, I’m
for assisted suicide, I’m for regular suicide, I’m for whatever gets the
freeway moving – that’s what I’m for. It’s too crowded, the planet is too
crowded and we need to promote death."
You can hear Maher making these
comments right
here.
If you think that is sick, just
check out this next example.
Two "scientists"
recently published a paper in
the Journal of Medical Ethics in which they called for the legalization of
the murder of newborn babies. Instead of "murder", they want it
to be called "after-birth abortion" instead....
“[W]hen circumstances
occur after birth such that they would have justified abortion, what we call
after-birth abortion should be permissible. … [W]e propose to call this
practice ‘after-birth abortion’, rather than ‘infanticide,’ to emphasize that
the moral status of the individual killed is comparable with that of a fetus …
rather than to that of a child.
Therefore, we claim that
killing a newborn could be ethically permissible in all the circumstances where
abortion would be. Such circumstances include cases where the newborn has the
potential to have an (at least) acceptable life, but the well-being of the
family is at risk.”
Isn't that disturbing?
Actually, you would probably be
surprised at how many people there are that will read this article and find
nothing wrong with the idea of "after-birth abortion".
Respect for life is rapidly
declining in our society, and a big reason for that is because the population
control agenda is being pushed at our colleges and universities.
Just check out this quote from
an actual classroom
lecture by MIT professor Penny Chisholm....
"The real trick is,
in terms of trying to level off at someplace lower than that 9 billion, is to get
the birthrates in the developing countries to drop as fast as we can. And that
will determine the level at which humans will level off on earth."
There is something deeply
insidious about specifically targeting the "developing countries" for
population control. Do you think that Professor Chisholm really
understands the full implications of what she is saying?
This sick population control
agenda is also being heavily promoted in Europe.
A recent article by Jurriaan
Maessen discussed a document entitled "Scenarios
for a One Planet Economy in Europe" that was produced by a EU-funded
think think called the "One Planet Economy Network". One of the
goals of the One Planet Economy Network is to "help transform Europe to a
One Planet Economy by 2050."
"Scenarios
for a One Planet Economy in Europe" examines four different scenarios
that could play out as Europe moves toward a "green" future.
The following is a quote from a section of the report that discusses a scenario
entitled "Breaking Point"....
"The EU must take
strong measures to limit population growth both in Europe, but more importantly
in the rest of the world in the face of increasing demand at a time when
technological innovation is stagnant and global shortages (e.g. of fossil fuels
and agricultural land) are pushing up prices. In some European countries, life
expectancy stagnates; in others it falls."
Once again, we see an example of
where population growth for "the rest of the world" is considered to
be absolutely crucial. And that tends to be the attitude of many of these
radical humanists. It is always "someone else" that is the
biggest part of the problem.
Farther down in the report, it
is suggested that financial coercion could be used to motivate families to have
less children....
"Beginning in 2012,
one of the measures taken to control population growth was to phase-out child
benefits for multi-children families. By 2020, benefits were only provided for
up to a maximum of 2 children. As the economy in general has become more labour
intensive, immigration policies were relaxed in order to attract low skilled
labour, especially for the agriculture sector. This further adds to social
tension in the EU. Bilateral trade deals require trading partners to implement
population control measures."
But population control measures
are not just something that we will see in the future. The truth is that
UN agencies and non-governmental entities are already implementing population
control measures all over the globe. They are often called "family
planning programs" or "free sterilization drives", but the goal
is always to get women to have less children.
And in many of the wealthier
countries we are also seeing fertility levels steadily drop. Thanks to
all of the garbage in our food, air and water it is getting harder and harder
to get pregnant.
A recent article by Anthony
Gucciardi included the text of an email from a biotech scientist who
admitted that he was aware that his work was contributing to reduced
fertility. What you are about to read is absolutely stunning....
**********
In the email, the biotech
scientist known as ‘Ed’ explains how he thinks it’s absolutely ‘awesome’ that
GMOs are contributing to infertility, as he believes the world is
overpopulated. He also attacks me personally for my work on warning the public
over the dangers of GMOs (particularly the latest news over the research
linking GMOs to organ failure and tumor development). As of right now we have
not released the full name of ‘Ed’ nor his organization, but we may in the
future after considering the legal concerns.
Here is the Full Email:
I am no traitor against
humanity. If this **** causes infertility… Awesome!!
The world is over-populated,
and people need to stop having children. This is one of earth’s largest
problems.
If the earth wasn’t
overpopulated, things like growth hormones wouldn’t EXIST.
The reason they do, is that
the earth cannot produce enough food on its own to feed us all.
This is why GMO
is actually saving the planet.
So **** you and your ********.
I am doing humanity a ******* FAVOR!!!
Sincerely,
A REAL ‘traitor to humanity’
– Ed
You can also view the screenshot
for yourself here.
**********
Many of those promoting
genetically-modified foods for the public actually privately insist on organic
foods for
their own families.
They know what they are doing,
but they truly believe that it is good for the planet.
For these radical humanists, the
ends often justify the means. Many of them are entirely convinced that
humanity is only going to have a bright future if the global population is
reduced dramatically. So they are willing to take extraordinary measures
for "the greater good".
The mindset of some of these
radicals is absolutely frightening. For example, Dave Foreman, the
co-founder of Earth First, once said that reducing
the global population to 100 million is one of his three primary goals....
"My three main goals
would be to reduce human population to about 100 million worldwide, destroy the
industrial infrastructure and see wilderness, with it’s full complement of
species, returning throughout the world."
This kind of philosophy rises to
the surface in some of our most trusted publications quite often as well.
For example, Time Magazine once
ran an article entitled "How
To Die" that explained why it is a good thing to kill off the elderly.
Newsweek actually once ran an
article entitled "The
Case For Killing Granny".
Sadly, there was not a massive
national uproar over either of those articles. Yeah, a few people were
upset, but most Americans did not get seem too disturbed.
The truth is that the American
public is starting to buy into the propaganda that getting married and having
children is not such a great thing.
Today, an all-time low 44.2%
of all Americans between the ages of 25 and 34 are married, and fertility rates
in the U.S. are steadily dropping.
Back in 2008, the average number
of children per woman in the U.S. was 2.1.
By 2011, that number had fallen
to 1.9.
So the numbers are definitely
going in the direction that population control advocates want.
This twisted philosophy is even
represented in the White House. Barack Obama's primary science adviser,
John P. Holdren, once co-authored a book in
which he advocated the mass sterilization of American women. The
following is just one of the incredibly disturbing quotes from Holdren's
book....
“A program of sterilizing
women after their second or third child, despite the relatively greater
difficulty of the operation than vasectomy, might be easier to implement than
trying to sterilize men.
The development of a
long-term sterilizing capsule that could be implanted under the skin and
removed when pregnancy is desired opens additional possibilities for coercive
fertility control. The capsule could be implanted at puberty and might be
removable, with official permission, for a limited number of births.”
And this population control
agenda was even reflected in the new health care law. It is not an
accident that sterilization won't cost women a
single penny under Obamacare.
They want U.S. women to choose
sterilization. They want to make it as easy for them as possible.
The more women that get
sterilized, the less children that will be running around.
There is so much more that could
be written about the population control agenda of these radical
humanists. The following are 10 of my previous articles about this
issue....
#1 "They
Love Death"
#2 "From
7 Billion People To 500 Million People – The Sick Population Control Agenda Of
The Global Elite"
#3 "Al
Gore, Agenda 21 And Population Control"
#4 "The
Green Agenda Is About Getting Rid Of As Many Humans As Possible"
#8 "Hillary
Clinton: Population Control Will Now Become The Centerpiece Of U.S. Foreign
Policy"
#9 "New U.N. Report: We Must Reduce The Population To Fight
Climate Change"
So what do you think about all
of this?
Please feel free to post a
comment with your thoughts below....