Mon 13 Sep 2010
Summary: This article is a continuation of Andrew Gavin Marshall's article (brought in part on July 16) on the eugenics movement. After the tragedies particularly in China and India with governmental and corporate sterilization enforcements, sometimes under the pretext of vaccination campaigns for real diseases and often by quacks, third world countries in 1994 demanded development instead of sterilizations. The eugenics movement then fused with the environmental movement and launched overpopulation as a form of cancer, an uncontrolled dissemination not of cells, but people who are said to be killing the planet due to global warming and resource overuse. As Paul Ehrlich wrote: The disease is now so grave that only radical surgery (read large scale extermination of people) can save the planet! What the elite behind the eugenics movement /environmental movement fear is that their own inimitable kind is being wiped out by the survival of the unfittest, ie. the great unwashed masses! Therefore, the Rockefeller, Ford, Carnegie Foundation stand as financial backers behind the environmental movement. They have succeeded in diverting the attention of that movement to seeing the "gas of life", completely harmless CO2, as the real enemy. DDT was declared terribly toxic and banned as an anti-malaria agent with millions of deaths to follow - despite even Rockefeller´s WHO stating not to have found a single toxic effect of the substance. That the master race-elite strive to make their surviving slaves obedient robots by means of brainwashing, technology and genetics was described earlier on this blog. Now they are advertising in the major Anglo-Saxon newspapers for vaccination against stress with re-engineered herpes virus DNA, which destroys the parts of our brain which emotions such as anger, even our soul are linked to, in fact a biochemical lobotomy for the purpose of mind control. I think it is time that everyone asks himself this question: Whom will I belong to: the Creator or his clumsy mimic, Lucifer. For it will not much longer be possible for us to avoid making the choice: Would I let my brain manipulate and become a machine - or I will keep my God-given free will?
This is part II of Andrew Gavin Marshall´s essay on the elitist´s eugenics – part I was given in extract on this blog in extract on 16 July 2010. US elitists started funding the eugenics movement, in Germany, too – and Hitler took over their ideas (Edwin Black 2003) – and here – and this movement is so deeply rooted that the elite has erected the Georgia Guidestones telling to keep mankind under the number of 500 millions! Today names like Rockefeller and Bill Gates dominate this elitist movement. Now this movement has been conveniently associated with environmentalism. The UN´s State of the World Population Report 2009: "Each birth results not only in the emissions attributable to that person in his or her lifetime, but also the emissions of all his or her descendents. Hence, the emissions savings from intended or planned births multiply with time." The UNPFA points to an EU proposal "that population trends be among the factors that should be taken into consideration when setting greenhouse-gas mitigation targets."
BBC 12 July 2010: The UK's Royal Society is launching a major study into human population growth and how it may affect social and economic development in coming decades. The world's population has risen from two billion in 1930 to 6.8 billion now, with nine billion projected by 2050. The burgeoning human population is acknowledged as one of the underlying causes of environmental issues such as climate change, deforestation, depletion of water resources and loss of biodiversity.
Global Research 5 July 2010, Andrew Gavin Marshall: 1. Population is seen as an environmental issue because the larger the population, the more resources it consumes and land it occupies. In this concept, the more people there are the worse the environment becomes. There is also a distinctly radical element in this field, which views population growth not simply as an environmental concern, but which frames people, in general, as a virus that must be eradicated if the earth is to survive. However, 2. in the view of elites, population control is more about controlling the people than saving the environment.
After the War,”Charles Davenport was cited for his vision of “a new mankind of biological castes with master races in control and slave races serving them.” In 1952, “John D. Rockefeller 3rd convened a group of scientists under the auspices of the National Academy of Sciences, and they agreed on the need for a new institution that could provide solid science to guide governments and individuals in addressing population questions.” That new institution was to become the Population Council, and here. Six of the Council’s ten founding members were eugenicists. It yields grants to individuals and institutions working with eugenics.
In 2008, Matthew Connelly, a professor at Columbia University, wrote a book called, “Fatal Misconception: The Struggle to Control World Population,” in which he critically analyzes the history of the population control movement
Connelly examines population control as a global transnational movement because its main advocates and practitioners aimed to reduce world population through global governance and often viewed national governments as a means to this end.
As one review in the Economist pointed out, “Much of the evil done in the name of slowing population growth had its roots in an uneasy coalition between feminists, humanitarians and environmentalists, who wished to help the unwillingly fecund, and the racists, eugenicists and militarists who wished to see particular patterns of reproduction, regardless of the desires of those involved.” The Economist further wrote: Millions of intra-uterine contraceptive devices were exported to poor countries although they were known to cause infections and sterility. In 1969 Robert McNamara, then president of the World Bank, said he was reluctant to finance health care "unless it was very strictly related to population control, because usually health facilities contributed to the decline of the death rate, and thereby to the population explosion."
The urgency of what came to be known as the "population control movement" contributed to a climate of coercion and led to a number of serious human rights abuses, especially in Asian countries”. Dominic Lawson, writing a review of Connelly’s book for The Sunday Times, explained that: the population-control movement was bankrolled by America's biggest private fortunes - the Ford family foundation, John D Rockefeller III, and Clarence Gamble (of Procter & Gamble). These gentlemen shared not just extreme wealth but a common anxiety: the well-to-do and clever (people like them, obviously) were now having much smaller families than their ancestors, but the great unwashed - Chinamen! Indians! Negroes! - were reproducing themselves in an irresponsible manner. What they feared was a kind of Darwinism in reverse - the survival of the unfittest. As the New Scientist reported, a horrific notion was “the official policies that made it acceptable to hand out food aid to famine victims only if the women agreed to be sterilized. In a sad irony, this seemingly progressive movement for women’s rights actually had the effect of resulting in a humanitarian disaster, disproportionately affecting women of the developing world.
In 1968, biologist Paul Ehrlich refers to mankind as a “cancer” upon the world: A cancer is an uncontrolled multiplication of cells; the population explosion is an uncontrolled multiplication of people. We must shift our efforts from treatment of the symptoms to the cutting out of the cancer. The operation will demand many apparent brutal and heartless decisions. The pain may be intense. But the disease is so far advanced that only with radical surgery does the patient have a chance to survive.
The American political elite fully embraced this population paradigm of viewing the world and relations with the rest of the world. President Lyndon Johnson was quoted as saying, “I’m not going to piss away foreign aid in nations where they refuse to deal with their own population problems.” In 1967, the UN Fund for Population Activities was created, and in 1971, “the General Assembly acknowledged that UNFPA [United Nations Population Fund] should play a leading role within the UN system in promoting population programmes. In 1970, Nixon created the Commission on Population Growth and the American Future, known as the Rockefeller Commission, for its chairman, John D. Rockefeller 3rd.
In 1974, the National Security Study Memorandum (NSSM) 200 was issued under the direction of US National Security Adviser Henry Kissinger, otherwise known as “Implications of Worldwide Population Growth for U.S. Security and Overseas Interests.” He associated aid to LDCs with their success in population reduction.
In 1975, Indira Gandhi, the Prime Minister of India, declared martial law. Her son Sanjay proceeded to flatten slums and then tell the residents that they could get a new house if they would agree to be sterilized. A total of eight million sterilizations were recorded in India in 1976. Numerous cases of uterine perforation, excessive bleeding, infections, and even death were reported.Next, however, China became the major focus of the population control movement, which offered “technical assistance” to China's "one child" policy of 1978-83, even helping to pay for computers that allowed Chinese officials to track "birth permits." In 1981, Chinese and American newspapers reported that "vehicles transporting Cantonese women to hospitals for abortions were 'filled with wailing noises.' Some pregnant women were reportedly 'handcuffed, tied with ropes or placed in pig's baskets.'"
After 1983, coercion became official Chinese policy. "All women with one child were to be inserted with a stainless-steel, tamper-resistant IUD, all parents with two or more children were to be sterilized, and all unauthorized pregnancies aborted."
At the UN’s 1994 World Population Conference in Cairo, Third World delegates to the conference emphasized the need for development policies as opposed to demographic policies; that the focus must be on development, not population. This was essentially a setback for the radical population control movement. It was around this point that the population control movement, while continuing on its overall aims of curbing population growth of Third World nations, began to further merge itself with the environmental movement.
Environmentalism and eugenics
Michael Barker extensively covered the connection between the Rockefeller and Ford foundations in funding the environmental movement in the academic journal, Capitalism Nature Socialism. Since Rockefeller interests were heavily involved in the chemical industry, the rising trend in environmental thought and concern had to quickly be controlled and steered in a direction favourable to elite interests. Two important organizations in shaping the environmental movement were the Conservation Foundation and Resources for the Future, which largely relied upon Rockefeller and Ford Foundation funding. Laurance Rockefeller served as a trustee of the Conservation Foundation, and donated $50,000 yearly throughout the 50s and 60s. Further, the Conservation Foundation was founded by Fairfield Osborn, whose cousin, Frederick Osborn, was also working with the Rockefeller’s Population Council and was President of the American Eugenics Society.
In 1952, the Ford Foundation created the organization Resources for the Future (RFF), and the original founders were also “John D. Rockefeller Jr.’s chief advisors on conservation matters.” Laurance Rockefeller joined the board of the RFF in 1958, and the RFF got $500,000 from the Rockefeller Foundation in 1970.
Since the early 1970s, there is a task force lead by the UN Population Fund, The World Bank, and the WHO, whose purpose is "fundamental and clinical research in the development of vaccines for fertility control following the guidelines outlined by the Rockefellers in the late 1960s. This is evidence that these organizations interlock perfectly with one another. Vaccines were tested in India and China - often without informed consent.
Certainly one of the pre-eminent, if not the most prominent environmental organizations in the world is the World Wildlife Foundation (WWF). The WWF was founded on September 11, 1961, by Sir Julian Huxley, the first Director General of the UN organization, UNESCO.
In 1962, Rachel Carson, an American marine biologist, published her seminal work, Silent Spring, which has long been credited with helping launch the modern environmental movement. Her book was largely based around the criticism of pesticides as harmful to the environment and human and animal health. Of particular note, she is seen as being the starting force for the campaign against DDT. The Environmental Defense Fund was founded in 1967 with the specific aim to ban DDT. Some of its initial funding came from the Ford Foundation. This also spurred the formation of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), an official US government agency, in 1970. In 1972, the EPA banned the use of DDT in the United States. Since this time, “DDT prohibitions have been expanded and enforced by NGO pressure, coercive treaties, and threats of economic sanctions by foundations, nations and international aid agencies.” DDT is widely regarded as a carcinogen, and most have never questioned the banning of DDT. However, it is by far the most efficient means to fight malaria.
The World Health Organization (WHO) said in 2000, that, “malaria infected over 300 million people. It killed nearly 2,000,000 – most of them in sub-Saharan Africa. Richard Tren, President of Africa Fighting Malaria, said that, “In the 60 years since DDT was first introduced, not a single scientific paper has been able to replicate even one case of actual human harm from its use.” In 1979, a World Health Organization (WHO) review of DDT use could not find “any possible adverse effects of DDT,” and said it was the “safest pesticide used for residual spraying and vector control programs.”. However, organizations such as the WHO, United Nations Environmental Program (UNEP), the World Bank, Greenpeace, World Wildlife Fund, and a variety of others still remained adamantly opposed to the use of DDT. Michael Crichton, an author and PhD molecular biologist, plainly stated, “Banning DDT is one of the most disgraceful episodes in the twentieth century history of America.”
Merging Man and Machine: The Future of Humanity
Bill Joy, a computer scientist and co-founder of Sun Microsystems, who was co-chair of the presidential commission on the future of IT research, wrote an article for Wired Magazine in 2000 entitled, “Why the Future Doesn’t Need Us.” An intelligent robot may be built by 2030, and through technology we can achieve near immortality by downloading our consciousnesses.” The elite will thereby have greater control over the masses; and because human work will no longer be necessary the masses will be superfluous, a useless burden on the system. If the elite is ruthless they may simply decide to exterminate the mass of humanity. This builds upon the ideas of Huxley, Russell and Brzezinski, who envisioned a people who – through biological and psychological means – are made to love their own servitude.”
Then see Prison Planet 3 Aug. 2010 and the video by Alex Jones: They are reengineering live herpes virus, inject it into you in vaccines, a bioweapon to eat part of your brain– removing your ability to get angry, your very soul, thus making in fact a lobotomi to make you submit, love your servitude and masters and their dictatorship . They are now recommending it in public papers as help against stress – so far in the US and the UK!
Marshall has only utopian suggestions against the Luciferian elitist eugenics/population control: An awakening of mankind in protest. He is forgetting that already Hitler and the Communists were able to brainwash mankind without genetic manipulations or brain chips. And they have already efficiently brainwashed todays populations by means of mental hygiene, the 68 Revolution and their ownership of corrupt politicians and the media. Thereby, the oil elite have succeeded in diverting our attention from their own mega-pollutions (BP/the Gulf) to seeing the "gas of life", the totally harmless CO2, as the enemy instead!
As I see it there is only one way out: Each and very one should ask himself whom his mind really does belong to: His maker – or those who are remaking us by stealth, the selfdeclared enemies of the(ir) maker, who can only apply coarse and bad imitation of his original work. For we cannot very much longer avoid to make this choice: Will I let my brain be manipulated, e.g. to have artificial intelligence, thereby keeping my job and health insurance, thus becoming a remote-controlled machine - or will I keep my god-given free will?
In other words: This is a religious strife between God and Lucifer and here, nature and robotics – the goal of the globalist elitists. Whose side do we want to be on? Do not rely on the churches. Many of them are on the side of the Luciferians . For this purpose the globalists have constructed the United Religions Initiative, a gnostic concoction of global religions to be “inclusive”, so as to ensnare as many as possible.
My bid? The man depicted with his 3–dimensional photographic negative on the Shroud of Turin - it is genuine, 1800 years older than the invention of the photographic technique – and his commands to follow God´s – not Lucifer´s commandments, and to disregard robotic “temptations” about eternal life as a programmed machine. For the man on the Shroud of Turin has given us a free will, which no machine has.
Ayatollah Khomeiny said:"Our best weapon to conquer the west is our women´s thick bellies." A Muslim woman has hatefully said: "We shall do you in by giving births." However, the elite's actions are not focused on Islam - but on sterilizing vaccination campaigns in the Philippines, Nicaragua, Mexico - AIDS and free abortion in the West, which is now demographically falling to Islamic mass immigration at the behest of the Western political elite.
One Response to “ The Purpose of Environmentalism Is Population Control ”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.