We KNOW global banking is making our 5% freemason/Greek players feel like WINNER in having China's 2 child limit while the 99% of WE THE PEOPLE are being HIT-----LITERALLY-----forced into situations of not being able to have children.
NOSY NEIGHBORS AND THE GANG illegal surveillance letting people know they are being made PORN----definitely puts a HALT to SEX ACTIVITIES----being called SEX TRADE PERFORMERS is a psychological deterrent to SEX.
Today's 5% players being allowed 2 children will see only 1 of those children able to have children, and then 2 generations that one child will not have any children. So, our 5% players are NOT WINNING. This encompasses only 40 years for 2 generations.
FORCED REMOTE CONTROL MICROCHIP CONCEPTION IMPLANTS WILL HIT OUR POOR AND WORKING CLASS FIRST------
Remember, all of our US MIDDLE-CLASS are being busted down to extreme poverty.
National FAKE NEWS media and global corporate ACADEMICS create media PRETENDING all this is LEFT SOCIAL BENEFIT CIVIL RIGHTS ----LIBERATING----when the goal is gender-blending people into forced sterility-----
THAT IS FAR-RIGHT WING GLOBAL BANKING TOTALITARIANISM.
Women's Health journal is global banking FAKE NEWS ----as PSYCHOLOGY TODAY-----not POPULIST but promoting global banking FADS.
10 Things You Need To Know About Pansexuality
It's not the same as being bisexual.
By Brittany Anas and Korin Miller
Aug 23, 2018
The term "pansexual" has been getting a lot of attention lately, thanks to celebrities like Janelle Monáe and Miley Cyrus, who have opened up about being pansexual.
In April, Janelle told Rolling Stone about her pansexuality.
"Being a queer black woman in America, someone who has been in relationships with both men and women—I consider myself to be a free-ass motherf#cker," she said. Janelle says she originally identified as bisexual, but realized that label didn't quite fit. "Later I read about pansexuality and was like, ‘Oh, these are things that I identify with too,'" she said. "I'm open to learning more about who I am."
Miley had a similar journey to pansexuality.
In 2016, she told Variety that she had a hard time understanding her own gender and sexuality. “I always hated the word ‘bisexual’ because that’s even putting me in a box,” she explained in the interview. “I don’t ever think about someone being a boy or someone being a girl...My eyes started opening in the fifth or sixth grade. My first relationship in my life was with a chick.”
Then in a recent interview with Billboard, Miley opened up a bit more about her status as a pansexual: "Who I’m with has nothing to do with sex," she said. "I’m super-open, pansexual, that’s just me."
So what is pansexuality and how does it differ from other LGBTQ identities? The experts have some insight.
1. It's a real thing.
"There are a lot of stereotypes and misconceptions about pansexuality, and one of the most prominent ones is that pansexuality doesn't exist, or isn't a 'real' sexual identity. This is absolutely false," says Corey Flanders, Ph.D., an associate professor of psychology and education at Mount Holyoke College. If a pansexual's sexual identity is denied by others or they're prevented from accepting their own identity, it can stifle them to a certain degree, she says.
2. Pansexual isn’t the same as bisexual.
Pansexual: Attracted emotionally, romantically, and/or sexually to people of all genders and sexes.
“'Pan' comes for the Greek word 'all,'” says Holly Richmond, Ph.D., a certified sex therapist and marriage and family counselor. “Pansexual is not bi-sexual, it’s all sexual.” That means a pansexual person could be attracted to a man, woman, a transgendered person, or a non-gendered person (a person who chooses not to identify themselves by gender), Richmond says.
3. It's not uncommon for people who once identified as bisexual to become pansexual.
Like Miley and Janelle, some people who formerly identified as bisexual later identify as pansexual. "Bisexuality as a term has experienced criticism for adhering to a binary system of gender, a.k.a. 'I'm attracted to men and women,' even though this strict definition of bisexuality doesn't fit many bisexual-identified folks," says Rena McDaniel, who has a master's degree in counseling with a specialty in gender and sexual identity.
Pansexuality, on the other hand, is seen as "more inclusive" of people who are transgender or identify outside of the gender binary of man or woman, she says.
4. Younger generations are more likely to identify as pansexual .
OH, REALLY??? IS THAT BECAUSE OUR YOUNG ADULTS CAME INTO THE WORLD AS GMO HUMAN RESEARCH WAS RAMPING UP?
There seems to be an age gap with this label. "Younger people are more likely to use pansexual as a term, while slightly older populations are more likely to use bisexual," McDaniel finds.
5. Pansexuality doesn’t translate to promiscuity.
Pansexuals may be attracted to all people, but that doesn't mean that they're going to have sex with anyone, Richmond says. “Pansexuals can be very choosy,” she says.
6. Pansexuals want relationships, too.
"One of the ways society shames those who are attracted to more than one gender is to say that they are 'greedy' or a 'commitment-phobe,'" McDaniel says. "However, no one says this about heterosexual folks who also have about half the population of the world to choose from."
Being attracted to more people has nothing to do with the kind of relationship a person wants to have with their partner or partners, she adds.
7. The term pansexuality only emerged recently.
Richmond says she first started learning about pansexuality five or six years ago at a conference for the American Association of Sexuality Educators, Counselors, and Therapists. Although pansexual people have definitely been around longer than that, the general public is just starting to acknowledge the term and learn what that sexual identity means.
8. Pansexuality has nothing to do with gender.
People often mix up gender identity and sexual identity but they're not the same. "Pansexuality is a term that refers to sexual orientation, who someone is attracted to," McDaniel says. "It is completely different from gender identity, which refers to how someone identifies their own gender."
So pansexuality isn't the same as transgender or gender non-binary, for example. Using pansexual as a label for your sexual orientation doesn't say anything about your gender identity or the gender identity of the person you're into, she says.
9. Less than 1 percent of the population identifies as pansexual.
Because pansexuality is a fairly new concept to many people, it’s hard to pinpoint exactly how many identify with the label, Richmond explains; she puts her best estimate at less than 1 percent. But as more people become aware of pansexuality, there may be more people who come to identify that way, she says.
10. Pansexuality isn’t just about sex.
When pansexuals are making a romantic connection, it’s very much about connecting with the person—not the gender, Richmond says. “It’s about developing meaningful relationships."
The idea of transgender has been around for thousands of years and we didn't have to CLASSIFY these to great detail---people knew they different and carved a life around people who accepted that difference.
Today's academic research creating a multitude of definitions of TRANSGENDER is not about protecting the above PERSON'S civil rights---it's about making SOCIETAL NORMS around what is MOVING FORWARD GMO HUMANS------especially tied to goals of manufactured genetic gender-blending and it does have goals of STERILITY and more easily managed WORKERS.
'Is Transgender Identity Inherited?
| DNA Science Blogblogs.plos.org/.../is-transgender-identity-inherited
The genetic or physical basis of transgender is not known. Some affected individuals have surgery to better match their physical selves with the gender that they feel certain they are.” It was a start'.
We have known the feeling of transgender are biochemistry----whether genetic, hormonal, brain pre-disposition------so, yes it can be INHERITED.
WHAT WE KNOW IS MOVING FORWARD IS NOT INHERITED TRANSGENDER BLENDING ---IT IS GENETIC MANIPULATION GENDER BLENDING.
So, what's the difference? We are MOVING FORWARD into a HYPER-GLOBAL CORPORATE MARXISM which denigrates humans into a OWNERSHIP capacity ----we are leaving behind all the LEFT SOCIAL PROGRESSIVE structures of family , religious morals and ethics tied to HUMANITY AND CHARITY-----
THESE GENDER-BLENDED HUMANS WILL NOT HAVE FAMILY BUT WILL BE TOLD TO THINK OF THE CORPORATIONS AS THE 'PARENTS'
If transgender children are a gift from GOD-----as this article stated parents promote the goal of producing genetically manipulated gender-blended babies.
'Androgyny in Society
Since androgyny can be used as a means of obtaining favor with the gods, a family may encourage one of its members, either male or female, to adopt an androgynous lifestyle. The Muxe ('mooshay') of Oaxaca in Mexico are among the best known examples of this, where a male adult crosses over to the opposite gender, adopting female clothing and imitating female behavior, often without recourse to surgery. These transgenders are accepted in the community and often serve as caregivers for their elderly parents. This tradition is long established in southern Mexico and the Yucatan, where Mayan priests sometimes wore female clothing while performing their rituals and Mayan gods in some cases possessed both male and female characteristics and genitalia. This androgynous category is sometimes called a third sex or a third gender. In Indonesia they are called Warias, men who believe they have the soul of a woman butwere born in the body of a man. This is one of the most common reasons given by transgenders for their condition, but they may also describe themselves simply as a third sex, where gender is not defined by reference to one's biology at birth but to one's preferred orientation in later life.
Warias are much more likely than Muxe to undergo surgery. Thus their romantic relationships will differ accordingly. A male Muxe may see himself as a homosexual – a man who behaves in an effeminate way to attract other men, including straight men – while a Waria may see himself as a woman (albeit a woman of a certain kind) who lives with a straight male partner'.
While our US 99% of WE THE PEOPLE who poor/working class are MOVING FORWARD via AFFORDABLE CARE ACT to forced remote-controlled microchip contraception FORCED STERILIZATION-----our today's WINNERS---those 5% freemason/Greek players being allowed to have 2 children for example are being sold IT'S A FAD-------they must genetically modify children for them to NOT BE LEFT BEHIND.
Whether it will be VANITY by parents ---or feelings of PRESSURE in employment------parents will be making GENETIC MANIPULATION of children a SOCIETAL NORM.
AS NOSY NEIGHBORS AND THE GANG SAY-------EVERYBODY LIKES STANFORD TOTAL PRISON MODEL 24/7 ILLEGAL SURVEILLANCE INSIDE THEIR HOMES.
'The Fertility Institutes proudly claims this is just the tip of the iceberg, and plans to offer almost any conceivable customization as science makes them available'.
Above we see today MARGARET SANGER and HITLER EUGENICS clinic gearing up for this gender-blending while parents worry about EYE COLOR or INTELLIGENCE -----be sure------when a parent heads to these kinds of clinics GENETIC MANIPULATION OF SEX will occur as well.
We will see as OB-GYN is made a SPECIALTY operation with their own CHAIN OF 'FAMILY PLANNING' CENTERS-----that even our 5% freemason/Greek WINNERS left as the only middle today will GO UNDER THE BUS.
You will go to have a baby and that baby WILL be genetically modified especially GENDER BLENDING to STERILITY.
Designer Babies – Like It Or Not, Here They Come
Singularity Hub Staff
Feb 25, 2009
Long before Watson and Crick famously uncovered the structure of DNA in 1953, people envisioned with both horror and hope a day when babies could be custom designed — free of inherited disease, yet equipped with superior genes for good looks, intelligence, athleticism, and more. Now the beginnings of the day of designer babies have finally come.
The Fertility Institutes recently stunned the fertility community by being the first company to boldly offer couples the opportunity to screen their embryos not only for diseases and gender, but also for completely benign characteristics such as eye color, hair color, and complexion. The Fertility Institutes proudly claims this is just the tip of the iceberg, and plans to offer almost any conceivable customization as science makes them available.
Even as couples from across the globe are flocking in droves to pay the company their life’s savings for a custom baby, opponents are vilifying the company for shattering moral and ethical boundaries. Like it or not, the era of designer babies is officially here and there is no going back.
For decades now a technology called preimplantation genetic diagnosis, or PGD, has enabled In Vitro Fertilization (IVF) clinics to screen embryos for more than 100 potentially debilitating and often deadly diseases before the embryo is implanted into the mother. A medical revolution has thus unfolded, enabling literally tens of thousands of couples and their babies to sidestep some of the world’s most terrifying diseases.
Take the case of Cindy and John Whitley. Their first child died at the age of 9 months from a deadly genetic disorder called spinal muscular atrophy. Genetic analysis uncovered that the Whitley’s statistically had a 1 in 4 chance of creating a child with spinal muscular atrophy each time they conceived. Unwilling to risk having another child with the deadly disorder, the Whitley’s used PGD to conceive three children, all healthy.
Yet PGD allows scientists to screen embryos for much more than just genetic diseases, and therein lies the promise – and the peril – of designer babies.
Gender was the first major genetic trait beyond genetic disease to be widely manipulated through PGD. The Fertility Institutes is a leader in the field, claiming nearly 100% success in providing couples with a baby of a predetermined gender. Completely healthy and fertile couples from all over the world are coming to The Fertility Institutes everyday to confront the risk, the expense, and the discomfort of conceiving their baby in a test tube, all for the ability to choose the sex of their baby.
Gender selection is a big business. Dr. Steinberg, Director at The Fertility Institutes, claims that they are performing on the order of 10 gender selection fertilizations every week, each for a fee of $18,400. Although In Vitro Fertilizations were originally designed to help parents that were unable to conceive children naturally, Steinberg says that a staggering 70% of their clients have absolutely no difficulty conceiving children, coming to the Institute purely for opportunity to choose the sex of their baby.
Now, in the latest twist in the march towards designer babies, The Fertility Institutes says they will soon be able to offer couples the ability to screen their embryos for eye color, hair color, and complexion. The Institute cannot change the DNA of the donating couple — if neither the mother nor the father has genes for green eyes, for example, then the Institute cannot give them a baby with green eyes. Yet within the constraints inherent in the DNA of the donating couple, The Fertility Institute is willing to screen embryos for these traits. The Fertility Institute wants to offer several other customizations, and many more are sure to be released in the coming years as the science behind screening for them is developed.
FERTILITY INSTITUTE SWEARS ---THEY PROMISE
---THEY ARE NOT EUGENICISTS/TRANSHUMANISTS.
In many countries around the world PGD is heavily regulated and designer babies are strictly out of the question. Yet in a strange paradox, even as the United States is one of the world’s most regulated nations in several areas of medical research and development, PGD is completely legal and unregulated in the United States. Hence, even as the United States is hindered by regulation in areas such as stem cell research, the country seems poised to be a world leader in the designer baby revolution.
At the moment, The Fertility Institutes carries the mantle as the company at the forefront of this revolution, and as such they are a lightning rod for the praise and adoration, but also the bitter and severe anger, of those on both sides of this great moral debate.
The genie is officially out of the bottle, in fact it probably has been for a long time. There is no stopping the designer baby revolution. Even as some countries try to clamp down on it, others will allow it. Progress, if we call it that, will continue unabated. A similar phenomenon has unfolded with embryonic stem cell research in recent years. Even as the Bush administration almost completely strangled US investment and research in this promising field, other countries invested heavily and advances continued.
A new generation of genetically enhanced designer babies is inevitable in the coming decades. Yet for those of us that are merely “normal”, do not despair. Even as we are outmatched by the next generation genetically, a host of new technologies from chip implants to gene therapy may allow us to keep up, allowing us to enhance ourselves in equally transformative ways. The future will indeed be interesting.
Below we see our friend OLIVER WENDELL HOLMES---the one who said THE MARKET DETERMINES WHAT IS TRUE. He is a raging global banking 1% OLD WORLD KINGS kind of guy.
As well, the use of the term PROGRESSIVE ERA at this time was a CORRUPTION of our REAL LEFT SOCIAL PROGRESSIVE ERA----these are far-right wing global banking 1% ECONOMIC PROGRESSIVES-----MAKING THE RICH EXTREMELY RICHER. These are NOT LEFT politicians---they simply took over our DEMOCRATIC PARTY at the time.
'It was a Progressive Era cause with the financial backing of the Carnegie Foundation, John D. Rockefeller, and other plutocrats'.
Whether FORCED STERILIZATION occurred in US during what was GREAT DEPRESSION era----or during HITLER GLOBAL CORPORATE FASCISM-------we always follow this with CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY.
Forced sterilization of 272,000 indigenous women ‘not a crime ...
Forced sterilization of 272,000 indigenous women ‘not a crime against humanity’: Public Prosecutor. IWHC and Chirapaq share the belief that awareness-raising and training are the first steps to nurture advocates who will go on to fight for the health and rights of women, girls, and young people.
Compulsory sterilization - Wikipedia
Widespread or systematic forced sterilization has been recognized as a Crime against Humanity by the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court in the explanatory memorandum. This memorandum defines the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court.
Investigating Alleged Widespread and/or Systematic Forced ...
Crime against Humanity of Forced Sterilization. Forced sterilization involves a deprivation of “biological reproductive capacity”, “neither justified by the medical or hospital treatment of the person or persons concerned nor carried out with their genuine consent” (ICC Elements of Crimes, article 7(1)(g)-5).
Coercive Sterilization: An On-Going Crime Against Humanity
Coercive Sterilization: An On-Going Crime Against Humanity.
All of this to say that sterilization in and of itself is an egregious offense against one's own body according to Catholic teaching, and forced sterilization is an even more egregious offense against someone else's body and against his or her will.
Forced Sterilization: Problem Solved? | A Contrario ICL
In a recent victory in the European Court of Human Rights, the Court ruled that the practice of forced sterilization against transgendered people violates their human rights. (The judgement however did not end forced medical examinations or mental health orders of transgendered people).
Coercive Sterilization: An On-Going Crime Against Humanity
aleteia.org/2014/08/06/coercive-sterilization-an... Forced sterilization has been recognized as a “crime against humanity” by the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. The practice is closely linked to the eugenics movement, in both ..
We know this is CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY and we KNOW it is global banking 1% OLD WORLD KINGS KNIGHTS OF MALTA TRIBE OF JUDAH pushing this goal. The difference from back then and today---is this does not target simply IMBECILES------it is global DE-POPULATION with goals of all 99% of WE THE GLOBAL PEOPLE eliminated. The goal of TRANSHUMANISM is killng all NATURAL HUMANS with only a .00014% of global 1% keeping those FAMILY GENES.
Who are the SHIP OF FOOLS---SOCIOPATHS constantly killing civil societies needing that GENE POOL eliminated ------that would be GLOBAL 1% OLD WORLD KINGS------let's work on that instead.
When Forced Sterilization was Legal in the U.S.
The 1927 case of Buck v. Bell set the stage for forced sterilizations for eugenics, but it turned out to based on complete falsehoods.
By: Matthew Wills
August 3, 2017
The 1927 case of Buck v. Bell is infamous for Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes’s thundering conclusion: “Three generations of imbeciles are enough.” By a vote of 8 to 1, the Supreme Court of the U.S. allowed the forced sterilization of Carrie Buck (1906-1983) by the state of Virginia. Buck’s was the first of thousands of such sterilizations in the state before the practice was ended in 1974. Virginia’s stated intent was to prevent Buck, already a single mother, and the others from conceiving “genetically inferior” children.
Buck v. Bell was a great legal victory for the American eugenics movement, which, via a misunderstanding of genetics, strove to perfect the “race” and “white” civilization. As Michelle Oberman writes in her essay on the lessons of Paul Lombardo’s revelations about the case, the pseudoscience of eugenics emerged in the 1890s. It was a Progressive Era cause with the financial backing of the Carnegie Foundation, John D. Rockefeller, and other plutocrats.
By 1939, some 30,000 sterilizations had been performed.
Though there was “surprisingly robust debate about when and whether the state should invoke the authority to sterilize a certain class of citizens,” Oberman notes that determined eugenicists pushed hard for such laws, and succeeded in most states. By 1939, some 30,000 sterilizations had been performed, more than half of them in California.
Like eugenics itself, Buck v. Bell turned out to be based on falsehoods. Paul Lombardo discovered that Carrie Buck had no hereditary “defects.” She wasn’t even “feebleminded” by the dubious definitions of the day. Her real crime was that she was poor and “illegitimate.” She was in the Virginia Colony for Epileptics and the Feebleminded because, in a perfunctory commitment hearing, her foster parents dumped her there after she became pregnant. Carrie Buck’s child Vivian—the third of Holmes’s “imbecile” generations—was conceived in rape. The rapist had been a relative of Carrie’s foster parents; this may have been another reason they wanted her out of the way.
At six months of age, Vivian Buck was looked at by a social worker and deemed to be just like her mother. The social worker’s testimony concluded “There is a look about it that is not quite normal, but just what it is, I can’t tell.”
Yet like her mother and grandmother, Vivian was neither feebleminded nor imbecilic (this also had a strict definition then). In fact, Vivian’s report cards showed her to be an average student who worked her way up to the honor roll before her early death at the age of eight. (Stephen Jay Gould wrote that the “ambiguous diagnosis” on her death certificate “might well indicate she fell victim to one of the preventable childhood diseases of poverty.”)
Michelle Oberman cautions that using the word “state” or “Virginia” allows for too much anonymity. It was a “cadre of earnest, self-righteous, and occasionally delusional individuals”—lawyers, politicians, doctors, and others who thought they were doing good—who instituted a system that surgically sterilized tens of thousands against their will or, as in the infamous “Mississippi appendectomy,” quite deceptively. Their victims were poor, disproportionately women, and often women of color.
The Nazis, who sterilized hundreds of thousands before moving onto outright mass murder, used American eugenicist theory, such as it was, and practice as an excuse for their own.
DE-POPULATION as MOVING FORWARD FINAL SOLUTION has nothing to do with environment---with depletion of natural resources and mineral/ores----it is not even tied to control of population groups. It is a MECHANATION global 1% have developed tied to WRITING AND IMPLEMENTING a NEW CREATION STORY and they are so MEGLAMANIAC they want to be GOD--------in this march towards TRANSHUMANISM---GMO HUMAN.
That is the difference between goals of EUGENICS------VS TRANSHUMANISM.
Below we see news headlines filling media today PRETENDING HITLER'S EUGENICS was tied to our US GREAT DEPRESSION EUGENICS when OLD WORLD EUROPE invented STERILIZATION/and CONTINUOUS WARS as population control.
SANGER ET AL AS EUGENISTS IN US-----WERE SIMPLY OLD WORLD TRIBE OF JUDAH KNIGHTS OF MALTA.
I see MOTIVE for NOSY NEIGHBORS AND THE GANG to RUIN------as many people as possible----they don't want to miss this RAPTURE ----
'The Horrifying American Roots of Nazi Eugenics
| History News ...historynewsnetwork.org/article/1796
Edwin Black is the author of "IBM and the Holocaust" and "War Against the Weak: Eugenics and America's Campaign to Create a Master Race," from which the following article is drawn. Hitler and his ...'
'Remembering the victims of Nazi eugenics
| German history ...www.dw.com/en/remembering-the-victims-of-nazi... Forced sterilization was carried out in hospitals throughout Germany, and minors were not exempt. Children from the age of 14 could be sterilized and, in exceptional cases, children under the age ...'
This video is a SENSATIONALIZED presentation saying basically what we say. The difference is THE GREEN AGENDA and SUSTAINABILITY is indeed FAKE pretense to what will be massive DE-POPULATION with figures ranging from 500 million to 2 billion----or as see below ----250----300 million people.
The ACTUAL FIGURES will be LESS THAN THAT.
We know MOVING FORWARD de-population starts from the premise of GARDEN OF EDEN FIRST HUMANS being GMO HUMANS.
So, that means 250 million GMO HUMANS? Actually no---it means NOAH'S ARK will only hold those .00014% of global 1.
'Plans are underway now, implemented by the New World Order Elite, to depopulate the planet's 6-7 billion people to a manageable level of between 500 million and 2 billion'.
'“A total world population of 250-300 million people, a 95% decline from present levels, would be ideal.” – Ted Turner, in an interview with Audubon magazine'
95% will be wiped out says this global banking FAKE NEWS media -------that 5% freemason/Greek player fighting to NOT BE LEFT BEHIND ----should WAKE UP to see that is FAKE DATA to make them believe they are WINNERS.
The Depopulation Agenda
There is a plan, hatched amongst those who squat above us, many long decades in the making. It is a plan to empty the world. It is based on a lie and driven by selfish and alterior motives.
Many resources have been spent in creating the myth around which it revolves – that there are too many people. We are taught almost from birth that humanity is nothing more than a disease, a blight upon the Earth. We are told that we are merely animals, and poor examples of such at that. Mankind is destroying his world and has outstayed his welcome they tell us.
And who are ‘they’ who tell us this? The likes of Dr Henry Kissinger, famous for such delightful utterances as “Power is the ultimate aphrodisiac,” and “The elderly are useless eaters”.
Or Mr Ted Turner who never misses the opportunity to remind us that a Chinese style one child policy is the only answer to the sad fact that we are choking the fragile planet upon which we live with our useless, unwanted presence. That’s Ted Turner, father of Laura Lee, Robert Edward, Rhett, Beau and Jennie.
You see, Ted and Henry are elitists. They believe they hold the destiny of the world in their veiny, liver spotted hands. They belong to the club made famous by George Carlin, you remember? Very small and we ain’t in it.
Bill and Melinda Gates are in it. The Queen of Great Britain and the rest of her parasitic brood are in it. David Rockefeller is in it, but you and me? Not so much. And these wonderful, if somewhat wrinkly, geniuses have, for the greater good, hit upon the final solution to the worlds great (not to mention totally made up) problem. Through vaccines and radiation and wars and disease, they are going to make us all go away.
Here is just a small selection of the statements these paragons of civic virtue have made on the subject of human overpopulation;
“The Planetary Regime might be given responsibility for determining the optimum population for the world and for each region and for arbitrating various countries’ shares within their regional limits. Control of population size might remain the responsibility of each government, but the Regime would have some power to enforce the agreed limits.” – Obama’s Science czar John P. Holdren: From a book he helped write ‘Ecoscience’
“A total world population of 250-300 million people, a 95% decline from present levels, would be ideal.” – Ted Turner, in an interview with Audubon magazine
“There is a single theme behind all our work–we must reduce population levels. Either governments do it our way, through nice clean methods, or they will get the kinds of mess that we have in El Salvador, or in Iran or in Beirut. Population is a political problem. Once population is out of control, it requires authoritarian government, even fascism, to reduce it….”
“Our program in El Salvador didn’t work. The infrastructure was not there to support it. There were just too goddamned many people…. To really reduce population, quickly, you have to pull all the males into the fighting and you have to kill significant numbers of fertile age females….” “The quickest way to reduce population is through famine, like in Africa, or through disease like the Black Death….” – Thomas Ferguson, State Department Office of Population Affairs
“In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill…. But in designating them as the enemy, we fall into the trap of mistaking symptoms for causes. All these dangers are caused by human intervention and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real enemy, then, is humanity itself.” – Alexander King, Bertrand Schneider – Founder and Secretary, respectively, The Club of Rome, The First Global Revolution, pgs 104-105, 1991
“A cancer is an uncontrolled multiplication of cells; the population explosion is an uncontrolled multiplication of people…. We must shift our efforts from the treatment of the symptoms to the cutting out of the cancer. The operation will demand many apparently brutal and heartless decisions.” – Stanford Professor ” Paul Ehrlich in The Population Bomb
“Malthus has been vindicated; reality is finally catching up with Malthus. The Third World is overpopulated, it’s an economic mess, and there’s no way they could get out of it with this fast-growing population. Our philosophy is: back to the village.” – Dr. Arne Schiotz, World Wildlife Fund Director of Conservation, stated such, ironically, in 1984:
THIRD WORLD IN AN ECONOMIC MESS------THAT COULDN'T BE THE RESULT OF GLOBAL NEO-LIBERAL FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONE POLICIES COULD IT----NO, IT'S OVER-POPULATION SAY GLOBAL 1%.
“In order to stabilize world population, we must eliminate 350,000 people per day. It is a horrible thing to say, but it is just as bad not to say it.” – J. Cousteau, 1991 explorer and UNESCO courier
“We must speak more clearly about sexuality, contraception, about abortion, about values that control population, because the ecological crisis, in short, is the population crisis. Cut the population by 90% and there aren’t enough people left to do a great deal of ecological damage.” – Mikhail Gorbachev
“Today, America would be outraged if U.N. troops entered Los Angeles to restore order. Tomorrow they will be grateful! This is especially true if they were told that there were an outside threat from beyond, whether real or promulgated, that threatened our very existence. It is then that all peoples of the world will plead to deliver them from this evil. The one thing every man fears is the unknown. When presented with this scenario, individual rights will be willingly relinquished for the guarantee of their well-being granted to them by the World Government.” – Dr. Henry Kissinger, Bilderberger Conference, Evians, France, 1991
“The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a little longer.” – Dr. Henry Kissinger New York Times, Oct. 28, 1973
“Depopulation should be the highest priority of foreign policy towards the third world, because the US economy will require large and increasing amounts of minerals from abroad, especially from less developed countries”.– Dr. Henry Kissinger
“World population needs to be decreased by 50%” – Dr. Henry Kissinger
“War and famine would not do. Instead, disease offered the most efficient and fastest way to kill the billions that must soon die if the population crisis is to be solved. AIDS is not an efficient killer because it is too slow. My favorite candidate for eliminating 90 percent of the world’s population is airborne Ebola (Ebola Reston), because it is both highly lethal and it kills in days, instead of years. We’ve got airborne diseases with 90 percent mortality in humans. Killing humans. Think about that. You know, the bird flu’s good, too. For everyone who survives, he will have to bury nine” – Dr. Eric Pianka University of Texas evolutionary ecologist and lizard expert, showed solutions for reducing the world’s population to an audience on population control which gave him a standing ovation
“Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature” – Written in granite on the anonymously commissioned Georgia Guide stones
“If I were reincarnated I would wish to be returned to earth as a killer virus to lower human population levels.” – Prince Phillip, Queen Elizabeth’s husband, Duke of Edinburgh, leader of the World Wildlife Fund/WWF
“Childbearing should be a punishable crime against society, unless the parents hold a government license. All potential parents should be required to use contraceptive chemicals, the government issuing antidotes to citizens chosen for childbearing.” – David Brower, first Executive Director of the Sierra Club