[The Palestinization of the world...?]
http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_2757.shtml Culling the herd By Sheila Samples Online Journal Contributing Writer Dec 19, 2007, 00:18 "Everything you can imagine is real" --Pablo Picasso In 1974, a year after orchestrating a mass terror bombing of Cambodia -- after being awarded the Nobel Peace Prize -- Secretary of State Henry Kissinger and his National Security Council completed ìNational Security Study Memo 200: Implications of Worldwide Population Growth for U.S. Security and Overseas Interests.î This document, whose sharp edges are dulled by page after leaden page of how to reduce overpopulation in the Third World through birth control and "other" population-reduction programs, was classified until 1989, but was almost immediately accepted as US policy, and remains the US blueprint for ethnic cleansing today. It is difficult to imagine the staggering number of innocent humans who have perished through war or famine as a direct result of Kissinger's half-century obsession with, and lust for, genocide. It's even more difficult to imagine the cruel indifference with which Kissinger, and those like him in positions of political and corporate power -- the elite -- continue to plan the elimination of millions, even billions. All under the guise of national security, or to spread freedom . . . democracy . . . Kissinger targeted a number of "key countries" whose populations, he said, must be curtailed and controlled lest they gain economic, political and military strength, and thus threaten US strategic interests. "Depopulation should be the highest priority of foreign policy towards the Third World," Kissinger said, "because the US economy will require large and increasing amounts of minerals from abroad, especially from less developed countries.î Then, as now, any nation refusing to surrender its natural resources was an ominous threat to our national security and was dealt with initially through birth control and other population-reduction programs such as food rationing. But that was too slow for Kissinger, for Brent Scowcroft who replaced Kissinger as national security adviser and was put in charge of thinning out the Third World population, and for his eager enabler, CIA Director George H.W. Bush who trotted like a love-starved puppy at Kissinger's heels for decades. At first, they used food as "an instrument of national power" to coerce the dumb masses to stop copulating and populating, and then as a deadly weapon because widespread famine not only dealt death quicker, but it was cost-effective. And it made more sense. Like Kissinger said, "To give food aid to a country just because they [sic] are starving is a pretty weak reason." If we could imagine the suffering endured by victims of such perverse inhumanity, we might feel a twinge of outrage or, as George Washington so succinctly put it, a "little spark of celestial fire called conscience." Or not. Perhaps we are so far removed from reality because our minds cannot grasp the horror of that reality. Those who seek to destroy the denizens of this planet are totally without compassion or remorse. They are grotesque mutants who kill indiscriminately in their relentless drive for world conquest and domination. It's naive to think the carnage will stop once predators such as Kissinger, Alexander Haig, Robert McNamara, George H.W. Bush, and other One World advocates, many of whom are in their 80s or 90s, are no longer in our midst. With the release of thousands of tons of depleted uranium in both Bush Gulf wars and Afghanistan, they have poisoned food, water and air, and turned the entire region into massive radioactive death camps. Without fear of accountability, they have ensured the slow, agonizing extermination of entire populations, to include the American military, whom Kissinger views as "dumb, stupid animals to be used as pawns for foreign policy" -- and their families -- that will continue for many generations. We're like herds of cattle, grazing placidly, unable or unwilling to imagine that we might share the same fate as the millions throughout the Third World targeted by the elite as "bottom feeders," contributing nothing -- eating into their profit -- gluttons who must be dispensed with. Any rancher or farmer will tell you that it's good business to cull the herd for a variety of reasons, such as market outlook, cash flow, or just to maintain a healthier, more easily controlled mass of cattle. It makes no sense to keep problem cows, the elderly, the ill or nonproductive around. There comes a time when you must cut your losses and cull the herd. There are those who, unlike Kissinger and his co-conspirators, are not interested in profit or power, but believe fervently that human population is destroying the planet. Perhaps the most outspoken is University of Texas evolutionary scientist Dr. Eric R. Pianka, who gave a speech in March 2006 advocating the elimination of 90 percent of Earth's population. According to Forrest M. Mims III, chairman of the Environmental Science Section of the Texas Academy of Science and the editor of The Citizen Scientist, Pianka shrugged aside war and famine -- too slow -- and said "the most efficient and fastest way to kill the billions that must soon die" is disease. Pianka advocates airborne Ebola because, he explained, "it is highly lethal, and it kills in days, instead of years." Pianka drew rounds of enthusiastic applause throughout his speech, and a standing ovation when he threw in the Bird Flu for good measure, and quipped gleefully, "We need to sterilize everybody on the Earth." Five hours later, the university presented Pianka with a plaque, not for winning hands down as "Mad Scientist of the Year," but in recognition of his being named 2006 Distinguished Texas Scientist. It doesn't take a wild imagination to know that genocide is real, and it's underway in America. The most blatant example is the barbaric response to Hurricane Katrina victims -- withholding food, blocking aid, ignoring those clinging to rooftops while crying out in vain for help, leaving corpses to float in the flooded streets or to rot in the Superdome. If you start with the poor, minorities, elderly, the ill or nonproductive, the culling becomes much easier the next time around. Those who wait become inured to the inhumanity and, rather than rise up against it, breathe sighs of relief that it's others and not them who are rounded up and herded to the slaughterhouse. Imagine what life would be like if the Food and Drug Administration did not ensure the safety of our food chain . . . if our creeks and rivers were polluted by sewage and industrial waste . . . if vaccines forced on our children caused mental deficiencies, even death . . . if mothers were afraid to breast-feed their babies because the environmental toxin perchlorate present in our food and water supply accumulates in mother's milk . . . if our air was contaminated . . . if we had a government cold-hearted enough to withhold food and aid from the needy and health care from poor children . . . if we were spied upon and incarcerated, tortured, disappeared without charges . . . Oh yeah. I forgot. That is what our life is like. All that, and more, is grinding relentlessly away at our safety, our health and our lives. We have the power to remove these madmen. They are criminals under Articles II and III of the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Genocide, and they must pay for their crimes. One more year wherein millions more throughout the world are slaughtered is, as they say, not an option. The culling must stop, even if we are forced to stampede. They must be impeached. Go here, here, and here and take action. -------- Sheila Samples is an Oklahoma writer and a former civilian US Army Public Information Officer. She is a regular contributor for a variety of Internet sites. Contact her at [EMAIL PROTECTED] ===================================================================== http://oldthinkernews.com/Articles/oldthinker%20news/coercive_population_con trol.htm Coercive population control: from the mouth of Frank Notestein Old-thinker news | Dec. 19, 2007 By Daniel Taylor Frank Notestein (1902 - 1983) was one of the most influential population control activists and demographers of the 20th century. His work led to the establishment of demography as an academic discipline. He worked as the first director of the population division of the United Nations, was instrumental in the founding of John D. Rockefeller's Population Council in 1952, and was a director of population research at Princeton University. [1] In a paper written by Notestein in 1969 titled "The Problem of Population Control," he outlines a strategy of quickening the pace of depopulation. Notestein admits that economic modernization would "...bring the birthrate down automatically." However, he goes on to state that more drastic measures must be taken because in his opinion this method would not be fast enough. "coercion" and the "institution of a totalitarian regime" are Notestein's solutions. "...The need for an early reduction of the birthrate is acute. Birthrates in the past have fallen most rapidly in the context of modernization and social-economic change. But there is nothing in the European experience to suggest that we must rely solely on gradual and automatic changes in society. One often meets the glib generalization, particularly in the underdeveloped countries, that it is only necessary to concentrate on social and economic modernization since it is well known that we can rely on these processes to bring the birthrate down automatically. The argument neglects the time-span required for such an adjustment... Even if we could be assured of rapid social and economic development the lag in transition between reduction of death rates and the reduction of birth rates poses enormous problems of population growth." Notestein continues, "...even if successful, voluntary family planning programs cannot be expected to resolve the world population dilemma. Even in the more developed countries, and notably in the United States, surveys show couples desiring more children than are necessary for replacement... Thus we cannot rely on the self-interested choices of individual couples to met society's needs. The only acceptable goal is zero rate of growth because any rate of growth continued long enough leads to astronomical figures. Given existing preferences in family size, governments must go beyond voluntary family planning. To achieve zero rate of population growth governments will have to do more than cajole; they will have to coerce." "The logical target for legal and institutional pressures is the family: pressures to postpone marriages; economic pressures and inducements for married women to work outside the home; provision of free abortions for all women requesting them; downgrading of familial roles in comparison with extrafamilial roles; and restriction of housing and consumer goods... Such institutional changes supply motivation for family limitation and the provision of free abortions affords a means. The implications of such major institutional changes go far beyond population control. The family is the basic social unit of society and its major institution for the socialization of the children... to impose more drastic changes on a large scale implies many risks, not least to the regime that undertakes them. The price for this type of population control may well be the institution of a totalitarian regime." [2] Citation: [1] "Notestein, Frank W." Encyclopedia of Population. Ed. Dennis Hodgson. Vol 2. p. 696-697. Available online at: <http:// www.faculty.fairfield.edu/faculty/hodgson/Courses/so184/popdocs/ EofPNotestein.pdf> [2] Ed. Hauser, Philip Morris. The Population Dilemma. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J. 1969. pages 145 - 166 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SpamWall: Mail to this addy is deleted unread unless it contains the keyword "igve". _______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list Futurework@fes.uwaterloo.ca http://fes.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
