-Caveat Lector-
At 12:42 AM 7/4/01 -0400, : Prudence L. Kuhn [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
-Caveat Lector-
In a message dated 07/03/2001 12:41:08 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Who shall write the curriculum? Who will implement the curriculum? Should
the curriculum be
-Caveat Lector-
Sounds pretty good. Which authorities should go first?
On Mon, 2 Jul 2001 08:44:54 -0700 Nessie [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
-Caveat Lector-
Specifically, should the authorities use a world population
reduction
program as an opportunity to remove specific populations that
-Caveat Lector-
The problem isss:
WHO is qualified to decide which groups are 'troublesome, backward
and undesirable' Ah, there is the problem. What if WHOEVER
decides you/yours are in that category???
On Mon, 2 Jul 2001 11:49:46 EDT Prudence L. Kuhn [EMAIL
-Caveat Lector-
At 11:49 AM 7/2/01 -0400, Prudence L. Kuhn [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
-Caveat Lector-
In a message dated 07/01/2001 11:03:29 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Does it make any difference WHICH populations have their future births
carefully planned by the
-Caveat Lector-
On 2 Jul 2001, at 22:20, Damian B. Cooper wrote:
If the world population is to be reduced, does it matter which specific
populations are reduced?
I appreciate your serious response.
I would prefer to let natural processes determine which populations
survive rather than
-Caveat Lector-
Which authorities should go first?
The CEOs of the multinational corporations. They're the ones who really
rule the world. Work down from there.
A HREF=http://www.ctrl.org/;www.ctrl.org/A
DECLARATION DISCLAIMER
=CTRL is a discussion informational exchange list.
-Caveat Lector-
Nessie wrote:
-Caveat Lector-
Which authorities should go first?
The CEOs of the multinational corporations. They're the ones who really
rule the world. Work down from there.
Hear hear!!! Then move to the CEO's of national corlporations. All starting
from the biggest.
-Caveat Lector-
kl wrote:
-Caveat Lector-
On 2 Jul 2001, at 22:20, Damian B. Cooper wrote:
If the world population is to be reduced, does it matter which specific
populations are reduced?
I appreciate your serious response.
I would prefer to let natural processes determine
-Caveat Lector-
At 01:46 PM 7/3/01 -0500, kl [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
-Caveat Lector-
BTW, are you a computer program?
At the risk of seeming to be evasive, let's just say I'm highly structured,
object oriented, have a vast library of sophisticated algorithms.
DBC
A
-Caveat Lector-
In a message dated 07/03/2001 12:41:08 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Who shall write the curriculum? Who will implement the curriculum? Should
the curriculum be targeted at specific populations?
I can see that you believe in handling society's
-Caveat Lector-
Specifically, should the authorities use a world population reduction
program as an opportunity to remove specific populations that are
historically troublesome, backward, or otherwise undesirable?
The authorities, ALL the authorities, should take poison and thus save
humanity
-Caveat Lector-
In a message dated 07/01/2001 11:03:29 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Does it make any difference WHICH populations have their future births
carefully planned by the authorities to achieve the end of world population
reduction?
Specifically, should the
-Caveat Lector-
In a message dated 06/26/2001 12:39:33 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If there is to be an organized program to reduce the human population
of planet earth, does it matter which populations are culled?
E.g. Would it be wise population management policy
-Caveat Lector-
In a message dated 06/26/2001 12:39:33 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If there is to be an organized program to reduce the human population
of planet earth, does it matter which populations are culled?
E.g. Would it be wise population management policy
-Caveat Lector-
At 07:45 PM 7/1/01 -0400, Prudence L. Kuhn [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
... It is not the
culling of those already here that is necessary, it is the careful planning
of future births that we need to see to.
Prudy
Does it make any difference WHICH populations have their
-Caveat Lector-
Or DON'T do it, as the case may be. :-D
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-Caveat Lector-
Ok, you first, Steve. Do your part.
On Mon, 25 Jun 2001 21:54:35 -0700 Steve [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
-Caveat Lector-
Maybe there is a 'Third Way'. Why do we have to cull any
-Caveat Lector-
At 10:49 AM 6/26/01 -0700, Nessie [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
-Caveat Lector-
The question, simply put, is this:
If there is to be an organized program to reduce the human population
of planet earth, does it matter which populations are culled?
That is not the question. The
-Caveat Lector-
The question, simply put, is this:
If there is to be an organized program to reduce the human population
of planet earth, does it matter which populations are culled?
That is not the question. The way you have phrased it presumes that
culling is the only way to reduce the
-Caveat Lector-
Nessie wrote:
-Caveat Lector-
The question, simply put, is this:
If there is to be an organized program to reduce the human population
of planet earth, does it matter which populations are culled?
Of course it matters. It must be the populations which produce the
most
-Caveat Lector-
Ok, you first, Steve. Do your part.
On Mon, 25 Jun 2001 21:54:35 -0700 Steve [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
-Caveat Lector-
Maybe there is a 'Third Way'. Why do we have to cull any living
being that
inhabits this planet? Why can we not just learn to get along, which
might
-Caveat Lector-
At 08:28 AM 6/22/01 -0400, Prudence L. Kuhn [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
-Caveat Lector-
I guess we all have a right to our own opinion of the truth. As far as I am
concerned Jacques Cousteau was absolutely right. The human population of
this planet is far too large, and is in
-Caveat Lector-
Maybe there is a 'Third Way'. Why do we have to cull any living being that
inhabits this planet? Why can we not just learn to get along, which might
require people to eventually give up religious differences and find a way to
reduce population growth (Catholic beliefs prohibiting
-Caveat Lector-
In a message dated 06/22/2001 9:51:44 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
When my friend took over the information officer role of the scottish
theosophical society
his brief folder went missing - it subsequently turned up with many
documents missing
but
-Caveat Lector-
Prudence L. Kuhn wrote:
-Caveat Lector-
In a message dated 06/22/2001 9:51:44 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
When my friend took over the information officer role of the scottish
theosophical society
his brief folder went missing - it subsequently
-Caveat Lector-
In a message dated 06/21/2001 6:32:58 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The Christain Alert network uncovered a UN document on a Costeau speech that
quoted him as saying that there must be a drastic reduction in the earths
population - and that he was for
-Caveat Lector-
The human population of this planet is far too large, and is in every
way demonstrating the veracity of the famous rat experiments.
See: www.dieoff.org
A HREF=http://www.ctrl.org/;www.ctrl.org/A
DECLARATION DISCLAIMER
=CTRL is a discussion informational exchange
-Caveat Lector-
I do wish these population reducation people would practice what they
preach, starting with themselves. Or is that one of those hypocritical
elite things, applicable to everyone but themselves?
__
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized
-Caveat Lector-
I do wish these population reducation people would practice what they
preach, starting with themselves. Or is that one of those hypocritical
elite things, applicable to everyone but themselves?
What makes you think that we don't?
Personally, I had one kid and then got a
-Caveat Lector-
way demonstrating the veracity of the famous rat experiments.
See: www.dieoff.org
not for me thanx - I personally don't buy into the fossil fuel argument
knowing that Bruce Depalma and in fact my friend called andrew M can
manufacture 300% free energy -
albiet DePalma was the
-Caveat Lector-
On 22 Jun 2001, at 16:00, Andrew Hennessey wrote:
not for me thanx - I personally don't buy into the fossil fuel argument
knowing that Bruce Depalma and in fact my friend called andrew M can
manufacture 300% free energy - albiet DePalma was the sunburst generator
using
-Caveat Lector-
I personally don't buy into the fossil fuel argument knowing that Bruce
Depalma and in fact my friend called andrew M can manufacture 300% free
energy -albiet DePalma was the sunburst generator using electromagnetic
fields and Andrew M with a home engineered catalytic convertor
-Caveat Lector-
Thanks KL, that is what I meant. I just didn't say it as clearly.
Tenorlove
--- kl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I agree that those who think we should kill 4 billion should put
their
money where their mouth is and commit suicide to demonstrate their
committment to the principle
-Caveat Lector-
We dont need to kill off anybody. Even at our current level of
overpopulation, virtually all shortages are the result of political
economics, not ecology. But we do need to stop over breeding.
the fertility rate in the west is Declining and is a 'worry'
africa is dying off -
-Caveat Lector-
Nessie wrote:
-Caveat Lector-
I personally don't buy into the fossil fuel argument knowing that Bruce
Depalma and in fact my friend called andrew M can manufacture 300% free
energy -albiet DePalma was the sunburst generator using electromagnetic
fields and Andrew M with a
-Caveat Lector-
Nessie wrote:
-Caveat Lector-
I do wish these population reducation people would practice what they
preach, starting with themselves. Or is that one of those hypocritical
elite things, applicable to everyone but themselves?
What makes you think that we don't?
-Caveat Lector-
In a message dated 06/22/2001 10:43:44 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
reducation
??
If you mean reduction, it is hard to practice any kind of birth control for
one's progenitors, although a day late and a dollar short is okay for many
other things.
-Caveat Lector-
In a message dated 06/22/2001 11:01:06 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The justification for killing off 4 billion people in my opinion is
What killing off of four billion people are you talking about? Prudy
A HREF=http://www.ctrl.org/;www.ctrl.org/A
-Caveat Lector-
What killing off of four billion people are you talking about? Prudy
You haven't heard of this ?? incredible !!!
I wouldn't know where to point you -
maybe to the UN archives, or the archives of the WHO,
or Theosophical or Right Wing literature or ...
but maybe you haven't
-Caveat Lector-
Nessie wrote:
-Caveat Lector-
The human population of this planet is far too large, and is in every
way demonstrating the veracity of the famous rat experiments.
See: www.dieoff.org
He's mostly full of shit.
J2
A HREF=http://www.ctrl.org/;www.ctrl.org/A
DECLARATION
-Caveat Lector-
Perhaps Cousteau wasn't lying. Perhaps he sincerely believed the
pessimistic outlook he described. He's no longer here to explain, so
it's easy to make him a target.
Perhaps also the many environmental protection laws enacted since that
speech 30 years ago did something to
-Caveat Lector-
The Christain Alert network uncovered a UN document on a Costeau speech that
quoted him as saying that there must be a drastic reduction in the earths
population - and that he was for implementing measures.
Certainly if he thinks that 4 billion people should die as quickly as
-Caveat Lector-
conservativeinfo - Subscribe to the Conservative Information email list at
http://conservativeinfo.listbot.com
Goomongers
Washington Times
Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, a California Republican who turns 54 this week,
was surfing the other day â and not the Internet.
Most
-Caveat Lector-
On 21 Jun 01, at 2:20, Yardbird wrote:
Jacques Cousteau was part of a movement, he concluded, part of a
movement that feels they have a right to lie and they have a right to
frighten people, because they have a higher calling ...
This is the type of nonsense our
43 matches
Mail list logo
