Filed under: abortion, birth control, Canada, China, climate change, Co2, Communism, copenhagen, Copenhagen treaty, depopulation, Diane Francis, Dictatorship, ecoscience, Empire, Eugenics, Fascism, forced abortion, Genocide, Global Warming, global warming hoax, Globalism, Hitler, Hoax, infertility, internationalist, internationalists, involuntary abortion, involuntary birth control, john holdren, kidnapped, kidnapping, malthusian, malthusian catastrophe, mao, Nazi, Neolibs, New World Order, NWO, one child policy, Oppression, Population Control, Propaganda, sterilization, ted turner, UN, united nations
World told to adopt China’s one child policy
Francis advocates brutal regime that kidnaps, drugs women, and carries out forced abortions in China
Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
December 11, 2009
An article featured in Canada’s Financial Post newspaper calling for China’s draconian one child policy, where woman are kidnapped off the streets, drugged, and forced to undergo compulsory abortions, to be imposed worldwide has been met with widespread hostile reaction, yet such measures are being debated at the United Nations climate summit in Copenhagen.
An article featured in Canada’s Financial Post newspaper calling for China’s draconian one child policy, where woman are kidnapped off the streets, drugged, and forced to undergo compulsory abortions, to be imposed worldwide has been met with widespread hostile reaction, yet such measures are being debated at the United Nations climate summit in Copenhagen.
In her editorial published on Tuesday, columnist Diane Francis wrote that, “A planetary law, such as China’s one-child policy, is the only way to reverse the disastrous global birthrate.”
Just days later, the Chinese government delegation at the Copenhagen climate change conference argued that the Communist dictatorship’s one child policy should “serve as a model for integrating population programs into the framework of climate change adaptation.”
As we have exhaustively documented, the overpopulation myth is often cited by control freak phony environmentalists as a justification for the implementation of drastic policies, yet it has no basis in reality whatsoever.
Due to falling fertility rates globally, humans will soon stop replacing themselves and population numbers will naturally fall.
Populations in developed countries are declining, only in third world countries are they expanding dramatically. Industrialization itself levels out population trends and even despite this world population models routinely show that the earth’s population will level out at 9 billion in 2050 and slowly decline after that. “The population of the most developed countries will remain virtually unchanged at 1.2 billion until 2050,” states a United Nations report. The UN’s support for depopulation policies is in direct contradiction to their own findings.
Once a country industrializes, there is an average of a 1.6 child rate per household, so the western world population is actually in decline. That trend has also been witnessed in areas of Asia like Japan and South Korea. The UN has stated that global population will peak at 9 billion and then begin declining.
Since radical environmentalists are pushing to de-industrialize the world in the face of the so called CO2 threat, this will reverse the trend that naturally lowers the amount of children people have. If climate change fanatics are allowed to implement their policies, global population will continue to increase and overpopulation may become a real problem – another example of how the global warming hysterics are actually harming the long term environment of the earth by preventing overpopulated countries from developing and naturally lowering their birth levels.
As is the norm with these so-called “liberals” who espouse modern-day eugenics, what they are advocating are the most illiberal, inhumane and barbarous policies imaginable – a Hitlerian final solution in the name of saving Mother Earth.
We need to call out these people for what they are – would-be mass murderers who are advocating arcane and brutal programs of global eugenics that have no place in the 21st century.
Francis’ poorly written diatribe is not only absent of facts, it is shockingly devoid of any notion of compassion or humanity for what a global implementation of China’s one child policy will entail.
China’s one child policy is enforced by way of forced abortions, infanticide and compulsory sterilization.
Somewhere in the region of twenty-five million men in China are unable to find brides because so many girls are murdered shortly after birth. The explosion in the illegal sex trade in Asia is also a direct result of the shortage of women.
In many cases, women are literally kidnapped off the street by state goons from the “Birth Control Office,” driven to government hospitals, drugged, and their child is forcibly aborted.
In one case earlier this year, both a young woman and her baby were killed after such an abduction in Liaocheng City.
“According to a Doctor at the hospital where the two died, the young woman was kidnapped by the “Birth Control Office” and taken to the hospital where she was forced to undergo an abortion procedure,” reported the Epoch Times.
“The young woman fought with staff to protect her unborn child however a half a dozen men, pushed her down on a bed and injected her with a drug to induce labor. After the young woman had a still birth, she developed a massive hemorrhage and soon thereafter died.”
This is the kind of tyrannical regime Francis is calling to be introduced worldwide.
Policies introduced in the name of cutting CO2 emissions are already killing millions of people in the third world. The implementation of policies arising out of fraudulent fearmongering and biased studies on global warming is already devastating the third world, with a doubling in food prices as a result of the introduction of biofuels causing mass starvation and death.
If Diane Francis is so keen on getting rid of stupid people that breed too much, then maybe she should step forward as the first candidate. As with all these control freaks, people like Ted Turner who calls for a 95% population reduction yet has five children and is the largest land owner in North America with some 2 million acres, they are utter hypocrites – do as I say not as I do. Francis herself has two children, according to her Wikipedia biography – one more than what she says the rest of the world should be allowed to have by decree of the dictatorial system of government she is proposing.
On the positive side, the reaction to Francis’ editorial has been vehement, furious and hostile to the kind of authoritarian hell she is pushing. Comments in response to her article were almost universally in opposition, as were callers to radio shows that she subsequently appeared on.
A selection of responses to Francis’ disgusting diatribe are reprinted below.
- “Diane Francis was on a talk radio show the same morning this article was published. NOBODY agreed with her. I mean nobody at all. People can see through this Eugenics bullshit. The walls are closing in on the elite scum of the earth.”
“You make me ashamed of living in Canada. If you’re a first-born, it’s too bad your mother had you and if you’re not, she should have started with you. You are a heartless, dirty woman and shame on you. Ask the Chinese people who fled their country and came to Canada and the U.S. exactly why they’re here. Hang your head in shame.”
“That this Malthusian junk science is still proposed from time to time speaks of the fact that some in academia just refuse to learn from empirical evidence. And now it’s slipped into journalism. The management of the Financial Post should be quite embarrassed. I’ll just stick to the WSJ and not bother coming back here again. An editorial board that thinks that this is worthy of publication couldn’t possibly know how to edit a newspaper / website.”
“I am currently reading “War and Genocide” by Bergen and it strikes me that these horrible Nazi ideas keep coming back.With Nazism it was a “scientific” eugenics that led to forced abortions, sterilizations, heavy fines, etc. for some who dared procreate. For Francis, it is a “scientific” environmentalism that will lead to the exact same evils for all (except, of course, herself).”
“It’s hard to believe that this opinionated rant is called journalism. I saw no evidence of journalistic balance, fairness, and objectivity. She made NO mention of the grave problems caused by the One-Child Policy in China, including: forced sterilizations and abortions, heavy fines, disparate sex ratio, infanticide of females, increase in mental health problems (including Chinese women’s suicide rates)…”
“This reporter is a complete nut job. I can’t believe anyone in a North American country would actually believe this is a legitimate idea. And by the way, China’s policy has had major consequences. many girl babies were aborted and killed, and due to the scarcity of Chinese women, Chinese men are paying through the nose to obtain brides. Therefore, lives are unfulfilled, and the Chinese population decreases much further than they even desired.”
“And so one must wonder, what kind of journalism does this article or “column” represent? Which of her children would Diane Francis give up in order to live up to her death rhetoric? One might also ask, what kind of a self-professed do-gooder wants to have power over others in order to “help” them? Who, after all, are these elites who keep telling us that we need to be better controlled, “for our own good, you see”?”
Filed under: abortion, Barack Obama, birth control, chemtrails, Child Abuse, China, Co2, Communism, CPS, Dictatorship, Empire, eugenicist, Eugenics, Fascism, food shortage, forced abortion, global government, global police force, Global Warming, Globalism, globalist, health and environment, Hitler, infertility, internationalist, internationalists, involuntary abortion, involuntary birth control, john holdren, john P. holdren, malthusian catastrophe, Nazi, Neolibs, New World Order, NWO, obama, one child policy, Oppression, Population Control, socialism, sterilization, united nations, us sovereignty, water shortage, world government, world police force | Tags: ecoscience, Paul Ehrlich, scholar stupid, sterilizing capsule
Obama Science Advisor Advocates Forced Abortions
In 1977 book, John Holdren advocated forced abortions, mass sterilization through food and water supply and mandatory bodily implants to prevent pregnancies
Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet
July 11, 2009
President Obama’s top science and technology advisor John P. Holdren co-authored a 1977 book in which he advocated the formation of a “planetary regime” that would use a “global police force” to enforce totalitarian measures of population control, including forced abortions, mass sterilization programs conducted via the food and water supply, as well as mandatory bodily implants that would prevent couples from having children.
The concepts outlined in Holdren’s 1977 book Ecoscience, which he co-authored with close colleagues Paul Ehrlich and Anne Ehrlich, were so shocking that a February 2009 Front Page Magazine story on the subject was largely dismissed as being outlandish because people couldn’t bring themselves to believe that it could be true.
It was only when another Internet blog obtained the book and posted screenshots that the awful truth about what Holdren had actually committed to paper actually began to sink in.
This issue is more prescient than ever because Holdren and his colleagues are now at the forefront of efforts to combat “climate change” through similarly insane programs focused around geoengineering the planet. As we reported in April, Holdren recently advocated “Large-scale geoengineering projects designed to cool the Earth,” such as “shooting pollution particles into the upper atmosphere to reflect the sun’s rays,” which many have pointed out is already occurring via chemtrails.
Ecoscience discusses a number of ways in which the global population could be reduced to combat what the authors see as mankind’s greatest threat – overpopulation. In each case, the proposals are couched in sober academic rhetoric, but the horrifying foundation of what Holdren and his co-authors are advocating is clear. These proposals include;
– Forcibly and unknowingly sterilizing the entire population by adding infertility drugs to the nation’s water and food supply.
– Legalizing “compulsory abortions,” ie forced abortions carried out against the will of the pregnant women, as is common place in Communist China where women who have already had one child and refuse to abort the second are kidnapped off the street by the authorities before a procedure is carried out to forcibly abort the baby.
– Babies who are born out of wedlock or to teenage mothers to be forcibly taken away from their mother by the government and put up for adoption. Another proposed measure would force single mothers to demonstrate to the government that they can care for the child, effectively introducing licensing to have children.
– Implementing a system of “involuntary birth control,” where both men and women would be mandated to have an infertility device implanted into their body at puberty and only have it removed temporarily if they received permission from the government to have a baby.
– Permanently sterilizing people who the authorities deem have already had too many children or who have contributed to “general social deterioration”.
– Formally passing a law that criminalizes having more than two children, similar to the one child policy in Communist China.
– This would all be overseen by a transnational and centralized “planetary regime” that would utilize a “global police force” to enforce the measures outlined above. The “planetary regime” would also have the power to determine population levels for every country in the world.
The quotes from the book are included below. We also include comments by the author of the blog who provided the screenshots of the relevant passages. Screenshots of the relevant pages and the quotes in their full context are provided at the end of the excerpts. The quotes from the book appear as text indents and in bold. The quotes from the author of the blog are italicized.
Page 837: Compulsory abortions would be legal
“Indeed, it has been concluded that compulsory population-control laws, even including laws requiring compulsory abortion, could be sustained under the existing Constitution if the population crisis became sufficiently severe to endanger the society.”
Page 786: Single mothers should have their babies taken away by the government; or they could be forced to have abortions
“One way to carry out this disapproval might be to insist that all illegitimate babies be put up for adoption—especially those born to minors, who generally are not capable of caring properly for a child alone. If a single mother really wished to keep her baby, she might be obliged to go through adoption proceedings and demonstrate her ability to support and care for it. Adoption proceedings probably should remain more difficult for single people than for married couples, in recognition of the relative difficulty of raising children alone. It would even be possible to require pregnant single women to marry or have abortions, perhaps as an alternative to placement for adoption, depending on the society.”
Page 787-8: Mass sterilization of humans though drugs in the water supply is OK as long as it doesn’t harm livestock
“Adding a sterilant to drinking water or staple foods is a suggestion that seems to horrify people more than most proposals for involuntary fertility control. Indeed, this would pose some very difficult political, legal, and social questions, to say nothing of the technical problems. No such sterilant exists today, nor does one appear to be under development. To be acceptable, such a substance would have to meet some rather stiff requirements: it must be uniformly effective, despite widely varying doses received by individuals, and despite varying degrees of fertility and sensitivity among individuals; it must be free of dangerous or unpleasant side effects; and it must have no effect on members of the opposite sex, children, old people, pets, or livestock.”
Page 786-7: The government could control women’s reproduction by either sterilizing them or implanting mandatory long-term birth control
Involuntary fertility control
“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.”
Page 838: The kind of people who cause “social deterioration” can be compelled to not have children
“If some individuals contribute to general social deterioration by overproducing children, and if the need is compelling, they can be required by law to exercise reproductive responsibility—just as they can be required to exercise responsibility in their resource-consumption patterns—providing they are not denied equal protection.“
Page 838: Nothing is wrong or illegal about the government dictating family size
“In today’s world, however, the number of children in a family is a matter of profound public concern. The law regulates other highly personal matters. For example, no one may lawfully have more than one spouse at a time. Why should the law not be able to prevent a person from having more than two children?”
Page 942-3: A “Planetary Regime” should control the global economy and dictate by force the number of children allowed to be born
Toward a Planetary Regime
“Perhaps those agencies, combined with UNEP and the United Nations population agencies, might eventually be developed into a Planetary Regime—sort of an international superagency for population, resources, and environment. Such a comprehensive Planetary Regime could control the development, administration, conservation, and distribution of all natural resources, renewable or nonrenewable, at least insofar as international implications exist. Thus the Regime could have the power to control pollution not only in the atmosphere and oceans, but also in such freshwater bodies as rivers and lakes that cross international boundaries or that discharge into the oceans. The Regime might also be a logical central agency for regulating all international trade, perhaps including assistance from DCs to LDCs, and including all food on the international market.”
“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.”
Page 917: We will need to surrender national sovereignty to an armed international police force
“If this could be accomplished, security might be provided by an armed international organization, a global analogue of a police force. Many people have recognized this as a goal, but the way to reach it remains obscure in a world where factionalism seems, if anything, to be increasing. The first step necessarily involves partial surrender of sovereignty to an international organization.”
Page 749: Pro-family and pro-birth attitudes are caused by ethnic chauvinism
“Another related issue that seems to encourage a pronatalist attitude in many people is the question of the differential reproduction of social or ethnic groups. Many people seem to be possessed by fear that their group may be outbred by other groups. White Americans and South Africans are worried there will be too many blacks, and vice versa. The Jews in Israel are disturbed by the high birth rates of Israeli Arabs, Protestants are worried about Catholics, and lbos about Hausas. Obviously, if everyone tries to outbreed everyone else, the result will be catastrophe for all. This is another case of the “tragedy of the commons,” wherein the “commons” is the planet Earth. Fortunately, it appears that, at least in the DCs, virtually all groups are exercising reproductive restraint.”
Page 944: As of 1977, we are facing a global overpopulation catastrophe that must be resolved at all costs by the year 2000
“Humanity cannot afford to muddle through the rest of the twentieth century; the risks are too great, and the stakes are too high. This may be the last opportunity to choose our own and our descendants’ destiny. Failing to choose or making the wrong choices may lead to catastrophe. But it must never be forgotten that the right choices could lead to a much better world.”
Page 944: As of 1977, we are facing a global overpopulation catastrophe that must be resolved at all costs by the year 2000
“Humanity cannot afford to muddle through the rest of the twentieth century; the risks are too great, and the stakes are too high. This may be the last opportunity to choose our own and our descendants’ destiny. Failing to choose or making the wrong choices may lead to catastrophe. But it must never be forgotten that the right choices could lead to a much better world.”
See Screenshots of the Actual Pages in Holdren’s Book “Ecoscience”.
Filed under: 9/11 Truth, abortion, Auschwitz, bilderberg, birth control, C-Span, CFR, Concentration Camp, Dictatorship, Empire, Eugenics, Fascism, Genocide, Germany, global elite, global government, Hitler, Holocaust, Human Experiments, internationalist, internationalists, jay rockefeller, john d. rockefeller, medical Experiments, Milbank Memorial Fund, Nazi, New World Order, NWO, osborn, Population Control, prescott bush, rockefeller, rockefeller foundation, Roe v. Wade, Senate, sterilization, truth movement, UN, We Are Change | Tags: Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Ernst Rudin, eugenic record office, eugenics records office, Frederick Osborn, Kaiser Wilhelm Society, Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research
Jay Rockefeller Confronted on Family’s Nazi Ties
Kurt Nimmo
Infowars
July 22, 2009
Near the end of the video here shot by WeAreChange activists, the great-grandson of John D. Rockefeller can only offer a telling smile when asked about the eugenics history of his family. “Go find somebody else to talk to,” snaps the West Virginia senator when politely asked to elaborate.
As briefly documented in the short video, the Rockefeller family essentially created the modern eugenics movement from scratch. As John B. Sharpless of the University of Wisconsin documented in 1993 after examining the files of the Rockefeller Foundation, the records of the Population Council, and the personal papers of John D. Rockefeller III, Rockefeller spawned foundations are responsible for a “nearly unanimous change in attitudes and ideas about population that occurred during the 1960s.” In addition to the Rockefeller Foundation and the Population Council, other foundations active in eugenics include the Ford Foundation, the Milbank Memorial Fund, the Carnegie Corporation, and the Conservation Foundation.
The Carnegie Institution established a laboratory complex at Cold Spring Harbor on Long Island in 1904 that stockpiled millions of index cards on ordinary Americans, as researchers carefully plotted the removal of families, bloodlines and whole peoples. “From Cold Spring Harbor, eugenics advocates agitated in the legislatures of America, as well as the nation’s social service agencies and associations,” Edwin Black wrote for the San Francisco Chronicle in 2003.
In the United States, key eugenic organizations funded by the Rockefeller, Harriman and Carnegie families included the American Eugenics Society, and its sister organization, the American Society of Human Genetics established in 1947, the above mentioned Cold Springs Harbor Experimental Station for the Study of Evolution, the Eugenic Record Office, and the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research.
It should be noted that J.D. Rockefeller and Averell Harriman were business partners of Prescott Bush in Brown Brothers Harriman. In addition to funding and promoting eugenics, they supported and funded the Nazi rise to power. Jay Rockefeller’s family is responsible for the racist eugenics policies that led to the mass extermination of millions.
The Rockefellers funded the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute in Germany, ultimately responsible for Hitler’s mass extermination policy.
In addition to supporting Alexis Carrel, who advocated the use of poison gas to get rid of useless eaters, the Rockefellers funded the program that Josef Mengele worked in before he went to Auschwitz where he became medical commandant and experimented on concentration camp inmates. These gruesome medical experiments included needles used to change eye color, work on infections and blood transfusions, the removal of limbs without anesthetics, sex changes, sterilization, and other unspeakable crimes. Countless people were murdered and their organs, eyeballs, heads, and limbs sent to the Rockefeller group at the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute.
The Rockefellers’ chief executive for the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute was the fascist Swiss psychiatrist Ernst Rudin. Rudin and his staff, as part of the Task Force of Heredity Experts chaired by SS chief Heinrich Himmler, crafted Germany’s sterilization law. Dr. Alexis Carrel of the Rockefeller Institute and a Nobel Prize winner publically applauded Hitler for advocating the mass murder of mental patients and prisoners.
Rockefeller and his bankster cronies were up to their eyes in eugenics and mass extermination. “Under the Nazis, the German chemical company I.G. Farben and Rockefeller’s Standard Oil of New Jersey were effectively a single firm, merged in hundreds of cartel arrangements. I.G. Farben was led, up until 1937, by the Warburg family, Rockefeller’s partner in banking and in the design of Nazi German eugenics,” writes Anton Chaitkin. Standard-Germany president Emil Helfferich testified after the war that Standard Oil funds helped pay for SS guards at Auschwitz, the notorious mass extermination and slave labor camp.
After the war, the Rockefeller eugenics movement experienced a facelift to distance itself from the discredited Nazis. In the 1950s, the Rockefellers reorganized the U.S. eugenics movement and added population-control and abortion groups. The Eugenics Society changed its name to the Society for the Study of Social Biology — a mere two months after Roe was handed down. “The name was changed because it became evident that changes of a eugenic nature would be made for reasons other than eugenics, and that tying a eugenic label on them would more often hinder than help their adoption. Birth control and abortion are turning out to be great eugenic advances of our time. If they had been advanced for eugenic reasons it would have retarded or stopped their acceptance,” commented Frederick Osborn, who oversaw the workings of the organization at the time.
As documented by Rebecca Messall and others, Roe v. Wade “relies directly and indirectly on the work of members of the British and American eugenic societies and of eugenics-related groups and initiatives.” Abortion has nothing to do with “choice” or empowering women — it is about controlling the masses and culling the herd.
In his excellent study of the Rockefellers, Gary Allen explains that the “Rockefeller game plan is to use population, energy, food, and financial controls as a method of people control which will lead, steadily and deliberately, into the Great Merger,” a one-world government and global fascism. “Understand that … enforced infertility is not planned for India or Senegal, but for the United States, where zero population growth is already a fact.
But we are being led to believe that unless we give Big Brother total power over people’s rights to have children, we will all be ankle deep in human beings within a decade. Such august organizations as the National Academy of Sciences are helping to hawk this Rockefeller line… Curbing population growth is just part of the Rockefeller war on the American family. Abortion is another.
Jay Rockefeller may deny knowledge of his family’s intimate connections to eugenics and abortion — and direct involvement in Hitler’s genocidal rampage across Europe — but the record is out there for all to see. It is easily researched on the internet.
And maybe that is why Jay Rockefeller mused during a Senate committee hearing a few months ago that we’d all be better off if the internet never existed. Minus the internet and search engines, it will be far easier to lead the masses to near extinction if they go ignorantly blissful like lambs to the slaughter with little more resistance than a bleat.
Drastically slashing world population and reducing the remainder into obedient slaves is the final act of the global elite. Jay Rockefeller knows it and that’s what his knowing smile was all about.
Jay Rockefeller: Internet should have never existed
noworldsystem.com 