Filed under: Africa, African Union, Al Gore, Barack Obama, bilderberg, carbon credits, carbon dioxide, Carbon Tax, China, climate change, Co2, copenhagen, Copenhagen treaty, depopulation, Dictatorship, ecoscience, Empire, environmental taxation, Eugenics, Europe, european union, g20, G7, Genocide, george bush sr., george h. w. bush, global economy, global government, global oligarchs, global tax, global treaty, Global Warming, global warming hoax, Globalism, globalists, Herman Van Rompuy, Hoax, impirialism, international treaty, internationalism, internationalist, internationalists, john P. holdren, mario borghezio, New World Order, NWO, obama, obama deception, oligarchy, One World Government, Population Control, Rompuy, slavery, sovereignty, trilateral commission, UN, united nations, us sovereignty, world government, world tax, world treaty | Tags: Dieter Helm
New EU President: 2009 is the “first year of global governance”
Sees Copenhagen as step towards global management
Old-Thinker News
November 20, 2009
The new EU President, Herman Van Rompuy, has proclaimed 2009 as the “first year of global governance.” During Rompuy’s intervention as President on November 19th, he stated,
“2009 is also the first year of global governance, with the establishment of the G20 in the middle of the financial crisis. The climate conference in Copenhagen is another step towards the global management of our planet.”
Rompuy attended a Bilderberg dinner at Hertoginnendal, Brussels on November 15th, during which he announced a plan to implement EU wide taxes that will be paid directly to Brussels. Recently Mario Borghezio (Italy), member of the European Parliament, spoke openly against the influence of globalist organizations such as the Bilderberg Group and the Trilateral Commission. “Is it possible that no one has noticed that all 3 (EU Presidential candidates) frequently attend Bilderberg or Trilateral meetings?,” asked Borghezio. Rompuy will undoubtedly serve globalist interests during his reign of the European Union.
The Road to Copenhagen part III: A “Planetary Regime” in the Making
Jurriaan Maessen
Infowars
November 22, 2009
“It is the sacred principles enshrined in the United Nations charter to which the American people will henceforth pledge their allegiance.” George H.W. Bush addressing the General Assembly of the U.N, February 1, 1992
The machine of mass media is working overdrive now that the Copenhagen summit is approaching. All major media outlets have by now obviously received their talking-points which have an strangely similar ring about them all across the board. Even a superficial comparative study in the overall reporting reveals not only a stunning disregard for national sovereignty, but a willingness to support carbon-taxes imposed by a- as John P. Holdren puts it- “planetary regime”.
Last month experts told the Second Committee Panel Discussion of the UN General Assembly that “a new regime of governance was under way in the global financial system.” The same is being said about global climate measures, global resource management and global development.
The mass media is not only setting the agenda themselves, they more often than not simply parrot the globalists that are being shoved in our face on a daily basis. Many of whom have a Ph.D. behind their name. Under the header ‘Carbon Tax’ is sensible, and perhaps inevitable, advocate says‘, the Los Angeles Times quotes Oxford professor Dieter Helm stating:
“(..) I’m in favor of quite a low carbon tax to start with – for political economy reasons, to get it in place, (…). Across Europe, my guess is within five years everybody will have a carbon tax…”
This, according to Helm, will make sure that the United States will eventually be forced into the global carbon tax policy as well:
“(…) is everybody else doing it? That’s a very good protection for politicians. The answer is yes, they are.”
Back in December of 2001, the Africa division of the UN Development Programme apparently already seriously considered such a tax:
“The main energy sources that would be affected by a carbon tax include coal, petroleum, kerosene and natural gas. The tax would be reflected in an increase in their price, at a level based on the capacity of each type of fuel to emit carbon dioxide.”
Answering the question who would collect the taxes and enforce such a global tax policy, the UN panel was quite clear:
“The panel said a new international tax organization should be created to assume all functions performed by existing institutions. It would serve as a global intergovernmental forum for international cooperation on all tax issues. It would also help resolve conflicts between countries and help them to increase tax revenue by fostering information exchanges and measures that could reduce tax evasion on investment and personal income earned at home and abroad.”
This sounds a lot like John P. Holdren doesn’t it, exclaiming in Ecoscience that “a Planetary Regime- sort of an international superagency for population, resources, and environment” could impose global policy and enforce it. “Such a comprehensive Planetary Regime”, said Holdren, “could control the development, administration, conservation, and distribution of all natural resources, renewable or nonrenewable, at least insofar as international implications exist.”
Furthermore, the UN panel advocated in 2001:
“We thus endorse the Commission’s proposal to create a global council at the highest political level to provide leadership on issues of global governance. The proposed council would be more broadly based than the G7 or the Bretton Woods institutions.”
In 2007, Reuters quoted Mr. Global Warming Himself, Al Gore as saying that a global carbon trading scheme could be “quite efficient if the world’s top polluters, the United States and China, fully joined.” Gore also stated that a direct tax on carbon would certainly be “an even simpler and more direct measure.”
It was the Bilderberg-appointed Herman Van Rompuy- the new EU-president- who stated recently that “The Climate Conference in Copenhagen is another step towards the global management of our planet.” He also announced that 2009 would be the “first year of global governance.” And he’s not the first to call for such global management. All people who occupy a position of power in the infrastructure of the New World Order have called for it since its very conception shortly after World War II.
As a preface to the coming Copenhagen summit in December, the United Nations Population Fund in a recently published ‘ State of the Population 2009‘ is pushing for global reproductive health services. This means not only universal access to ‘family planning’ but also better access to abortion facilities. Humans, after all, are supposed to be the prime driver of climate change and therefore: less humans means honouring Mother Earth.
In the foreword, the executive director of the UNFPA, Thoraya Obaid addresses the fake global warming hype, saying that “floods, storms and rising seas” will soon envelope the planet if not for quick, decisive and global efforts to combat these calamities.
“A Copenhagen agreement that helps people to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions and adapt to climate change by harnessing the insight and creativity of women and men would launch a genuinely effective long-term global strategy to deal with climate change.”
Global strategy. That’s the talking point we hear over and over again from all agencies, UN or otherwise, who have an interest in profiting from the deal they are proposing. Never mind that all nation-states who sign on to the Copenhagen treaty will effectively forfeit their representative systems to this global authority, deciding which taxes will be paid by which nation-state. In the end, all roads seem to lead to a “planetary regime” envisioned by the elite long before “global warming” was even heard of.
Filed under: Barack Obama, Communism, Dictatorship, Empire, Eugenics, Fascism, Genocide, global elite, global government, Globalism, Hitler, john holdren, john P. holdren, Nazi, Neolibs, New World Order, NWO, obama, Population Control, socialism, stalin, White House, World Bank
Top Obama Adviser Urged a ‘World of Zero Net Physical Growth’ in 1995 World Bank Publication
Terence P. Jeffrey
CNSNews.com
August 7, 2009
A top White House adviser to President Barack Obama argued that mankind eventually must face up to the need for a “world of zero net physical growth” and “population limitation” in an essay he co-authored that was included in a 1995 book on environmentally “sustainable” economic activity published by the World Bank.
John P. Holdren, who is now director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, co-authored the essay with Paul Ehrlich and Gretchen Daily of the Center for Conservation Biology at Stanford. Ehrlich has been a well-known population control advocate since he authored the 1968 bestseller, “The Population Bomb,” in which he advocated zero population growth. At the time the 1995 essay was published, Holdren was a professor at the University of California.
The essay—“The Meaning of Sustainability: Biogeophysical Aspects”—was published in the first chapter of “Defining and Measuring Sustainability: The Biogeophysical Foundations,” a book published in 1995 by the World Bank. The book is available as a PDF on the World Bank’s Web site.
“We know for certain, for example, that: No form of material growth (including population growth) other than asymptotic growth, is sustainable,” wrote Holdren and his co-authors. “Many of the practices inadequately supporting today’s population of 5.5 billion people are unsustainable; and [a]t the sustainability limit, there will be a tradeoff between population and energy-matter throughput per person, hence, ultimately, between economic activity per person and well-being per person.
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”.
noworldsystem.com 