Uncategorized

The club of liberals, transhumanism, depopulation

http://campaign.r20.constantcontact.com/render?llr=4tixiugab&v=001lnBTEkB9iIFVGjcxk8R4jeJvqXxxgbrx2HaVApnnHv1XhvIwyb6IbYIe6LfFzXzbZYPwqibGc54PW0md6P9viRYrzMF4NsoCfG61tOk0pvw%3D

The club of liberals, transhumanism, depopulation

The club of liberals, transhumanism, depopulation

by Jon Rappoport

January 25, 2013

http://www.nomorefakenews.com

By liberals, I simply mean those people who accept big government as a given, regardless of their political affiliation.

And yes, at certain key levels, they are a club. They come from major media, large corporations, banks, the military, well-funded foundations, investment houses, do-good non-profits, legal and medical societies, academic factories, think tanks, and of course the huge pool of government employees.

For them, big, bigger, and biggest government is a rock-bottom assumption that requires no thought. The sun comes up every morning, and there is big government.

This assumption supersedes anything written in the US Constitution explicitly limiting the power of central authority.

Where there is conflict between that document and the actions of government, the Constitution automatically takes a back seat. It is looked upon as a primitive, ancient, and worn-out set of ideas.

In fact, the Club is surprised and shocked that anyone would try to impede government based on fanciful notions about powers reserved for the individual states, or readings of the 2nd Amendment.

Long ago, the Club decided that every statement made in the Constitution was subject to revision or outright dismissal, based on the arrogant concept that changing times require new measures and new solutions.

In their eyes, they are working with reality, whereas Constitutionalists have a quirky and disturbing obsession that clings to absolute Principle. If Principle isn’t a sign of a mental disorder, it at least indicates an unhealthy nostalgia about a fairy tale of days gone by.

The Club blithely assumes it has won its battle.

The Club is focused on what big government, in concert with its corporate allies, can do to further expand. This is where a disjunction of attitude occurs.

For some Club members, the mission of government is to do good, to give to those in need, no matter how many are in need or how much that need grows.

For other Club members, at higher levels, the massive giveaway and fulfilling of need is just a pose, a tactic to gain more adherents who will trade a great deal of their freedom for a little security.

But there is no debate within the Club about this matter. No one wants to rock the boat. Those at higher levels view the do-gooders within their ranks as useful and amusing dupes.

The do-gooders, if they glimpse the faces and intentions of the higher-ups, shrug it off, assuming that somehow, in the long run, the vision of “a shared and just world” will triumph, because the universe wants to make it so.

The Club has one major enemy.

Abundance.

The idea that there is enough for everyone who wants to work for it, the idea that individuals can pursue their deepest dreams and desires, and win…that is anathema.

Why? Because if that perception operated widely in the society, it would rule out the grasping need for invasive central government.

Therefore, creating artificial scarcities is at the top of the Club’s to-do list. Of course, this agenda must be masked behind false cover. The scarcities must seem to be inevitable, or at least caused by forces beyond our control.

Scarcity of money, health, prosperity, freedom, property, sanity, natural resources…they must appear to be naturally occurring crises, for which the only answer is parental control over populations.

When Buckminster Fuller offered his brilliant analysis of abundance and how we could achieve it on planet Earth, he was missing only one piece: who would implement it? Who would revolutionize life for all?

The obvious answer is: the people in charge. But that doesn’t work, for the simple reason that those people are dedicated to producing false scarcities.

To reject abundance, the elite Club of Rome published its famous study, “The Limits to Growth,” in 1972. It essentially used computer modeling to predict failure for civilization, and ushered in a tsunami of propaganda aimed at floating the planet’s only hope for survival: a recognition of global interdependence and the distribution of the world’s resources from a point of Central Planning.

This concept, in turn, was translated to mean “addressing needs.”

The conclusion? Big government was the addresser, the single most important institution for saving us all.

Hand in hand, elite planners and propagandists invented a loop that guaranteed the primacy of a bill of needs over a bill of rights.

Individual freedom stood accused in the dock as the criminal. It had led to the wealthy few and the poor many. A world out of balance.

Members of the Club, sitting in their massive London drawing rooms and their Park Avenue apartments, applauded this “progression of awareness.”

To say they were laughing up their sleeves would be a vast understatement.

From FDR to Truman, from Eisenhower to Kennedy, from LBJ to Nixon, from Ford to Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, George Bush, Bill Clinton, Bush Jr., the Club watched their plans solidify. Regardless of what these presidents said or did, government expanded, and the official status of “fulfilling needs” was welded ever more securely to government’s mission.

Finally, in a considerable victory, to symbolically signify the emergence of the “lowest to the highest,” a man who represented former slaves on the American continent took up residence in the White House.

He, above previous presidents, would raise the sword to equalize all status in society. He would right past wrongs, square past debts, and fly the flag of humanity. Justice would be served.

No matter that the condition of “his own people” would worsen during his reign. No matter that the condition of all Americans would diminish. No matter that he was the agent of a operation designed to put the crown on government as the great provider.

From Buddha to Jesus to Karl Marx, the Club has borrowed sentiments of high hope and realization, in order to sell its program. The Club has cast its role as the messianic force. It has filled the pews of its church with followers, who have no clue as to the actual plan, but instead mouth the words and sing the songs and praise the gifts.

The marketing of these sentiments, their weave, fabric, tone, and flow are the substance of a trance induction.

And at the end of the line? America harmonized in its structure with other nations, and the subsuming of the USA under a regional and global arch of management.

As David Rockefeller, one of the designers of the plan, put it in his 2003 Memoirs: “Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as ‘internationalists’ and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure – one world, if you will. If that is the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.”

There are millions of people who refuse to believe that a high humanitarian sentiment or ideal can be enrolled and deployed to defeat us. They automatically assume what stirs them is for the good.

They are crowded together in the middle of the trance. They clog the arteries of the body politic. They foment a disease of the public immune system attacking itself, and it is long past the time when they should wake up and cure their distorted perception.

But as far as the Club is concerned, they are useful. And useful they will stay, as long as they can be hypnotized into the future glory that lies just over the next hill.

And now we come to the technocrats.

The technocrats among Club leaders consider the overall mission in terms of a systems fix. There are flaws in the way humans have chosen to organize themselves, and these flaws need to be corrected.

With the important information entered into computers armed with algorithms, models can be obtained. These models will take into account vital resources, such as water, breathable air, earth minerals, fuel, food crops, transportation, housing, education, medical care, and so on. Planetary allocation quotas for all territories and regions can be arrived at.

Dispassionately, the human condition can be modified.

The technocrats consider this an interesting problem. It will take work, but it can be solved.

Certain factors, however, must be reduced or eliminated. Freedom, choice, personal decision-making have to be devalued in the new System, in order to avoid the introduction of random and unpredictable outcomes.

The very meaning of a technocratic system precludes freedom as an objective, because that quality of humans isn’t circumscribed and can’t be inserted as a pure passive object into calculations.

Technocrats value systems above all. They live to build self-referential closed structures. This fascination negates a whole range of emotions.

The technocrats aren’t admirers of emotion, which are unpredictable when it comes to the mathematics of a new planet.

Joy, for example. How would one enter joy into an equation? How could it be quantified?

Technocrats are, in a sense, a separate species. They are intensely cerebral. They view human beings as troublesome pieces of a puzzle. A system is erected on the basis of built-in controls. Humans tend not to fit.

This they find annoying. But there are ways to limit the trouble. Chemicals can be introduced into the brain. The chemicals will regulate behavior. This is another interesting problem awaiting a solution, a whole series of solutions. The drugs we now have are only a minor step in the right direction.

It’s all in the service of a better system, which is what technocrats must have. They would wither and die if they couldn’t have it. They would feel isolated and useless and rejected.

If you want to see a technocrat squirm and wriggle and scream, like a person being tortured, take away his access to systems.

The greatest acceleration of human organization took place in the century just past. The obsession for big, bigger, and biggest flowered as never before. Now, in this century, the push is for refinement. To the technocrat, that means much greater definition of roles for humans.

Specialization will take on new restrictions and regulations. Plugging people into a system is one thing; carefully ordering their limits and restraints is another.

Take the long view of this century. The overall aim is for a structure that will encompass the actions of every human on Earth; every person with a designated function rigorously placed in the correct slot.

This will be promoted as salvation. It will be floated as the genius of the species finally taking hold.

However, it’s clear that for such an enormous structure, machines will perform better as workers than people in most cases. As Bucky Fuller pointed out, automation is the wave of the future.

Then what is to be done with humans?

The obvious answer is massive depopulation.

This is on the drawing board. No doubt about it. It is being enacted in certain regions.

But there is a significant glitch. Among the most important Club members are heads and owners and financiers of mega-corporations.

Those corporations are already experiencing dead time in their operations. Their production lines are moving at half-mast, because the available consumer base is too small. Out of the world’s population, perhaps only a billion people have the means to participate in what is commonly understood as the consumer economy. Corporations can accommodate far greater numbers.

This is a genuine conflict. It has been brewing for some time.

If you have any knowledge about the men who run these companies, you know they will not go gently into the good night of major depopulation. That would reduce their consumer base to a much greater degree.

So far, all attempts to artificially create more consumers has failed. The overall picture hasn’t markedly changed, nor does it appear vast government giveaways will do the job in the future.

There is a thread of Globalist calculation that appears to be an answer to the problem. It’s based on the old Nazi presumption of a lost master race, a genetic strain certain Nazi leaders were dreaming and fantasizing about—and trying to recreate.

The new IG Farben (a vast chemical/pharmaceutical Nazi cartel) is a loose collection of corporations that now constitutes global leadership in pharmaceutical/genetic research. It certainly wants to invent “enhanced humans.” This is one of its prime goals. A laboratory-induced master race.

Here is my opinion on how the hideous project could proceed:

Over time, through food, drugs, and definitely vaccines, genetic factors would be inserted in human beings to render them infertile. The gradually ensuing decline in new births would be explained away by false cover stories. These stories, particularly when they come from “eminent researchers,” would be rather easy to sell.

As the global population decreases, a re-seeding and replacement operation would be launched.

This would certainly include genetically enhanced humans, but it would also consist of favored body profiles and races, because the overall program is most assuredly a racialist scheme.

In those regions where the population is made to fall, import the favored humans and genetically enhanced specimens.

This isn’t ultimately a depopulation program at all. In its later stages, it is quite the opposite. The objective is to reduce and then bring back a full ten or 20 billion people on the planet.

It’s all about replacement. It’s all about the assumption that “superior humans” will flourish. They will buy and consume the products of the mega-corporations. They will carry out, to a T, their assigned roles in the new civilization, along side the machines of the technocrats.

It’s a plan to: rewrite the future; and, when things are humming again, to forget the genocidal past entirely, in four or five generations.

This would solve the conflict within the Club, among the technocrats, the mega-corporations, and the Rockefeller-type Globalists.

And somewhere today, a young person, filled to the brim with vague ideals and hope, buying the promise that everyone’s needs will be met, that suffering and pain and injustice will be solved, has no clue that such pretty thoughts can be hijacked in the service of building a system to eradicate what it means to be alive.

This young person thinks freedom, liberty, and the intentions of the Constitution are frivolous obstructions to a better world.

Dispense with the Constitution. It isn’t part of the modern trend.

Instead, join the crowd. Shout with delight for the political salvation that is only a few more joined hands from realization.

Forget. Believe. Go along.

Reject as absurd the possibility that elite planners have a completely different version of the world in tow.

Yell for equality, whatever that may be shaped to mean.

Think about nothing. Just swim into the days with faith born from what our leaders are selling on the shore of the new shining city.

Believe. Trust.

Your job isn’t to imagine and invent your own reality. That is a meaningless proposition.

No, your job is to love the State because the State loves you.

Jon Rappoport

The author of an explosive collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at http://www.nomorefakenews.com

Jon Rappoport

The author of an explosive collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at http://www.nomorefakenews.com

Jon Rappoport

The author of an explosive collection, THE MATRIX REVEALED, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at http://www.nomorefakenews.com

Uncategorized

Monsanto Formally Joins Global Agenda 21 Front Group | ExplosiveReports.Com

http://explosivereports.com/2013/01/24/monsanto-formally-joins-global-agenda-21-front-group/

Monsanto Formally Joins Global Agenda 21 Front Group

Gallery

MONSANTO-1

Jurriaan Maessen
ExplosiveReports.Com
January 24, 2013

The global front group of the Agenda 21 program which was formalized during the UN’s 1992 Earth Summit is proud to welcome Monsanto as its newest “member”, joining the likes of such “sustainable” businesses as Coca Cola, Dutch Royal Shell and other global leviathans.

The World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD) has put out a press release, announcing that Monsanto has joined the effort for “global sustainable development”. The Council consists of several global mega-corporations such as Dutch Royal Shell and Coca Cola, to mention just a few.

The press-release notes that by joining the Council “Monsanto is taking an important step along a continuum towards developing a more sustainable agriculture system – one that improves our daily lives, respects our global environment and recognizes the importance of the world’s small-holder farmers”.

President of the WBCSD, Peter Bakker, stated that “a future vision” is required to move “to protect soils, enhance ecosystems and optimize land use in ways that are environmentally sound.”

“(…) we must move towards a future vision for agriculture where absolutes become as out of place as a one-size-fits-all approach to farming.”

Jerry Steiner, Executive Vice President, Sustainability and Corporate Affairs at Monsanto said:

“We are excited to join the WBCSD and connect with a global coalition of more than 200 companies that advocate for progress on sustainable development.”

The global coalition Steiner speaks about consists of just about all global mega-corporations. Here’s an overview of the membership-list as posted on the WBCSD’s website:

Companies_web banner_011012

The Council on their website admits that it strives to execute Agenda 21 as part of a “One World Vision”. Furthermore, the WBCSD describes that it “has its roots in the proactive stance adopted by a group of visionary business leaders during and after the Rio Summit.”

“The Rio Summit in 1992 was a defining event for sustainable development. It added development to the environmental agenda, produced the Rio Declaration, the Climate Change and Biological Diversity Conventions and set in motion Agenda 21. Importantly, it positioned business as a key actor.”

Adding global GM food producer Monsanto to its roundtable equals victory for Agenda 21, as global food production is a prime concern as formulated during the 1992 Earth Summit.

Peter Bakker, the Council’s president, recently gave a speech in London for prince Charles, stating he is “delighted to be able to announce that WBCSD will collaborate with the Prince of Wales’ Accounting for Sustainability programme in convening a forum for CFOs and Accountants to discuss and develop scaled up solutions for finance and reporting in the run up to 2020”.

Bakker stated:

bakkerhrh
“In 1992 the United Nations organized the first Earth Summit in Rio and Agenda 21 was published. If you read this document today you will be amazed at how relevant the descriptions of the world’s challenges are still in 2012 – only their urgency has increased since 1992.”

In 2011 the Council prepared a document for the latest Earth Summit in 2012 titled Vision 2050. In the document a “radical strategy” is being proposed in order to achieve this “one world” under an Agenda 21 regime:

“From 2020 to 2050, the traits formed during the first decade mature into more consistent knowledge, behavior and solutions. It is a period of growing consensus as well as wrenching change in many parts of society – climate, economic power, population – and a time for fundamental change in markets that redefines values, profits and success.”

The manuscript stresses that the vision for 2050 entails, among other things, a stabilization of the global population and a redistributing of the global population into compact cities:

“In 2050, some 9 billion people live well, and within the limits of the planet. The global population has begun to stabilize, mainly due to the education and economic empowerment of women and increased urbanization. More than 6 billion people, two-thirds of the population, live in cities. People have the means to meet their basic human needs, including the need for dignified lives and meaningful roles in their communities.”

Another aspect of the described “vision” relates to a new “green revolution” and the use of biotechnologies to “feed the world”:

A 21st century version of the Green Revolution has helped the larger 2050 population meet its nutrition needs. Improved agricultural practices, water efficiency, new crop varieties and new technologies, including biotechnologies, have allowed a doubling of agricultural output without associated increases in the amount of land or water used.”

This, of course, is where our old friend Monsanto comes into play, which has now formally aligned itself with the global coordinating group of Agenda 21.

Like this:

Like
Be the first to like this.

January 24, 2013 Leave a Reply

Uncategorized

Hillary Clinton’s E-Journal Retracts Neo-Malthusian Essay By Crocodile Hunter’s Daughter | E xplosiveReports.Com

http://explosivereports.com/2013/01/24/hillary-clintons-e-journal-retracts-neo-malthusian-essay-by-crocodile-hunters-daughter/

Hillary Clinton’s E-Journal Retracts Neo-Malthusian Essay By Crocodile Hunter’s Daughter

Gallery

bindi-irwin

Jurriaan Maessen
ExplosiveReports.Com
January 24, 2013

According to the daughter of the late Steve Irwin, her essay on the “population problem” was first edited, then retracted altogether by the editors of the State Department’s e-journal.

Bindi Irwin, the now 14-year old daughter of the late Crocodile Hunter Steve Irwin was apparently invited by the editors of the State Department’s e-journal as part of Clinton’s “endangered species initiative” to write an essay on how the young Irwin views wildlife conservationism. Irwin, in response to the assignment, spoke her mind, regurgitating the same old neo-Malthusian death-talk we have become accustomed with from the mouths of conservationists such as David Attenborough, Paul Ehrlich and other people devoted to reducing the world’s population “for the earth”.

When the editors of Hillary Clinton’s State Department’s online journal received Irwin’s essay, they returned the thing with all references to “overpopulation” edited out.

Bindi’s mother, Terri Irwin, spoke to News.com.au, stating that “she (Bindi) was asked to write an essay about the environment and included the consideration of population (growth) and they returned her essay edited and completely edited that out.”

“So Bindi wrote to Hillary Clinton’s organisation and said ‘what happened to freedom of speech?”, Terri Irwin continued.

After the editors of Hillary Clinton’s journal told Irwin there wasn’t enough time for a rewrite, Bindi decided to withdraw the article altogether.

As I said, Irwin’s original, unedited essay contains classical Malthusian and Ehrlichian thinking based on the faulty opinion that more people means less resources.

“I believe that most problems in the world today, such as climate change, stem from one immense problem which seems to be the ‘elephant in the room’ that no-one wants to talk about.”, Bindi writes.

Further on she writes: “How is it possible that our fragile planet can sustain these masses of people.”

I assume Irwin wrote her essay in ignorance. She might be persuaded to think otherwise after seeing the following video:

In any case it seems the State Department is extremely cautious on the subject, perhaps afraid to be subjected to all kinds of criticism for openly providing a platform to advocates of population control (although there are still some first class neo-Malthusian snakes slithering around the White House). In the final equation, I think the government’s caution in regards to everything relating to this subject is a good thing. After all, it shows they are on the defense, knowing that a growing number of people have become aware of the elite’s depopulation plans.

Like this:

Like
Be the first to like this.

January 24, 2013 Leave a Reply

Uncategorized

Population Control Advocacy Group: Humans Equal Locusts | ExplosiveReports.Com

http://explosivereports.com/2013/01/25/population-control-advocacy-group-humans-equal-locusts/

Population Control Advocacy Group: Humans Equal Locusts

Gallery

locust_canary1

Jurriaan Maessen
ExplosiveReports.Com
January 25, 2013

The UK based population control advocacy group Population Matters felt compelled to respond to the latest controversy surrounding their patron David Attenborough, who recently stated humans are a “plague on the earth”.

In a press release posted on its website, the organization expresses support for their beloved patron’s statements, concurring that mankind may be viewed as a plague upon the planet- not to be understood as a disease as such, but rather as the way this disease spreads.

“What did he (Attenborough) mean? Surely he does not mean that we are a disease? More probably, he was thinking of a plague of locusts, which consumes all that it sees, and then dies off.”

“That analogy is apt.”, the statement continues. “Human numbers have doubled in the last fifty years to seven billion. Natural habitats, wildlife and fish stocks are falling around the world, due to development, overexploitation and climate change. Resources, too, are being steadily depleted, whether that be water sources, fertile land, fossil fuels or key minerals such as fertilizers.”

This kind of thinking was effectively commincated in the first Matrix film:

In their haste to come to their patron’s aid, the Population Matters people have shown us a brief glimpse into their outlook on humans in general which can be summarized as follows: humans equal insects that spread, consume resources and then die. This view is held dear by environmentalists and conservationists all over the globe. One could even say that this dangerous anti-human thinking spreads locust-like within the scientific community. Another patron of Population Matters, University College’s Emeritus Professor John Guillebaud, has shown us (quite literally) another glimpse into the true nature of these neo-Malthusians when he spoke in front of a group of scientists at Cambridge University’s Triple Helix Society on October 14, 2010.

On the top of the screen of Guillebaud’s slide show we read the words: “guide to “population control” methods”, showing on the one hand a contraception pill, which is described as an artificial method of population control. On the right hand side we see depicted a machine-gun, a knife, and a hospitable-bed as examples of “natural” methods of population control (from 1 minute onward).

“It either happens the gentle way, through family planning (…), or it happens the nasty ways (…) excessive heat, hurricanes, flooding and so on. To me that’s the ultimate inconvenient truth”, the professor stated.

This is classical neo-Malthusian reasoning. Reduce human numbers voluntarily “for the earth”, or else… Also typical of modern-day eugenicists is the urge to conceal their true purpose (population reduction and control) with euphemistic phrases which vary from “family planning” to “reproductive health”. In this video the professor admits to this deception:

“Will you all undertake a little project today, for me”, Guillebaud said, “and that is never from the 14th of October onwards will you say those words up there (pointing towards the text on the slide: “population control”). You will never find me in any situation except in the context of this slide saying: population control. So will you for the rest of this meeting, and for the rest of your life, never put those two words together. They have been so damaging. They instantly make your hair up… think of India in the 1970s and of China at time present. Use any other way you would like to say, like my phrase “population matters”. Please don’t say “population control”. So there’s one thing you can all do.”

In 2010 I reported on a 2006 gathering which was attended by the United Nations Population Fund, the International Planned Parenthood Foundation, the European Commission, the World Bank and Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. At the meeting professor of Medical Demography at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine John Cleland admitted that all modern-day language used in relation to the population reduction agenda is actually code.

“No more shrouding our statements in code. Because code just confuses people.”, the professor said (page 33 in the document).
out honestly with the true mission they have set out to pursue.

“It does this cause no service at all to continue to shroud family planning in the obfuscating phrase “sexual and reproductive health”. People don’t really know what it means. If we mean family planning or contraception, we must say it. If we are worried about population growth, we must say it. We must use proper, straightforward language. I am fed up with the political correctness that daren’t say the name population stabilization, hardly dares to mention family planning or contraception out of fear that somebody is going to get offended. It is pathetic.

Deception is the fruit by which we know these characters who would like to view mankind as a plague of locust, plundering natural resources. If there is one group that consumes resource on a massive scale, it’s crypto-eugenicists such as Al Gore and Bill Gates who individually consume more than an average small-sized developing nation- which just happens to be exactly the sort of nation they like to see depopulated.

January 25, 2013 Leave a Reply