Climate Change, Socialized Medicine and Population Control
October 17th, 2009
“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.” (1)
The quote above is from the book Ecoscience published in 1977. In this book is detailed a plan for a “planetary regime” that would regulate the global population. According to the authors, this regime would be empowered to create specific “compulsory population-control laws” in order to accomplish this aim.
By Adam Murdock, MD
Published 10/17/09
What specific population-control laws did they have in mind? For starters, the authors propose that this regime should have the power to:
1. Compel inferior mothers to either give up their children or have abortions.
2. Sterilize the population through putting “sterilants” into their water and food supply.
According the authors of Ecoscience this would be okay as long as “pets” or “livestock” are not harmed.
3. Forcibly implant a long-term sterilizing capsule which would only be removed with “official permission.”
It is clear that the above methods will be successful at curtailing the population if implemented. There is just one problem: How will they convince the people to go along with the program? Their solution is to demonize people that have too many children as having irresponsible “resource-consumption patterns.” They, therefore, need to be compelled to behave more responsibly in order to save the planet and to spread the earth’s finite resources more equitably. An additional rationale is that since government already regulates marriage, why not family size?
Despite these rationales for population control, it is clear that many people are not likely to be convinced. Therefore, how will such unpopular measures be enforced? In the end, the only way the authors foresee fulfilling their dream will be through the creation of a “planetary regime” and international “police force.”
I don’t know about you, but these proposals are beginning to sound to me like the sick vision of some early twentieth century eugenicist. Who could come up with such a heinous plan? In fact, one has to look no further than one of the co-authors of Ecoscience, namely, President Obama’s top science and technology advisor, John Holdren. John Holdren and his two co-author’s totalitarian vision for our future is frightening enough, but now he holds the keys to our future through his advisory position with President Obama. If President Obama or the international community wanted to implement some sort of population control measure they have a blueprint in hand. And, unfortunately, I believe the implementation is already underway.
How, you ask? Let us just take a second and examine the ideas and methods that have been used since the book’s publication and by the Obama administration.
It was not long ago that the idea of man-made climate change was not taken seriously. We Americans made a mockery of the “kooky” Europeans who had deluded themselves into a global warming hysteria. But, not long after, here we sit on the verge of subjecting ourselves to the very same global cap and trade system that we had previously derided. And guess what? The very same method for tackling the current global warming crisis is the one that had been outlined by Holdren 30 years ago to tackle the “population crisis.” The only way a proposed cap and trade system will be successful is by, you guessed it, restricting the American people’s “resource-consumption patterns.” Not surprisingly, Holdren maintains that his ancient blueprint was inconsequential and has had nothing to do with the Obama Administration’s current resource restriction model for dealing with climate change.
In addition, despite the fact that the government has yet to make the leap from regulating marriage to directly regulating the number of resource-consuming children, the climate change legislation will accomplish this goal indirectly. Indeed, as climate taxes reverberate through the economy and so-called gas guzzling SUVs are made impossibly expensive, housing heating bills rise, inflation propagates, and the general cost of living skyrockets, so will come the demise of population-sustaining families. This trend will be further exacerbated by President Obama’s support for the Federal Reserve’s monetary expansionist policies, which will lead to massive inflation and devaluation of the dollar. More and more people will find it more difficult to pay for ever-expanding bills with ever-shrinking valueless dollars. This will lead to more couples having reservations about the cost of starting and providing for large families. Indeed, generous family sizes will become ever-increasingly a thing of the past and with it, the so-called infestation of the earth with children.
Finally, as part of the health care debate, President Obama has made repeated claims that his plan will not include rationing. As usual, the truth is quite the opposite. Once again “resource-consumption patterns” will have to be restricted in order for the government to stay within its health care budgetary restraints. Those with the highest consumption patterns will become the targeted group, namely, the elderly. In a recent article in the UK Times Online is described the familiar story of Hazel Fenton, from East Sussex, who fortunately is still alive despite being placed on the “Liverpool care pathway plan.” (2) According to the Times, the plan once reserved for “patients who do have only days to live” is now being used “more widely in the NHS, denying treatment to elderly patients who are not dying.” Indeed, this death program denies medical care, nutrition, and even water to patients that are not dying and in the case of Hazel still alive nine months later. This example is by no means unique. I have personally witnessed in the U.S. an increased pressure being injected into the medical establishment to push elderly patients into DNR (Do Not Resuscitate) status and even hospice. The rationale for such a trend has been that we physicians should be aware that medical resources are finite and therefore should be distributed to those that will see the most benefit. This doesn’t always include the elderly. Sound like a “resource-consumption” model to you? Once physicians have fully embraced this rationale we will not be far off from the very same UK death plan here in the U.S.
In a final sick twist, as Holdren and Obama are able to indirectly restrict the number of children through climate taxation and dispose of the elderly through health care rationing so will they have, unbeknownst to the majority of the rest of us, accomplished their original eugenics inspired population-control dream.
References:
1. Ecoscience: Population, Resources, Environment. Paul R. Ehrlich, Anne H. Ehrlich, John P. Holdren; W. H. Freeman, 1977. 1052 pgs. Pertinent Pages: 837, 786-8, 838, 917, 942-3.
2. “Daughter saves mother, 80, left by doctors to starve.” Times Online. October 11, 2009.
Source: Campaign for Liberty
No related posts.
October 18th, 2009 at 2:33 pm
Your point that population control is inherently evil is short-sighted. We do have an evolving population crisis in all countries across the globe. As always instead of teaching good family planning we continue to endorse the status quo that having babies is a miracle. It’s not a miracle! If it were a miracle birds and bees would need to be taught how to do “it”. We all know that we have no shortage of unintended pregnancies which are just another indicator of how un-miracle like the ability to conceive actually is. Each person on the planet consumes natural resources which is why we have to destroy more and more pristine land to house more mini-mansions and genetically modify our food to grow faster in less space with less water and plow under rain forests to become the next cattle ranches which in turn cause more and more species that we use to coexist with into extinction. Our failure to properly plan our land use within our communities for continuity and survival causes the urban sprawl that in turn requires more roads, cars and longer commutes. All creating more demand for oil and other natural resources in an environment where all resources will only continue to rise in price. Our inability to grow food locally will require food to be transported from thousands of miles away just so we can survive. You think things are tough when our president says we have an addiction to oil? What will you think when you realize we have an even bigger addiction to food that is mostly mast produced by oil?
When we do not educate our children and communities about the decreasing natural resources of our planet and the demand on those resources to sustain more and more humans we are doing a real dis-service to everyone occupying the globe and those that will be in the future.
October 18th, 2009 at 5:48 pm
Contraceptive$ can reduce impact of climate change $ay$ Lancet???
The Lancet medical journal also critici$ed non-government organisations (NGOs) for ”working in silos” and avoiding the varied approach needed to change social attitudes.
A $tudy soon to be published by the World Health Organisation (WHO) showed that 37 of the least developed countries appreciated the link between population growth and climate change. However, only six of them identified family planning as part of their adaptation strategy.
Earlier this month, research by the London $chool of Economics said contraception is almost five times cheaper as a means of preventing climate change than conventional green technologies.
Telegraph Media Group Limited – 18 Sep 2009
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/6203364/Contraceptives-can-reduce-impact-of-climate-change-says-Lancet.html
The above, and just about everything you’ve ever been told about Global Warming is untrue.
From Al Gore’$ “An Inconvenient Truth” to news reports from the popular media (The Lancet-medical journal) outlets, and even public classrooms, which in Chicken Little fashion are screaming – the sky is falling. But is it really?
The Great Global Warming Swindle – Produced by WAGTV
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xzSzItt6h-s
Tony Gosling interviews Webster Tarply about claims of global warming and their political and historic significance.
Elitism & Depopulation lurking behind Climate Change Lies
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UNAn7ttlD0g
That’s what the UN, the IMF, the World Bank and the big foundations, among others, have built throughout the last 60 years, as front institutions for monopoly banks, corporations, and the good old Fabian elite running it all.
Climate change is the ultimate pretext to get everyone under complete regulation and paying taxes through their ears, as established in UN Agenda 21.
Climate change bill: looting the economy for world empire
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TPcgBxhSmuE
Read the Edward J. Wegman report; it covers the following subject: Climate Change 2001.
Featured prominently in this “Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change” (IPCC) report, was the work of Dr. Michael Mann, Dr. Raymond Bradley, and Dr. Malcolm Hughes (Mann et al., 1998, 1999) [MBH98, MBH99] – Mann et al., were responsible for the controversial “hockey stick” graph.
Challenges to the way in which “principal components analysis” (PCA) was used, have arisen from McIntyre and McKitrick (2003, 2005a, 2005b) [MM03, MM05a, MM05b]. The challenges are based on rather subtle mathematical nuances. They found MBH98 and MBH99 to be somewhat obscure and incomplete, and the criticisms of MM03/05a/05b to be valid and compelling.
After MBH99, Stephen McIntyre and Ross McKitrick [MM03] published their critique of the 1998 paper, citing calculation errors, unjustified truncation or extrapolation of source data, obsolete data, geographical location errors and incorrect calculation of principal components.
They also claimed that using the MBH98 methodology and the Northern Hemisphere average temperature index, for the period 1400-1980 shows that temperatures in the 15th century exceeded those of the late 20th century. In particular, they claim that MBH98’s incorrect usage of PCA alone, resulted in the well-known “hockey stick” shape. http://climateaudit.org/pdf/others/07142006_Wegman_Report.pdf
More Than 650 International Scientists Dissent Over Man-Made Global Warming Claims.
A newly updated U.S. Senate Minority Report was released last week featuring the dissenting voices of over 650 international scientists. Many are current, and others were former UN IPCC scientists who now criticized the climate claims made by the UN’s IPCC and, former Vice President – Al Gore.
The report quotes Ivar Giaever, a Nobel Prize Winner for Physics, saying: “I am a skeptic…Global warming has become a new religion.”
UN IPCC Japanese Scientist Dr. Kiminori Itoh, an award-winning PhD environmental physical chemist said; warming fears are the “worst scientific scandal in the history …When people come to know what the truth is, they will feel deceived by science and scientists.”
See the full Senate Minority Report here:
http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Files.View&FileStore_id=83947f5d-d84a-4a84-ad5d-6e2d71db52d9
CBC – Global Warming Doomsday Called off – 44 min – Apr 21, 2007
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3309910462407994295
The Cryosphere Today – Compare Daily Sea Ice
http://igloo.atmos.uiuc.edu/cgi-bin/test/print.sh?fm=10&fd=31&fy=1995&sm=10&sd=31&sy=2008
Global Warming or Global Governance
This documentary showcases the interviews of climate scientists and biologists from numerous sources, who explain step by step, why Al Gore and the global warming alarmists are incorrect.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4860344067427439443
“I believe it is appropriate to have an ‘over-representation’ of the facts on how dangerous it is, as a predicate for opening up the audience.”
GORE AL – CLIMATE CHANGE ACTIVIST.
“Effective execution of Agenda 21 will require a profound reorientation of all human society, unlike anything the world has ever experienced a major shift in the priorities of both governments and individuals and an unprecedented redeployment of human and financial resources. This shift will demand that a concern for the environmental consequences of every human action be integrated into individual and collective decision-making at every level.”
UNITED NATIONS (UN) AGENDA 21
“We are on the verge of a global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis…”
ROCKEFELLA DAVID – CLUB of ROME executive member.
“The common enemy of humanity is man. In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea; that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine, and the like, would fit the bill. All these dangers are caused by human intervention, and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real enemy then, is humanity itself.”
CLUB of ROME – Premier think-tank consultants to the UNITED NATIONS.
“No matter if the science of global warming is all phony…climate change provides the greatest opportunity to bring about justice and equality in the world.”
STEWART CHRISTINE – Former Canadian Minister of the Environment
“Global Sustainability requires the deliberate quest of poverty, reduced resource consumption and set levels of mortality control.”
KING MAURICE – PROFESSOR.
“My three main goals would be to reduce human population to about 100 million worldwide, destroy the industrial infrastructure and see wilderness, with it’s full complement of species, returning throughout the world.”
FOREMAN DAVE – co-founder of Earth First!
“Human beings, as a species, have no more value than slugs.”
DAVIS JOHN – editor of Earth First! Journal.
“The Earth has cancer and the cancer is Man.”
CLUB of ROME – Mankind at the Turning Point.
“A cancer is an uncontrolled multiplication of cells; the population explosion is an uncontrolled multiplication of people. We must shift our efforts from the treatment of the symptoms to the cutting out of the cancer. The operation will demand many apparently brutal and heartless decisions.”
EHRLICH PAUL (PROFESSOR) – The Population Bomb.
“A reasonable estimate for an industrialized world society at the present North American material standard of living would be 1 billion. At the more frugal European standard of living, 2 to 3 billion would be possible.”
UNITED NATIONS (UN) – Global Biodiversity Assessment.
“A total population of 250-300 million people, a 95% decline from present levels, would be ideal.”
TURNER TED – Founder of CNN and major UNITED NATIONS donor.
“…the resultant ideal sustainable population is hence more than 500 million but less than one billion.”
CLUB of ROME – Goals for Mankind.
“One America burdens the earth much more than twenty Bangladeshes. This is a terrible thing to say. In order to stabilize world population, we must eliminate 350,000 people per day. It is a horrible thing to say, but it’s just as bad not to say it.”
COUSTEAU JACQUES – UNESCO Courier.
“If I were reincarnated I would wish to be returned to earth as a killer virus to lower human population levels.”
PHILIP – PRINCE DUKE of EDINBURGH – Patron of the World Wildlife Fund
Demographic Winter & Demographic Bomb
When the great social experiments of the 1960’s were launched, and when concern over a “population bomb” loomed large, we did not have the social science and economic studies we have available to us today. So the world embarked unknowingly on a self-destructive course.
The population control movement includes organizations, governments and international bodies (like the United Nations), dedicated to lower birth rates. Their methods range from the voluntary to the coercive – including forced sterilization in Peru, and China’s one-child-per-family policy, which has included forced abortions. Over the course of decades, population controllers have persuaded the public, through fear and hysteria, that there are too many people in the world and drastic action must be taken to curb population growth. Their fallacies have been institutionalized and become the “standard wisdom” of Western elites.
http://www.demographicwinter.com/index.html
“The science to which I pinned my faith is bankrupt, its counsels which should have established the millennium, led instead directly to the suicide of Europe. I believed them once. In their name I helped destroy the faith of millions of worshipers in the temples of a thousand creeds. And now they look at me and witness the great tragedy of an atheist who has lost the faith.” – George Bernard Shaw.
Information compiled and provided by Christopher-Peter: Maingot; without prejudice, malice aforethought, ill will, vexation, or frivolity.