UN/NWO plan to reduce the world’s population by 80%

[Malmoesoldier]

UN Conference on Human Settlements (Habitat I) in 1976,

Quote:

"Land...cannot be treated as an ordinary asset, controlled by individuals.... Private land ownership is...a principal instrument of accumulation and concentration of wealth and therefore contributes to social injustice; if unchecked, it may become a major obstacle in the planning and implementation of development schemes.... Public control of land use is therefore indispensable...."

They State that the human population has exceeded earth's biosphere capacity and set the parameters for recovery:

Quote:

It is estimated that an 'agricultural world' in which most human beings are peasants should be able to support 5 to 7 billion people....In contrast, a reasonable estimate for an industrialised world society at the present north American material standard of living would be 1 billion."

There is no discussion in the GBA of how 2/3 of the earth's human population might be eliminated, but it does give some clues. Agricultural practices are sharply condemned,

Quote:

Overwhelming evidence leads to the conclusion that modern commercial agriculture has had a direct negative impact on biodiversity at all levels.... Agriculture may be one of the most important causes of pollution, by the production of sediments, by the generation of chemical wastes, or by the use of pesticides."

Never mind that US agricultural practices have reduced these impacts to all time lows. The use of fertilizers would be sharply reduced if the GBA recommendations were implemented, in spite of the realization "that fertilisers have played an essential part in producing the world's harvests is undisputed. It is estimated that if the use of fertilisers ceased, the world's harvests would be cut almost in half." Although the GBA does not say it, cutting the world's food production in half would certainly produce massive starvation and pestilence and cut human population by at least half.

For more info go to: http://www.discerningtoday.org/world...line.htm#N_26_

The United Nations doesn’t just talk about killing people in the name of saving the earth, they’ve actually put their plans into action. The Burmese army killed two thousand people and drove thirty thousand from their homes to make way for a United Nations biosphere sanctuary (source: London Guardian, March 23, 1997).


NSSM 200.

The 1974 NSSM 200 document cites “Injectable contraceptives for women” as a possible method of population reduction and control. Depopulation, as stated in the document, should be pursued because it would be in the “…economic interests of the United States.” “Wherever a lessening of population pressures… can increase the prospects for such stability, population policy becomes relevant to resource supplies and to the economic interests of the United States.”

NSSM 200 is a 1974 secret report prepared for the outgoing U.S. President Richard Nixon which discussing ways to drastically reduce world’s population base. The underlying premise of the report is that Planet Earth’s natural resources could only sustain 3 billion people. The report was signed by Henry Kissinger.

Point 29 of the report speaks volumes about the oligarchy’s true intentions. The plan was to reduce the world’s population by 500 million towards the year 2000 (from 1974) and by 3 billion by the year 2050.

Food as a weapon.

Quote:

“Mandatory programs may be needed and we should be considering these possibilities now,” “Would food be considered an instrument of national power? ... Is the U.S. prepared to accept food rationing to help people who can't/won't control their population growth?”

"Depopulation should be the highest priority of foreign policy towards the third world, because the US economy will require large and increasing amounts of minerals from abroad, especially from less developed countries." - Henry Kissinger

http://www.population-security.org/28-APP2.html
http://www.schillerinstitute.org/foo...m_jb_1995.html

And from declassified government documents in Australia, we learn that world-famous microbiologists, Nobel Prize winners, were seriously contemplating and planning to release biological weapons to reduce an overpopulated world (The Age, March 10, 2002, “Burnet’s solution: The plan to poison SE Asia”). The revelation is contained in top-secret files declassified by the National Archive of Australia. http://www.theage.com.au/articles/20...365752044.html

In 2004 the publication World Watch published an article titled, "Global Population Reduction: Confronting the Inevitable," by Ken Smail, a professor in the Anthropology department of Kenyon College in Ohio. In this article, Smail proposes that the earth's carrying capacity will reach, or has reached already, its limit. In what Smail calls a modern day "Malthusian dilemma", he cites measures to merely slow population growth as being inefficient, stating that,

Quote:

"Looking past the near-term concerns that have plagued population policy at the political level, it is increasingly apparent that the long-term sustainability of civilization will require not just a leveling-off of human numbers as projected over the coming half-century, but a colossal reduction in both population and consumption."

Smail says that a large scale global population reduction is inevitable, but that there are two possible ways for this to happen,

Quote:

"That there will be a large-scale reduction in global human numbers over the next two or three centuries appears to be inevitable. The primary issue seems to be whether this process will be under conscious human control and (hopefully) relatively benign, or whether it will turn out to be unpredictably chaotic and (perhaps) catastrophic."

http://oldthinkernews.com/documents/...inevitable.pdf


"The first task is population control at home. How do we go about it? Many of my colleagues feel that some sort of compulsory birth regulation would be necessary to achieve such control. One plan often mentioned involves the addition of temporary sterilants to water supplies or staple food. Doses of the antidote would be carefully rationed by the government to produce the desired population size." - Paul Ehrlich, The Population Bomb, p.130-131

UNICEF Nigerian Polio Vaccine Contaminated with Sterilizing Agents Scientist Finds: http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2004/mar/04031101.html

U.N. Complicit in Forced Sterilizations: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,73780,00.html

Virginia governor apologizes for eugenics law: http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/...a-eugenics.htm


"A total of 3,461 adverse reactions, including eight deaths, were reported to the government through the VAERS system since the FDA approved the drug: http://www.crosswalk.com/news/11561185/

"More than 17 girls a week have been experiencing adverse reactions such as seizures and numbness after taking cervical cancer vaccine Gardasil since it became widely distributed in April. But the Department of Health and Ageing, while revealing the number of reactions, is refusing to release the details of them - despite growing controversy overseas, including links to at least seven deaths: http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599...11-421,00.html

500 rushed to hospital after vaccination: http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default...1-7-2007_pg7_2

governments have tested deadly pathogens, viruses, radiological and biological weapons on human populations without their knowledge (which has resulted in many deaths) in order to advance the progress of eugenics. including the infamous Ringworm Children, who were used as guinea pigs and subjected to lethal doses of radiation by Israeli health officials, killing 6,000 and leaving the rest with lifelong debilitating illnesses.

http://web.israelinsider.com/views/3998.htm

For more info

read: http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/biowar.html

Watch: http://video.google.com/googleplayer...261&autoplay=1


Quotes.

"Isn't the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn't it our responsibility to bring that about?" -Maurice Strong (U.N. environmental leader)

"To achieve One World Government it is necessary to remove from the minds of men their individualism, their loyalty to family traditions and national identification." -Brock Chisholm, while director of UN World Health Organization

“It is the sacred principles enshrined in the United Nations charter to which the American people will henceforth pledge their allegance.”
President George Herbert Walker Bush Addressing the General Assembly of the United Nations, February 1, 1992

"Out of these troubled times, our fifth objective - a New World Order - can emerge... We are now in sight of a United Nations that performs as envisioned by its founders." - George Bush (September, 1990)

“The United Nations is the greatest fraud in history. It's purpose is to destroy the United States.” John E. Rankin, a U.S. Congressman from 1923-1953

"The UN provides cover almost the same way the Taliban does. It serves as the laboratory, the linchpin for legitimizing incendiary rhetoric (against the West in general and America in particular)."
- Harvey Kushner, Long Island State University Professor of Criminology (terrorism analyst)

"The total world population should be not more than 2 billion, rather than the current 5.6 billion." --Cornell University professor David Pimentel, speaking at the American Association for the Advancement of Science, 1994

There was very strong agreement that religious institutions have to take primary responsibility for the population explosion. We must speak far more clearly about sexuality, about contraception, about abortion, about the values that control the population, because the ecological crisis, in short, is the population crisis. cut the population by 90 percent and there aren’t enough people left to do a great deal of ecological damage.” -Dr. Sam Keen, philosopher, at the 'State of the World Forum', sponsored by the Gorbachev Foundation and attended by many worldleaders, San Francisco, 1995, as quoted by William Jasper in 'Global Gorby', The New American, Oct. 30, 1995

"Whatever the price of the Chinese Revolution, it has obviously succeeded not only in producing more efficient and dedicated administration, but also in fostering high morale and community of purpose. The social experiment in China under Chairman Mao's leadership is one of the most important and successful in human history." -David Rockefeller 1973 (NY Times 8-10-73)

"One-fourth of humanity must be eliminated from the social body. We are in charge of God's selection process for planet earth. He selects, we destroy. We are the riders of the pale horse, Death." - Psychologist Barbara Marx Hubbard - member and futurist/strategist of Task Force Delta; a United States Army think tank

UNESCO Courier, Jacques-Yves Cousteau, the famous Emmy award winning film producer and ambassador for the environmental movement, said in 1991,

"It’s terrible to have to say this. World population must be stabilized and to do that we must eliminate 350,000 people per day."

Ted Turner, in an interview with Audubon Magazine said, "A total world population of 250-300 million people, a 95% decline from present levels, would be ideal," and is using his purported $1Billion "gift" to the UN to further global depopulation programs.

"If I were reincarnated I would wish to be returned to earth as a killer virus to lower human population levels." -Prince Phillip, Duke of Edinburgh, leader of the World Wildlife Fund - quoted in "Are You Ready For Our New Age Future?," Insiders Report, American Policy Center, December '95

In the event that I am reincarnated, I would like to return as a deadly virus, in order to contribute something to solve overpopulation."
Reported by Deutsche Press Agentur (DPA), August, 1988.

"Eugenic goals are most likely to be attained under another name than eugenics." - Frederick Osborn


UN scandals.

Child sex book given out at U.N. summit: http://web.archive.org/web/200206031...0-25256488.htm

UN chief resigns over sexual harassment row: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main...21/wlubb21.xml

UN shame over sex scandal: http://news.independent.co.uk/world/...cle2132576.ece

Teenagers used for sex by UN in Bosnia: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.../25/wbos25.xml

U.N. adds new cases of sex abuse: http://web.archive.org/web/200210160...4-85616521.htm

UN troops accused of 'systematic' rape in Sierra Leone: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main...17/wleon17.xml

American firm in Bosnia sex trade row poised to win MoD contract: http://www.guardian.co.uk/military/s...850107,00.html

Representative Cynthia McKinney Grills Rumsfeld On Dyncorp Sex Rings: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-iR_WDbwmh4

Nato force 'feeds Kosovo sex trade: http://www.guardian.co.uk/Kosovo/Sto...211248,00.html

UN 'ignored' abuse at Kosovo mental homes: http://www.guardian.co.uk/internatio...770856,00.html

UN troops traded guns for gold with militias: http://news.independent.co.uk/world/...cle2578497.ece

US oilman jailed over UN scandal: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7116113.stm

Much more here: http://www.prisonplanet.com/archive_elite_sex_ring.html

[DGM]

Malmoe:

Still refuse to read the NSSM 200 document for yourself?

Or is it that you don't understand the words you read?

[jhunter1163]

Who's got that pic of the chimp with the poo and the thought-bubble saying "fling?"

[WildCat]

Don't worry Malmoesoldier, we have a nice movie to show you before we put you to sleep.

[Horatius]

Quote:

12. While GNP increased per annum at an average rate of 5 percent in LDCs over the last decade, the population increase of 2.5 percent reduced the average annual per capita growth rate to only 2.5 percent. In many heavily populated areas this rate was 2 percent or less. In the LDCs hardest hit by the oil crisis, with an aggregate population of 800 million, GNP increases may be reduced to less than 1 percent per capita per year for the remainder of the 1970's. For the poorest half of the populations of these countries, with average incomes of less than $100, the prospect is for no growth or retrogression for this period.

13. If significant progress can be made in slowing population growth, the positive impact on growth of GNP and per capita income will be significant. Moreover, economic and social progress will probably contribute further to the decline in fertility rates.

14. High birth rates appear to stem primarily from:

a. inadequate information about and availability of means of fertility control;

b. inadequate motivation for reduced numbers of children combined with motivation for many children resulting from still high infant and child mortality and need for support in old age; and

c. the slowness of change in family preferences in response to changes in environment.

15. The universal objective of increasing the world's standard of living dictates that economic growth outpace population growth. In many high population growth areas of the world, the largest proportion of GNP is consumed, with only a small amount saved. Thus, a small proportion of GNP is available for investment -- the "engine" of economic growth. Most experts agree that, with fairly constant costs per acceptor, expenditures on effective family planning services are generally one of the most cost effective investments for an LDC country seeking to improve overall welfare and per capita economic growth. We cannot wait for overall modernization and development to produce lower fertility rates naturally since this will undoubtedly take many decades in most developing countries, during which time rapid population growth will tend to slow development and widen even more the gap between rich and poor.

Those utter bastards! How dare they conspire to increase the standard of living of poor people in undeveloped countries! String 'em up!

Quote:

16. The interrelationships between development and population growth are complex and not wholly understood. Certain aspects of economic development and modernization appear to be more directly related to lower birth rates than others. Thus certain development programs may bring a faster demographic transition to lower fertility rates than other aspects of development. The World Population Plan of Action adopted at the World Population Conference recommends that countries working to affect fertility levels should give priority to development programs and health and education strategies which have a decisive effect on fertility. International cooperation should give priority to assisting such national efforts. These programs include: (a) improved health care and nutrition to reduce child mortality, (b) education and improved social status for women; (c) increased female employment; (d) improved old-age security; and (e) assistance for the rural poor, who generally have the highest fertility, with actions to redistribute income and resources including providing privately owned farms. However, one cannot proceed simply from identification of relationships to specific large-scale operational programs. For example, we do not yet know of cost-effective ways to encourage increased female employment, particularly if we are concerned about not adding to male unemployment. We do not yet know what specific packages of programs will be most cost effective in many situations.

My God! The Evil! Next, they'll be telling us women shouldn't be barefoot and pregnant all the time! Where's my gun?



[/sarcasm, just in case]


Now, when you said:

Quote:

Food as a weapon.

Quote:

“Mandatory programs may be needed and we should be considering these possibilities now,” “Would food be considered an instrument of national power? ... Is the U.S. prepared to accept food rationing to help people who can't/won't control their population growth?”

were you quoting from NSSM 200? Because that text doesn't seem to appear in the version you linked to at:

http://www.population-security.org/11-CH3.html#summary

In fact, the only mention of mandatory programs I could find was this:

Quote:

37. There is an alternate view which holds that a growing number of experts believe that the population situation is already more serious and less amenable to solution through voluntary measures than is generally accepted. It holds that, to prevent even more widespread food shortage and other demographic catastrophes than are generally anticipated, even stronger measures are required and some fundamental, very difficult moral issues need to be addressed. These include, for example, our own consumption patterns, mandatory programs, tight control of our food resources. In view of the seriousness of these issues, explicit consideration of them should begin in the Executive Branch, the Congress and the U.N. soon. (See the end of Section I for this viewpoint.)

...which clearly states that this is an alternate view, and even emphasizes that characterization.


Do I really need to go through the rest of this to point out every distortion?

[TimB1]

I think that Kissinger quote is made up too, I tried to search for it not long ago when someone else quoted it to me.

[AMTMAN]

Is this thread a joke?

[DGM]

Originally Posted by Horatius

Do I really need to go through the rest of this to point out every distortion?

No, It's well known that he (?) does not actually read the articles he quotes from.

This is a person that claims Alex Jones would never say things that are not true.

I do however admire the fact that you went as far as you did. More effort than most would give his nonsense..

[Loss Leader]

I only skimmed the first post but here's what I got:

1. The NWO is out to gt us.
2. The NWO is all powerful.
3. The NWO is secretive.
4. The NWO has gone ahead and told us their plan decades in advance for ... no logical reason.
5. Despite the power to move straight ahead with its plans, the NWO moves obliquely through many different methods that appear unrelated, affect a relative few people and are frequently accidental.
6. The NWO never says anything by accident, just floats an idea or considers and then discards a concept. Everything they say is permanent NWO policy.

Has the OP read The Omnivore's Dilemma or any other book that talks about how our methods of food production are actually destroying our ability to produce food in the long run? Is the poster familiar with the tremendous amount of petrolium it takes to produce artificial fertilizer or the serious harm that farming in monoculture does to the soil as well as the nutritive value of the food on which it's grown. Is the OP familiar with the fact that the Sahara desert is largely the result of prehistoric overfarming of the African continent?

Is the OP familiar with the concept of free speech in that a vigerous debate in which many ideas are bandied about is necessary for maximum creativity and innovation? Is the OP familiar with the concept of brainstorming in which all manner of ideas are solicited and only then are they weighed for usefullness?

Is the OP familiar with how the world works at all?

[funk de fino]

Originally Posted by malmoe

"If I were reincarnated I would wish to be returned to earth as a killer virus to lower human population levels." -Prince Phillip, Duke of Edinburgh, leader of the World Wildlife Fund - quoted in "Are You Ready For Our New Age Future?," Insiders Report, American Policy Center, December '95

So not only is he a liar he repeats the lies when they have already been pointed out to him. The above quote is not correct and in fact is a magled version of the one he posted next to it.

Still no proof of where the govt says it will kill 80% of the world population yet then eh?

This should be deleted or merged with his other travesty of a thread

[westprog]

Originally Posted by AMTMAN

Is this thread a joke?

Obviously not. If 17 girls a week are experiencing numbness from cervical cancer vaccine, that can only be explained in the context of a masterplan to reduce the world's population by 80%.

[Horatius]

Originally Posted by DGM

I do however admire the fact that you went as far as you did. More effort than most would give his nonsense..

Thanks! I've been noticing a lot of these "Quote dozens of articles" twoofers seem to think we "can't debunk them" because we don't go through all the articles point-by-point, so I've been trying to do a bit of that, just to see if they'll shut up*. However, it's frustrating, as pretty much every link I've followed ends up being completely misrepresented by the twoofer**.

So I've decided to "sample" their arguments, and debunk a bit of them. I figure if 2 or 3 randomly selected bits can be shown to be false or misleading, we can safely assume the rest is of similar quality. So far I've found no such samples that could be considered to say what the twoofers alleges they say, so I think that's a valid assumption.








*Yes, yes, I know.


**Yes, yes, I know.

[PixyMisa]

Kind of like doing a biopsy. Snip out a representative sample and test that.

[PixyMisa]

Also, if the UNNWO have been working for over thirty years to eliminate 80% of the world population, I think we can conclude that they're not very good at it.

[Malmoesoldier]

Originally Posted by DGM

Malmoe:

Still refuse to read the NSSM 200 document for yourself?

Or is it that you don't understand the words you read?

The question is if YOU understand the words you read?. NSSM 200 talks about sterilizing and using food as a weapon. I didnt expect you to understand simple facts [edit].

Originally Posted by funk de fino

Still no proof of where the govt says it will kill 80% of the world population yet then eh?

So you didnt read the UN Conference on Human Settlements (Habitat I) in 1976?. I feel sorry for you that you have such a hard time understanding text, please dont post before you understand what the facts say. ask somebody to read it for you, if you cant read.

Please keep the tone civil

Posted By:LibraryLady

[DGM]

Originally Posted by Malmoesoldier

The question is if YOU understand the words you read?. NSSM 200 talks about sterilizing and using food as a weapon. I didnt expect you to understand simple facts since i have seen your ignorance many times before.



So you didnt read the UN Conference on Human Settlements (Habitat I) in 1976?. I feel sorry for you that you have such a hard time understanding text, please dont post before you understand what the facts say. ask somebody to read it for you, if you cant read.

Are you still having trouble putting articles into context? You will find it easier to do if you READ THE WHOLE ARTICLE*.

*Maybe you should ask Alex if it's OK before you do so.*

[Horatius]

Originally Posted by Malmoesoldier

The question is if YOU understand the words you read?. NSSM 200 talks about sterilizing and using food as a weapon. I didnt expect you to understand simple facts since i have seen your ignorance many times before.

And as I said before, please link us to that passage, as I haven't been able to find it in the links that you provided.

If you've actually read and understood this document for yourself, this should be trivially easy.

Refusal to provide a link will be considered an admission that such a passage does not exist.

[Malmoesoldier]

Originally Posted by DGM

Are you still having trouble putting articles into context? You will find it easier to do if you READ THE WHOLE ARTICLE*.

*Maybe you should ask Alex if it's OK before you do so.*

They ARE in context, the facts speaks for themself.

DGM, do you agree with UN? that the population of the world should be 1 billion.

[JimBenArm]

Originally Posted by Malmoesoldier

They ARE in context, the facts speaks for themself.

DGM, do you agree with UN? that the population of the world should be 1 billion.

It doesn't matter, since we'll be in the 20%. Perks of the job, don't you know.

[DGM]

Originally Posted by Malmoesoldier

They ARE in context, the facts speaks for themself.

DGM, do you agree with UN? that the population of the world should be 1 billion.

The UN does not say the world population should be 1 billion. You seem to have a problem with reading comprehension. The quote was to show two extremes. What part of that supports your assertion?

You need to fire your translator because he/she does not understand English.

[Malmoesoldier]

Originally Posted by Horatius

And as I said before, please link us to that passage, as I haven't been able to find it in the links that you provided.

If you've actually read and understood this document for yourself, this should be trivially easy.

Refusal to provide a link will be considered an admission that such a passage does not exist.

You will find the quotes about food on this page under "An Alternative View": http://www.population-security.org/28-APP2B.html

And you will find the "Injectable contraceptives for women" under "Recommendations" here: http://www.population-security.org/28-APP2B.html

[Malmoesoldier]

Originally Posted by DGM

The UN does not say the world population should be 1 billion. You seem to have a problem with reading comprehension. The quote was to show two extremes. What part of that supports your assertion?

You need to fire your translator because he/she does not understand English.

You are either lieing or you dont understand the text. they say that the world today should be 1 billion. please go somewhere else with your ignorant posts.

Quote:

a reasonable estimate for an industrialised world society at the present north American material standard of living would be 1 billion."

there arent anything that is hard to understand in this quote or the others from UN. but then again peoples ignorance here is incredible and some posters here thinks that 80% of the population should die.

[Horatius]

Originally Posted by Malmoesoldier

You will find the quotes about food on this page under "An Alternative View": http://www.population-security.org/28-APP2B.html

Actually, no I won't. The first part, about the "mandatory programs" is there, but there is no discussion of food used as a weapon. In fact, the word "weapon" doesn't seem to be anywhere on that page.

Remember, the quote you brought up was:

“Would food be considered an instrument of national power? ... Is the U.S. prepared to accept food rationing to help people who can't/won't control their population growth?”

So, where is this quote found? You implied in your original post, and have explicitly stated here, that the quote is in the above linked page, but it is not. Were you lying, or just repeating a bit of BS someone else told you, that you failed to check?

Originally Posted by Malmoesoldier

And you will find the "Injectable contraceptives for women" under "Recommendations" here: http://www.population-security.org/28-APP2B.html

This bit is there! Congratulations. Too bad I wasn't asking about that one.

Of course, the whole quote isn't very sinister, is it?

Quote:

1. Short-term approaches: These approaches include improvement and field testing of existing technology and development of new technology. It is expected that some of these approaches would be ready for use within five years. Specific short term approaches worthy of increased effort are as follows:

...

e. Injectable contraceptives for women which are effective for three months or more and are administered by para-professionals undoubtedly will be a significant improvement. Currently available methods of this type are limited by their side effects and potential hazards. There are reasons to believe that these problems can be overcome with additional research.

Approx. Increased Cost: $5 million annually.

One (small) part of a "short term" plan, that doesn't even mention any "mandatory" aspects. Ohhh, I'm quivering in fear!


Is this the best you have? Really? Really?

Colour me not impressed.

[Architect]

I'm having flashbacks to ChristopherA here. Ayone else?

[JimBenArm]

Originally Posted by Architect

I'm having flashbacks to ChristopherA here. Ayone else?

That cough syrup I gave you? You're supposed to take it in small doses. That's what's causing the flashbacks. Well, that and the stupidity.

[JamesB]

Does anyone actually care what some bureaucrats in the UN had to say 20 years ago? I mean, can you name a less effective organization?

Actually this whole 80% thing was started by me. I got tired of having to wait in line at Starbucks, and it seemed like the best solution.

[JimBenArm]

Originally Posted by JamesB

Does anyone actually care what some bureaucrats in the UN had to say 20 years ago? I mean, can you name a less effective organization?

Actually this whole 80% thing was started by me. I got tired of having to wait in line at Starbucks, and it seemed like the best solution.

Starbucks? What's the matter, you don't like good coffee?

[Architect]

Originally Posted by JimBenArm

That cough syrup I gave you? You're supposed to take it in small doses. That's what's causing the flashbacks. Well, that and the stupidity.

Johnnie Walker seemed a strange name for a cough medicine, I can tell you!

(hic)

[JimBenArm]

Originally Posted by Architect

Johnnie Walker seemed a strange name for a cough medicine, I can tell you!

(hic)

Hey, it was good enough for my dear mother!

[afinemadness]

Originally Posted by JamesB

Does anyone actually care what some bureaucrats in the UN had to say 20 years ago? I mean, can you name a less effective organization?

Actually this whole 80% thing was started by me. I got tired of having to wait in line at Starbucks, and it seemed like the best solution.

James I thought I started it because the NJ traffic on my commute was getting to bad. That and trying to et through the tunnel to Manhattan is killing me.

[Architect]

Originally Posted by JimBenArm

Hey, it was good enough for my dear mother!

Aye, but that'll be the blue or black label....not this red stuff that our fiend palmed me off on......doesn't even smell like Calpol!

[Malmoesoldier]

Originally Posted by Horatius

Actually, no I won't. The first part, about the "mandatory programs" is there, but there is no discussion of food used as a weapon. In fact, the word "weapon" doesn't seem to be anywhere on that page.

Remember, the quote you brought up was:

“Would food be considered an instrument of national power? ... Is the U.S. prepared to accept food rationing to help people who can't/won't control their population growth?”

So, where is this quote found? You implied in your original post, and have explicitly stated here, that the quote is in the above linked page, but it is not. Were you lying, or just repeating a bit of BS someone else told you, that you failed to check?






This bit is there! Congratulations. Too bad I wasn't asking about that one.

Of course, the whole quote isn't very sinister, is it?




One (small) part of a "short term" plan, that doesn't even mention any "mandatory" aspects. Ohhh, I'm quivering in fear!


Is this the best you have? Really? Really?

Colour me not impressed.

LOL!. people here are really ignorant, no joke.

you cant find the “Would food be considered an instrument of national power? ... Is the U.S. prepared to accept food rationing to help people who can't/won't control their population growth?” quotes on this page?, STRANGE since it IS on this page: http://www.population-security.org/28-APP2B.html

You are a joke.

And they talk about sterilizing, "Injectable contraceptives for women". Maybe you forgot what document you are reading, it is about reducing the population, because the world is so "overpopulated"....

And i guess you didnt understand the UN quotes either. And yes it THOSE scare you very much, thats why you dont understand the facts.

b-r-a-i-n-w-a-s-h-e-d

[DavidJames]

Originally Posted by Malmoesoldier

b-r-a-i-n-w-a-s-h-e-d

m-e-n-t-a-l-l-y i-l-l

Please seek help.

[Architect]

e-r-s-e

[Loss Leader]

My favorite part of the NSSM 2000, this:

Declassified/Released on 7/3/89


So, not only did the NWO have a secret plan to do ... something ... but NWO gruppenfuhrer George HW Bush actually declassified the document so that sheeple of the world would know his evil, evil plan. And it wasn't like it was the last thing he did, either. He had three and a half years of his Presidency left to go.

Brilliant.

[Mangoose]

Originally Posted by Malmoesoldier

They State that the human population has exceeded earth's biosphere capacity and set the parameters for recovery:
Quote:
It is estimated that an 'agricultural world' in which most human beings are peasants should be able to support 5 to 7 billion people....In contrast, a reasonable estimate for an industrialised world society at the present north American material standard of living would be 1 billion."
There is no discussion in the GBA of how 2/3 of the earth's human population might be eliminated

Whoa, nelly!! How in heck are you able to read genocide/eightfold decimation in a statement that is talking about the size of the population that can have an "American standard of living"?? It's the population that can have a certain standard of living.....not that's what the total world population should be! Please show us where it says that the world population would have be to reduced to that level.

[Malmoesoldier]

Originally Posted by Mangoose

Whoa, nelly!! How in heck are you able to read genocide/eightfold decimation in a statement that is talking about the size of the population that can have an "American standard of living"?? It's the population that can have a certain standard of living.....not that's what the total world population should be! Please show us where it says that the world population would have be to reduced to that level.

I dont know why i keep responding to posts like this, but i will do it one more time. i dont need to show you anything you just quoted UN. like they say "a reasonable estimate for an industrialised world society at the present north American material standard of living would be 1 billion"

The Global Biodiversity Assessment says: simply cut the world population by about 80%-or return to a feudal lifestyle (no cars, planes, air conditioners)

they say that a world with the present north American material standard of living cant support 5-7 billion people.

And Although the GBA does not say it, cutting the world's food production in half like they talk about, would certainly produce massive starvation and pestilence and cut human population by at least half.

[T.A.M.]

better get the bunker dug then Malmoe, as you may be one of the 350,000 they plan to eliminate on day #1.

must suck to live in a sea of paranoia.

TAM

[Cl1mh4224rd]

Originally Posted by AMTMAN

Is this thread a joke?

No. Well... yes, but... no.

[afinemadness]

Malmoe was not around for a few days I was thinking the extermination already started. He was in the first group targeted was he not?