posted November 01, 2006 02:46 AM              

England: Eugenics Society (1907 to 1989), Eugenics Society Ltd. (1926 to 1989), Galton Institute (1989-);
America: American Eugenics Society Inc. (1926 to 1973): Society for the Study of Social Biology Inc. (1973-).
In the text these societies are generally referred to by their original names, that is the Eugenics Society (ES) or the American Eugenics Society (AES).
Democracy or Eugenics is intended as an introduction to lists of American and English Eugenics society members on accompanying disks.
In the body of the text and in the footnotes, names of members of the English Eugenics Society are bolded (e.g.. John Maynard Keynes) while the names of members of the American Eugenics Society are bolded and italicised (e.g.. John Rockefeller Jr.) This means that there is an entry under that name in the list on the appropriate disk.
This somewhat unconventional approach is necessary to maintain the flow of the text which otherwise would constantly bog down in lists of names and misdeeds.
The Sanctity of Life and the Criminal Law, Glanville Williams, 1957, p. 73.
Alexander Graham Bell (AT&T, National Geographic), John D. Rockefeller, John D. Rockefeller Jr., Mrs. E.H. Harriman (Union Pacific Railroad), Cleveland Dodge (Phelps Dodge) and W.P. Draper (textiles). American eugenics was also supported by Andrew Carnegie, who was Scottish, and Axel Wenner Gren, the owner of Bofors, who was Swedish. In Germany, the Krupp family supported German eugenics, according to Men Behind Hitler .
Support for the Nazis: Harry Laughlin; C.M. Goethe; C.G. Campbell; Maria Kopp; Mrs Hodson; O.F. Von Vershuer; H. Nachstein; see also The Nazi Connection, Stefan Kuhl, Oxford 1994.
Johnson Immigration Act I924: Hon. Albert Johnson (author of the act); Harry Laughlin; C.M. Goethe; Madison Grant
Rockefeller Foundation Annual Reports 1927-36; The Nazi Connection, Stefan Kuhl, Oxford, 1994 pp. 20-21
"The importance of racial hygiene has only become known in Germany to all intelligent Germans through the political work of Adolph Hitler, and it was only through him that our more than thirty year old dream has become a reality and racial hygiene principles have been translated into action", E. Rudin quoted in The Men Behind Hitler- A German Warning to the World, B. Schreiber
The Nazi Connection, Stefan Kuhl, Oxford, 1994, p. 39, p. 87
from "Patriotism and Racial Standards", C.M. Goethe, (AES, E)Presidential address to Eugenics Research Association 1936, Eugenical News, v. 21, #4, p. 65, 1936
Some have claimed that the Nazi programme was not a eugenical program but a crude misunderstanding of eugenics implemented by non scientists. This claim is made in the Encyclopaedia Britannica section on eugenics - a section written by Frederick Osborn. This claim is refuted by the fact that both before and after the Nazi era, Nazi supporters were accepted members of eugenics societies. For example, Von Verschuer, who planned Josef Mengele's twin experiments at Auschwitz was a post war member of the American Eugenics Society. Furthermore, prominent American eugenicists praised the Nazi programme. For example in 1935, C.M. Goethe wrote the following to E.S. Gosney (AES, ES):
"You will be interested to know that your work has played a powerful part in shaping the opinions of the group of intellectuals who are behind Hitler in this epoch making program. Everywhere I sensed that their opinions have been tremendously stimulated by American thought, and particularly by the work of the Human Betterment Foundation. I want you, my dear friend, to carry this thought with you for the rest of your life, that you have really jolted into action a great government of 60,000,000 people." (from the Human Betterment Foundation Annual Report 1935)
Fredrick Osborn (Phelps Dodge), Fairfield Osborn (Phelps Dodge); C.E. Dodge (Phelps Dodge), and Wycliffe Draper (textiles) were members of the American Eugenics Society in 1956. Others, such as John D. Rockefeller III, did not join the Society, as had his father and grandfather, but instead supported eugenics through foundation grants to society members, society fronts such as the IPPF and the Population Council, or society projects such as population control.
For example, in 1984 Senator Al Gore voted for an amendment to the Civil Rights Act to define a 'person' to include `an unborn child from the moment of conception'. But in 1995 Vice President Gore called pro-lifers "extremists" (from "A New Offensive on Behalf of Foster" Philadelphia Inquirer, 2114/95). Richard Gephart and Jesse Jackson have made similar flip flops.
"Harriman Suit: Misconduct, or just bad luck investing ?" "It was when the trust fund checks stopped coming last fall to the elderly daughters of Gov. W. Averill Harriman, the railroad heir and financier that the family began to sweat ... The family discovered that funds that had once held $25 million had dwindled to scarcely $3 million ... the fortune had been overseen by Pamela Harriman ... and Clark Clifford... a law suit ... Landed in Federal Court in Manhattan this month ... months and probably years of Harriman family litigation [will result]", (from New York Times, 10/25/94)
Francis Galton quoted in "List of Members of the American Eugenics Society", published in 1930 by the American Eugenics Society. Deposited in Margaret Sanger Papers, Library of Congress Container 62-63, Reel 41, "American Eugenics Society, Feb. 1928- May 1936"
Eugenics Then and Now, C. J. Bajema, Stroudsberg, 1976 p. 2, quoted in A History of the American Eugenics Society 1921-40, Barry Mehler, PhD Thesis, 1988 available from UMI Dissertation Services; see also "Evolution of Humans May at Last Be Faltering", (New York Times, 3114/95, Science section) for an interesting article on evolution and fertility control which discusses eugenics without ever using the word.
The leading figures in the fields of abortion, contraception, sterilisation and sex education were eugenics society members. Some important figures are:
Abortion: Alan Guttmacher, Christopher Tietze; ALRA: F.W. Stella Browne, Clinton and Janet Chance, Martin Cole, Vera Houghton, Julian Huxley, Alice Jenkins, Dorothy Kerslake (who invented the technique of suction abortion), Francois Lafitte, Frida Laski, Glanville Williams; Abortionists: Dugald Baird, Peter Diggory, W.C. W. Nixon; Facility Owners or Directors: M. Cole, F. Lafitte, DM Potts, M. Simms
Contraception: Margaret Sanger, Abraham Stone, Sheldon Segal, Lady Denman, Marie Stopes, David Malcolm Potts (Malcolm Potts), Margaret Pyke
Sterilisation: Bishop E.W. Barnes, A.G. Church, Sir Lawrence Brock, Leonard Darwin, C.V. Drysdale, Havelock Ellis, Francois Lafitte, Marion Norton (New Jersey Sterilisation League), Margaret Sanger, Lord Simon of Wythenshawe
Sex Education: Havelock Ellis, Margaret Sanger, Abraham Stone, Janet Chance, Eustace Chesser, Francois Lafitte, Marie Stopes, David Mace, Martin Cole.
The Bell Curve, Charles Murray and Richard Herrnstein, Free Press, 1994. The two most frequently cited authors in The Bell Curve are Arthur Jensen< and Richard Lynn. In addition, 40 other past and present members of eugenic societies are cited.
English: F. Galton, C. Spearman, Roger Pearson, C. Mascie-Taylor, Maxwell, H.J. Eysenck, D. Vining, R.B. Cattell, S. Itzkoff, C.D. Darlington.
American: H. Laughlin, C Brigham, J. Hirsch (opposed), T.J. Bouchard, W.H. Sewell, R. Hauser, P. Hauser, L. Terman, O.D. Duncan, R. Plomin, Loehlin, D. C Rowe, J.N. Spuhler, DeFries, F. Ahern, Johnson, S.H. Preston, R. Retherford, Lykken , H. Goddard , R Gordon., Mc Gurk, G. Lindzey, R. Lewontin, S. Scarr, Linda Gottfredson, Mangold , F. Bean, R. Cook, C. Bajema, J.V. Higgins, S. Reed. The Bell Curve also cites Judith Blake, the wife of Kingsley Davis.
from "Of Genes and IQ", William Safire, New York Times I0/20/ 1994
A director of the American Eugenics Society from 1971-82 and in 1985-86. In 1973 the American Eugenics Society renamed itself "The Society for the Study of Social Biology".
"What is equality?", Sandra Scarr, Issues in Science and Technology, Winter, 1994-95, p 85 (a book review of The Bell Curve)
The Bell Curve, p. 550
The Voice of Destruction, Hermann Rauschning, G.P. Putnam, 1940, p. 136-38
Oct. 12, 1980, San Diego Union quoted in Life Advocate, Oct. 1994, p.21
Eugenics Review 1934, p. 164 by CBS Hodson
The Bell Curve, p. 523, 526
The Bell Curve, p. 523
The remark became the subject of an intense controversy and was widely quoted. See for example, New York Times 21/11/95 (Metro)
"Greenpeace succeeded three times in placing small inflatable between the whalers and the whales, each time protecting a whale from the harpoon and saving its life.", from Greenpeace Newsletter, vol. 3, #3, Nov./Dec. 1994
It even helped found the British pro life Group, SPUC. as the following letter from the time of the founding of Society for the Protection of Unborn Children (SPUC) indicates: "it is proposed to form a Society provisionally entitled the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children, with the following aims: 1) To uphold the principle that human life ought not to be taken except in cases of urgent necessity." (from a letter to the Daily Jan. 11, 1967 signed by CB Goodhart, Peter Huntingford, and Aleck Bourne among others.) What is meant by urgent necessity? ... "...we support clause (a), which seeks to clarify the case-law position regard (sic) to abortion in the case of serious risk to life or health of the mother" from letter to the Church Times 30/9/66) The case law apparently allowed abortion in the case of rape. So SPUC was supporting abortion in the case of rape. See C.B. Goodhart
Abortion Industry:
England: see paragraphs above;
America: Planned Parenthood owns 49 abortion clinics and launched many of the landmark cases which "legalised" abortion; other cases were launched by Population Services International; and others by physicians at Planned Parenthood clinics.
Contraception: see note 16
Genetic Screening: C.O. Carter
In Vitro fertilisation: R.G. Edwards; A.S. Parkes
Sterilisation: see note 16
Euthanasia: Killick Millard and C. J. Bond (Founders of the Voluntary Euthanasia Society); Julian Huxley
Obstetrics: Eardley Holland (Pres., RCOG), Alan Brews, J.H. Peel (Pres., RCOG)
Psychiatry: I.R.C. Batchelor, C.P. Blacker
Sociology: Alan Carr-Saunders, Lord Beveridge, Richard Titmuss, David Glass, Francois Lafitte
Genetics: Ronald Fisher, Thoday
Education: Sutherland

posted November 01, 2006 08:50 AM              

Charles Darwin, explains natural selection ~

In The Descent of Man, Darwin had predicted that "lesser" races would die out as a result of evolution through natural selection.

"At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilised races of man will almost certainly exterminate and replace, the savage races throughout the world. At the same time the anthropomorphous apes ... will no doubt be exterminated. The break between man and his nearest allies will then be wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilised state, as we may hope, even than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as now, between the Negro or Australian and the gorilla" (Descent of Man, Charles Darwin)

Francis Galton, Darwin's cousin, continued with the idea of 'artificial selection' for the purpose of nurturing the more suitable races over the less suitable ~

Darwin's cousin, Francis Galton, thought that this evolutionary process among human beings would become more merciful and more rational if man took control of it and speeded it up by "artificial" selection of the next generation. In 1880 he coined the word eugenics to describe the process of replacing natural selection by artificial selection. According to Galton, the aim of eugenic policies was to give:

"the more suitable races or strains of blood a better chance of prevailing speedily over the less suitable."

posted November 01, 2006 02:14 PM            

This is one of the supposed proofs of a conspiracy you managed to post here.

National Security Decision Memorandum 314 (NSDM 314) was signed in 1975 by National Security Adviser Brent Scowcroft on behalf of President Gerald R. Ford.

The new President's forthright approval of virtually all of the NSSM 200 recommendations appeared to set the U.S. on a direct course toward development and implementation of a sophisticated national population policy.

NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20506
CONFIDENTIAL (GDS) November 26, 1975

National Security Decision Memorandum 314

TO: The Secretary of State
The Secretary of the Treasury
The Secretary of Defense
The Secretary of Agriculture
The Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare
The Administrator, Agency for
International Development

SUBJECT: Implications of Worldwide Population Growth for
United States Security and Overseas Interests

The President has reviewed the interagency response to NSSM 200 and the covering memorandum from the Chairman of the NSC Under Secretaries Committee. He believes that United States leadership is essential to combat population growth, to implement the World Population Plan of Action and to advance United States security and overseas interests. The President endorses the policy recommendations contained in the Executive Summary of the NSSM 200 response, with the following observations and exceptions:

AID Programs

Care must be taken that our AID program efforts are not so diffuse as to have little impact upon those countries contributing the largest growth in population, and where reductions in fertility are most needed for economic and social progress.

Research and Evaluation

An examination should be undertaken of the effectiveness of population control programs in countries at all levels of development, but with emphasis on the LDC's. The examination should include an evaluation of AID program efforts as well as other efforts by national or international groups. The study would attempt to determine the separate effect of the population program, taking account of other economic or social factors which may have also influenced fertility.

Research on broader issues should be undertaken examining the factors affecting change (or lack of change) in the birth rate in different countries.

Funding for Population Programs:

The President desires that a review be undertaken quickly to examine specific recommendations for funding in the population assistance and family planning field for the period after FY 1976. The President wishes a detailed analysis of the recommended funding levels in the NSSM 200 study bearing in mind his desire to advance population goals. This analysis should include performance criteria to assure that any additional funds are utilized in the most effective manner. The appropriate level of funding of multilateral programs which effectively support this objective should be included in this review. The Chairman of the USC is responsible for preparing this analysis which is due 60 days from the date of this NSDM.

The Role of Other Countries:

Emphasis should be given to fostering international cooperation in reducing population growth in pursuing the recommendations of the World Population Plan of Action. It is important to enlist additional contributions from other developed and newly rich countries for bilateral and multilateral programs. Basic Approach to Developing Countries' Population Programs: Leaders of key developing countries should be encouraged to support national and multilateral population assistance programs.

The objective of the United States in this field is to work closely with others rather than to seek to impose our views on others. Our efforts should stress the linkage between reduced population growth and the resultant economic and social gains for the poorest nations. In all these efforts, we should recognize the basic dignity of the individual and his or her right to choose freely family goals and family planning alternatives.

National and World Population Goals:

The President believes that the recommendation contained in paragraph 31(c) of the Executive Summary dealing with the announcement of a United States national goal is outside the scope of NSSM 200. Of course, domestic efforts in this field must continue in order to achieve worldwide recognition that the United States has been successfully practicing the basic recommendations of the World Plan of Action and that the nation's birthrate is below the replacement level of fertility. In order to obtain the support of the United States citizens for our involvement in international population programs, it is important that they recognize that excessive world population growth can affect domestic problems including economic expansion as well as world instability.

Concerning the consideration of World Population Goals in paragraph 31(b), it should be understood that the general goal of achieving global replacement levels of fertility by the year 2000 does not imply interference in the national policies of other countries.

The Under Secretaries Committee, in conjunction with all appropriate agencies of the Executive Branch, may wish to make further recommendations to the President on these subjects. Coordination of United States Global Population Policy:

Implementation of a United States worldwide population strategy will involve careful coordination. The response to NSSM 200 is a good beginning, but as noted above, there is need for further examination of the mix of United States assistance strategy and its most efficient application.

The President, therefore, assigns to the Chairman, NSC Under Secretaries Committee, the responsibility to define and develop policy in the population field and to coordinate its implementation beyond the NSSM 200 response.

The Chairman is instructed to submit an initial report within six months from this date on the implementation of this policy, with recommendations for any modifications in our strategy, funding programs, and particularly, the identification of possible deficiencies. Thereafter the Chairman is instructed to submit reports to the President annually.

The Chairman is authorized to request other appropriate bodies and agencies to assist him in this task as required. For the purpose of implementing this NSDM, the Under Secretaries Committee should include, in addition to the addressee members, ex officio representatives of the following agencies:

Council on Environmental Quality
Office of Management and Budget
The President's Science Adviser

BRENT SCOWCROFT

cc: The Chairman, NSC Under Secretaries Committee
The Director, Office of Management and Budget
The Chairman, Council of Economic Advisers
The Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff
The Director of Central Intelligence
The Chairman, Council of Environmental Quality

posted November 01, 2006 02:50 PM              

Fellow professors and scientists applause and roar approval at elite's twisted and genocidal population control agenda

Paul Joseph Watson & Alex Jones/Prison Planet.com | April 3 2006

A top scientist gave a speech to the Texas Academy of Science last month in which he advocated the need to exterminate 90% of the population through the airborne ebola virus. Dr. Eric R. Pianka's chilling comments, and their enthusiastic reception again underscore the elite's agenda to enact horrifying measures of population control.

Pianka's speech was ordered to be kept off the record before it began as cameras were turned away and hundreds of students, scientists and professors sat in attendance.

Saying the public was not ready to hear the information presented, Pianka began by exclaiming, “We're no better than bacteria!”, as he jumped into a doomsday malthusian rant about overpopulation destroying the earth.

Standing in front of a slide of human skulls, Pianka gleefully advocated airborne ebola as his preferred method of exterminating the necessary 90% of humans, choosing it over AIDS because of its faster kill period. Ebola victims suffer the most tortuous deaths imaginable as the virus kills by liquefying the internal organs. The body literally dissolves as the victim writhes in pain bleeding from every orifice.

Pianka then cited the Peak Oil fraud as another reason to initiate global genocide. “And the fossil fuels are running out,” he said, “so I think we may have to cut back to two billion, which would be about one-third as many people.”

Later, the scientist welcomed the potential devastation of bird flu and spoke glowingly of China's enforced one child policy, before zestfully commenting, “We need to sterilize everybody on the Earth.”

At the end of Pianka's speech the audience erupted not to a chorus of boos and hisses but to a raucous reception of applause and cheers as audience members clammered to get close to the scientist to ask him follow up questions. Pianka was later presented with a distinguished scientist award by the Academy. Pianka is no crackpot. He has given lectures to prestigious universities worldwide.

One horrified observer was able to make notes on the speech and our gratitude goes to Forrest M. Mims for bringing this sickening display to the attention of the world.

Throughout history elites have invented justification for barbaric practices as a cover for their true agenda of absolute power and control over populations. Up until the 19th century, the transatlantic slave trade was justified by saying that the practice was biblical and therefore morally redeemable in nature, despite the fact that no such bible passage exists.

From 1932 until 1972, the Tuskegee Study Group (pictured below) deliberately infected poor black communities in Alabama with syphilis without their consent and withheld treatment as the diseased rampaged through the town killing families.

In 1951 the Israeli government used US government provided technology to irradiate 100,000 Jewish children in a mass atomic experiment with an entire generation of Sephardi youths used as guinea pigs. 6,000 died immediately after the experiments and the rest suffered for the rest of their lives with debilitating illnesses and cancer.

Pianka's doomsday warning of the population bomb, for which Mims claims he presented no evidence whatsoever, is complete pseudo-science. Populations in developed countries are declining and only in third world countries is it expanding dramatically. Industrialization itself levels out population trends and even despite this world population models routinely show that the earth's population will level out at 9 billion in 2050 and slowly decline after that. "The population of the most developed countries will remain virtually unchanged at 1.2 billion until 2050," states a United Nations report. Conservation International's own study revealed that 46% of the earth's surface was an untouched wilderness, that is land areas not including sea. It is commonly accepted that the entire world population could all fit into the state of Texas and each have an acre of their own land.

Think about the magnitude of Pianka's statements. He wants to kill nine out of every ten members of your family and he wants to kill them in one of the most painful and agonizing ways imaginable.

If Pianka, or 'The Lizard Man' as he likes to be called, is so vehement in the necessity of culling the human population will he step forward to be the first one in line? Will he sacrifice his children for the so-called greater good of the planet? We somehow doubt it.

Will the students who so enthusiastically greeted his ideas go home and kill themselves for the cause if it is so righteous?

It was noted how Pianka presented his argument with the kind of glee that you would see in a demented serial killer before dispatching his victim. This is an attitude we have encountered again and again. To discuss killing 90% of the world's population via a horrific plague is sick enough within itself but you would at least expect its advocates to be serious and sober in their approach to the subject. The opposite seems to be the case, where the subject is aired in a context of lighthearted lip-smacking and hand-rubbing as if the individual was about to sink his teeth into a T-bone steak.

This window gives us a clear view of exactly why these deranged ******** encompass this ideology. They love death and their lives are motivated by dark influences very different to you or I.

Pianka's approval of how the Chinese police state effectively controlled their population tells us that this rhetoric is just the glue that holds together the true agenda of the elite. A staged bio-attack blamed on terrorists could be the perfect cover for enacting the program of population reduction and the usurpation of our remaining freedoms.

In the 21st century the elite are concerned that from over 6 billion people might spring a new elite to challenge their stranglehold on the reigns of power. This is one reason for desire to cull the population down to a manageable level. Another is control over the behavior of the existing serfs and herding them like cattle into the slaughter house.

As we have documented, members of the elite are quite open in their feverish lust to commit mass murder and ethnic cleansing. In the foreword to his biography If I Were An Animal, Prince Philip wrote, "In the event that I am reincarnated, I would like to return as a deadly virus, in order to contribute something to solve overpopulation."

National Security Memo 200, dated April 24, 1974, and titled "Implications of world wide population growth for U.S. security & overseas interests," says:

"Dr. Henry Kissinger proposed in his memorandum to the NSC that "depopulation should be the highest priority of U.S. foreign policy towards the Third World." He quoted reasons of national security, and because `(t)he U.S. economy will require large and increasing amounts of minerals from abroad, especially from less-developed countries ... Wherever a lessening of population can increase the prospects for such stability, population policy becomes relevant to resources, supplies and to the economic interests of U.S."

Kissinger prepared a depopulation manifesto for President Jimmy Carter called 'Global 2000' which detailed using food as a weapon to depopulate the third world.

One of the most chilling admissions of deadly intent came from the lips of the late Jacques Cousteau, the sainted environmental icon. In an interview with the UNESCO Courier for November 1991 the famed oceanographer said:

"The damage people cause to the planet is a function of demographics — it is equal to the degree of development. One American burdens the earth much more than twenty Bangaladeshes. The damage is directly linked to consumption. Our society is turning toward more and needless consumption. It is a vicious circle that I compare to cancer...."

"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."

The Melbourne Age reported on recently uncovered documents detailing Nobel Peace Prize winning microbiologist Sir Macfarlane Burnet's plan to help the Australian government develop biological weapons for use against Indonesia and other "overpopulated" countries of South-East Asia.

Pianka's ideology is in the same league as Hitler, Pol Pot, and the rest of history's despots who advocated mass extermination and had the temerity to dress it up in a 'noble' Straussian facade. We demand that he be investigated for openly calling for mass murder and in the meantime we encourage everyone to click here and e mail Pianka, enabling him to receive your feedback about his wish that you and your entire family die.

posted November 01, 2006 03:14 PM              

this article that includes mention of National Security Decision Memorandum 314 also cites the following ~

quote:

---

"The US can help to minimise charges of an imperialist motivation behind its support of population activities by repeatedly asserting that such support derives from a concern with: (a) the right of the individual to determine freely and responsibly the number and spacing of children ... and (b) the fundamental social and economic development of poor countries."(10)

The overt reasons for government involvement population control are provided with supporting arguments by economists and others who say that population control will assist the poor. Their argument, the classic Malthusian argument, is that overpopulation causes poverty. It's hard to study economics and escape ensnarement by this reasoning because key economists in England and America for the last two hundred years have linked poverty and overpopulation; since 1907 key economists have been members of eugenic societies.(11)

---

following is the documentation of these statements ~

10. NSSM 200 quoted in Whose Choice: Population Controllers or Yours?, Whelan, p. 8
Controlling populations in order to control resources is colonialism. Before it was called colonialism, it was called mercantilism. Mercantilism was one of the causes of the American Revolution. Mercantilist measures appear in the Declaration of Independence as causes of the Revolution. But in the beginning of the Twentieth Century many wealthy citizens abandoned the Declaration.
Colonialism was taken up and given a eugenic twist by Lothrop Stoddard. In 1917 in "The Rising Tide of Colour Against White World Supremacy", he asserted that white supremacy required control of populations, or colonialism, in order to control resources. He recommended that whites bail out of Asian countries and concentrate on controlling resources in Africa and South America.

11. T.R. Malthus, James Mill, John Stuart Mill, Alfred Marshall, John Neville Keynes, John Maynard Keynes, Irving Fisher, James Meade

posted November 01, 2006 03:29 PM            

Helping 3rd world nations control their populations through family planning has nothing to do with genocide, nothing to do with the US controlling their resources, HAS everything to do with assisting them to control their population so they do not overuse their resources to the extent their people starve to death, fall prey to disease, social unrest and civil war among factions within their own countries competing for scarce food and other resources.

Only to conspiracy mongers is this sinister.

posted November 01, 2006 03:50 PM              

and omg, i do occasionally agree with him.

sshhhh....but don't tell anyone.

my apologies, jwhop, if my statements here in some way reflect poorly on you.

posted November 01, 2006 03:58 PM              

quote:

---

Helping 3 world nations control their populations through family planning has nothing to do with genocide, nothing to do with the US controlling their resources, HAS everything to do with assisting them to control their population so they do not overuse their resources to the extent their people starve to death, fall prey to disease, social unrest and civil war among factions within their own countries competing for scarce food and other resources. -- jwhop

---

again, this is exactly what the articles posted illustrate as official, public policy, in order to implement the ideas of Kissinger and others with eugenicist goals.

quote:

---

As a consequence of these discussions among eugenicists in the Fifties, population control is integral to the 'development' programs of the rich nations, including the United States and Japan, who spend half a billion dollars annually to prevent development of Asian, African and Latin American babies.

Population control is a specific goal of the World Bank which was organised by John Maynard Keynes. The World Bank has always been heavily influenced by members of the Population Council which is a eugenics front group.(5) Policy at the Population Council and at the World Bank continues to be affected by eugenicists such as James Meade, W.P. Mauldin, Sheldon Segal, John Bongaarts and others.

The apparently benign loan program of the World Bank gives it the power to demand "co-operation" on family planning from leaders of poor nations around the world.(6) For example, in Kenya:

"support [by the World Bank] for the establishment of the NCPD [the Kenya National Council on Population and Development] ... came in the form of a condition for release of the second tranche of the Second Structural Adjustment Loan. This loan became effective August 27, 1982, the same day the second population project was signed. ... Its creation [the creation of the NCPD]. was opposed by the MOH [Kenya Ministry of Health]"(7)

---

http://www.eugenics-watch.com/eugbook/euod_ch3.html#population

5. Frank Notestein became president of the Population Council. The Council included and still includes many other members of the American Eugenics Society. C Bajema; J. Bongaarts; J. Caldwell; D. Callahan; P. Demeny, (V.P.); R.W. Gillespie; C. Haskins (Trustee); W. P. Mauldin (Acting Pres.); K. Morgan; F.W. Notestein (Pres.); Fred. Osborn (co-founder/Pres.); A. Satterthwaite; S. Segal (V.P.); D. Sills; V. Slade; J.M Sullivan; C. Tietze
Biomedical Division: L. Erlenmeyer-Kimling; I. Gottesman; S. Segal (Dir.); C. Tietze
Center for Policy Studies: J. Bongaarts; P. Demeny (Dir.)
Demography division: P. Demeny (Dir.); D. Kirk (Dir.); W.P. Mauldin (Dir.); D. Sills (Dir.)
International Committee for Contraceptive Research: Segal, S. (developer of RU-486 and Norplant)
(from lists of ES and AES members and from The Population Council: A Chronicle of the First Twenty Five Years. 1952-1977, Elaine Moss, New York, Population Council 1978

6.See, for example, the article: "In Poor Decolonized Africa Bankers Are the New Overlords " New York Times, 6/20/1994

posted November 02, 2006 05:58 PM            

pidaua
Knowflake
Posts: 5860
From: Arizona - Moving to Germany to be with Bear the Leo
Registered: May 2002
posted October 31, 2006 04:45 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
once to that original post.. maybe you're having a memory issue - you posted
"naiad
Knowflake
Posts: 117
From:
Registered: Sep 2006
posted October 31, 2006 04:24 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
your window view? i replied once to that original post.
i haven't brought it up since. it is you rather who continuously and ad infinitum expounds upon your glorified education and employment."

yet here it is....

"naiad
Knowflake
Posts: 117
From:
Registered: Sep 2006
posted October 31, 2006 03:18 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
hey pidaua
once again you seem hopelessly confused. how in the world you possibly construe my statement that married life and the arizona taxpayers must be treating you well as a threat i can't imagine.

again, you misread my post totally as i did not say ~

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For example, stating that the taxpayers of Arizona must be proud of me was not a compliment. It is called a veiled threat.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

you frequently and liberally expound upon your elevated position in terms of your having your own office with a window view, etc....i would imagine most people here would find having a job like yours a great luxury to spend the many many hours in the day at work that you do posting here. you frequently state that you have to take a break from posting so that you can get back to your work.....lol...."

Prove where I frequently state I have to take a break from posting so that I can work. I have stated I am taking a break from working to post...

Once again.. just another lie out of your mouth.

P.S... there are MANY people that post here while they are work - yet you seem to only want to zero in on me. Tell me- do you work nights? Do you work at all? How is it you have so much time to play and post plus copy and paste article after article? LMAO....

posted November 02, 2006 06:26 PM              

it's quite funny how you never answer my questions about the lies that you post, but demand an answer to something as redundant as this....

well, since you must, here's one ~

quote:

---

I was editing my post to add information - which had started almost as soon as I hit enter. But, during the course of editing, I had to pull aways to go over our grants and finances since... I WORK.

http://www.linda-goodman.com/ubb/Forum16/HTML/001960-3.html

---

as you can well see, you're the one who brought up your work status to begin with, not i. and oh goodness, you said "pull aways" rather than "take a break"....lol.

you're often at work while posting your voluminous arguments here....yes, you do state that quite often. and i suppose you do sometimes take a break from posting all that content to work. i don't think that anyone here would disagree that your tax-payer funded job treats you well by allowing you to do so.

who really cares though, i couldn't say. i mention your employment as it appears to be one of the most common of topics that you carry on about here...after the personal and derogatory things you have to say to anyone whose opinion doesn't coincide with your own.

and as i said also, anything i've said about your work was in response to a statement you've made to me about it. on one occasion i said, "married life and the arizona taxpayers seem to be treating you well." based upon the frequent statements that you make about yourself, your marriage and your employment. and it wasn't malicious.

to continue fixating on that one statement (now here's a proper context for the word fixate) is very disturbing. how it is that you can insult people so often and with such nasty impunity, and then have such an outraged obsession with this one innocuous statment from me is baffling indeed.

posted November 02, 2006 06:31 PM            

You made an assumption based on your filter. By me pulling away from an edit to look something up and enter in information on a grant demonstrates that my WORK is more important than a post.

I am not sure you work in the real world or else you would not have just embarrassed yourself to that magnitude.

Again, please find where I said "I take breaks from posting so that I can work".

Silly girl..... Someone had insano flakes for breakfast today didn't she?

*** you know what I did notice salome- once again you used the same exact phrases again and again that you use on jwhop, lotus and me. That is really funny, you would think for someone as self-righteous and enlightened as you, you'd have an original thought.

posted November 02, 2006 06:39 PM            

Huh? And did you forget my post about the sheer number of hours I put in over a work week and how the taxpayers are actually getting a HUGE break by paying me a salary? How about the 3-4 times a month I have to travel 4 1/2 hours to a State meeting leaving at 5am and returning at 8pm if I am lucky?

Or how about the weekends, OT and nights I have to stay in a hotel not getting paid anything more than a $39 per diem (depending on when I leave or when I come home). LOL...

What is it you do that makes the expert on the cost / benefit of government employees and how we are able to post here and still do our jobs?

Maybe you just aren't as talented to work on several tasks at a time and it makes you bitterly jealous that I can. It doesn't matter to me what you think, but if you feel the need to make a big deal out of people that work for the government and post here, you might want to start paying Forum nazi and track down EVERYONE..

Oh wait.... you'd just like to reserve your venom for some of us now don't you. LOL...

Yes.. poor salome.. hates America, hates corporations, hates the Government.

What solutions do you have since you seem to spend so much time b1tching about what is wrong with every entity. I don't know that I have ever seen you post something positive FOR America, Corporations or the Government.

posted November 02, 2006 06:45 PM              

posting includes the act of editng a post. so whether you said "pull away from" rather than "take a break from" really doesn't make any difference, nor does it have any relevance whatsoever.

as neither does this morbid obsession with this ridiculous subject.

posted November 02, 2006 06:58 PM              

i don't care about your work. you keep discussing it to no end. i don't have to do that.

neither do i have cater to your lies about what i believe personally. if you disagree with my points of view, it would be a novel and uncharacteristic thing indeed to see you say so without being so personally degrading and derisive. provided of course you actually read, or even understand what it is i've said. which you've proven numerous times that you don't.

resorting to this kind of degrading and insulting intimidation does nothing to alleviate that pidaua.

and i'll repeat that as many times as i care to, regardless of your absurd screeches that it's repetitive. it is repetitive, as is your continued and embarassing attempt at repsonding with any comprehension whatsoever to anything i post. as is your continued attempt here to degrade this website with your unabated personal attacks and insults.

posted November 02, 2006 07:05 PM            

When I posted to you about my window office it was in a sarcastic manner. I have never used my education or position over someone, yet you and a few others here have to keep bringing it up- which means it must bother you to no end.

You have also made these references to my husband - that is something you can't sweep under the rug.

What is it with you? You can't admit your own subversive tactics, you use people's workplaces against them, you imply that people are better of than they are without even knowing (as evidenced by you stating Bear was in an air-conditioned office). Are you that angry at the world?

***edited to add

posted November 02, 2006 07:39 PM              

quote:

---

Described as a “human catastrophe” by the United Nations, the deteriorating humanitarian crisis in the West Bank and Gaza has astounded officials and organizations worldwide. The continuing obstruction of mobility by the IDF, forced upon not only Palestinian civilians but international aid workers as well, has dramatically increased the unemployment rate and prevented food and foreign aid to reach the civilian population in the Palestinian territories. With the poverty rate in Gaza alone now standing at a staggering 67% and the UN Food and Agriculture Organization estimating that 51% of Palestinians cannot meet their daily food needs, how will the Palestinians survive? Is a policy of starvation and malnutrition in the Occupied Territories a legitimate means of protecting Israel’s security?

---

posted November 02, 2006 08:03 PM              

you seem to wish to continue discussing your personal issues with me, bringing up any ancient subject, mainly because of your inability to respond in a coherent manner to valid topics of discussion

re: http://www.linda-goodman.com/ubb/Forum16/HTML/002868.html

and anything other than the topic of this thread, and others, continuously.

i will respond to your paranoia and absurdities, but not in order to destroy these topics, as seems your goal.

i will post your accusations in a separate thread and address them there, should you wish to continue this absurd and inane attack. yes, you frequently state that what you say is the end of your tirade, yet continue anyway. please go to the following thread for the remainder of the discussion of your personal problems.

http://www.linda-goodman.com/ubb/Forum16/HTML/002888.html