6.5 Billion People

THE CONSPIRACY TO REDUCE THE POPULATION OF THE EARTH THE CURRENT NUMBERS 09/30/02 6,253,435,331 Monthly World population figures: 07/01/02 6,234,250,387 08/01/02 6,240,730,593 09/01/02 6,247,210,800 10/01/02 6,253,481,968 11/01/02 6,259,962,175 12/01/02 6,266,233,343 01/01/03 6,272,713,550 02/01/03 6,279,193,757 03/01/03 6,285,046,847 04/01/03 6,291,527,054 05/01/03 6,297,798,222 06/01/03 6,304,278,429 07/01/03 6,310,549,597 At the beginning of this century, there were a mere 1.7 billion inhabitants around our earth. A century later, we have passed 6 billion as the number of humanoids and the numbers are metastasising at a breakneck pace of five births per-second. Meanwhile revolutionary medical technology is preparing to extend the average life span to well over 90 years of age. In the United States alone, by 2050 the U.S. Census Bureau estimates a population of over 80 million senior citizens. Combine the elderly populations of other industrialized and developing countries, and the prospect of billions of 90-somethings may become a reality. This string of developments has left the more anxious foot soldiers of the environmental lobby fearing that this pernicious equation of rampant procreation, advanced aging, and mass consumption will set off a disastrous domino effect that will plunder the Earth’s rapidly diminishing storehouse of natural resources, and quickly culminate in the destruction of the planet. Obviously, drastic actions are needed and this growing faction of nature lovers are stepping forward to stem this possible Earth crisis with a highly original (but eerily realistic) panacea to this looming threat: death. Unfortunately, a popular (and beloved) author in his country of origin, the iconoclastic Linkola asserts that a catastrophic Third World War would be a “happy occasion for the planet.” The dedicated environmentalist altruistically told the Wall Street Journal in 1994 that “...If there were a button I could press, I would sacrifice myself without hesitating if it meant millions would die.” As part of his far-reaching effort to annihilate the ozone eating hordes of Homo Sapiens, Linkola is calling for measures demanding that financial assistance to third world countries be ceased, borders blocked, and government-mandated mandatory abortions be performed on pregnant mothers with two or more children. Although his polemical views would be subject to censure in the highly sensitive (and at times myopic) arena of American politics, he is revered in his bucolic country of origin. Remember that China already has a law that couples are only allowed one child in a marriage. Other children, if allowed to live are hidden. Over the last 30 years, there have been many varied programs to lower birth rates. Many regions of the world have dramatically reduced birth rates. Some have already achieved family sizes small enough, if maintained, to result eventually in a halt to population growth. These successes have led to a slowing of the world's rate of population increase. The shift from high to low death and birth rates has been called the "demographic transition." The rate at which the demographic transition progresses worldwide will determine the ultimate level of the human population. The lag between downward shifts of death and birth rates may be many decades or even several generations, and during these periods population growth will continue inexorably. We face the prospect of a further doubling of the population within the next half century. Most of this growth will take place in developing countries. Consider three hypothetical scenarios* for the levels of human population in the century ahead: Fertility declines within sixty years from the current rate of 3.3 to a global replacement average of 2.1 children per woman. The current population momentum would lead to at least 11 billion people before leveling off at the end of the 21st century. Fertility reduces to an average of 1.7 children per woman early in the next century. Human population growth would peak at 7.8 billion persons in the middle of the 21st century and decline slowly thereafter. Fertility declines to no lower than 2.5 children per woman. Global population would grow to 19 billion by the year 2100, and to 28 billion by 2150. Population control is absolutely necessary to the quality of life the 'masses'.  But, how that is done is not always a kind thing that governments do and of course, you can be sure that the people who are in control will want the majority of people to survive will be their own kind. That is one thing we must be aware of.

DOCTOR DEATH Dr. Death Gets FBI Visit Media, colleagues continue to portray him as the innocent victim Paul Joseph Watson & Alex Jones/Prison Planet.com | April 6 2006 The Austin-American Statesman today reports that Dr Eric Pianka, who has been at the center of a media firestorm for wishing death upon 90% of humanity via an airborne ebola bio-attack, today received a visit from the FBI after he was reported as a potential terrorist. As we and others like ZD Net previously reported, Dr. Death types across academia and their followers have access to the very weapons of mass destruction that would enable them to enact their 'final solution'. Both UT Arlington and UT Austin have contracts with Sandia National Laboratories which includes research related to "chemical and biological weapons." Openly stating a desire to see 90% of humanity wiped out by means of releasing a bio-weapon and also having access to biological weapons is in our eyes an alarming precedent. In addition, in 2003 biological weapons watchdogs asked the US National Institutes of Health (NIH) to suspend biodefense funding for the University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston due to the Medical Branch's secrecy about its research on biological weapons agents and its refusal to comply with federal biosafety guidelines. It comes as no surprise that, according to the Statesman, hanging on the wall of Pianka's office is a picture of him proudly dressed as Charles Darwin. Dr. Death is a social Darwinist Malthusian who believes in the virtues of eugenics, a movement characterized by forced sterilization in the US, fueled by Carnegie and Rockefeller funding, and responsible for the birth of the Holocaust in Nazi Germany. It was Charles Darwin's cousin, Sir Francis Galton, who first brought eugenics to the US at the turn of the last century. According to the San Francisco Chronicle, "The idea was created in the United States, and cultivated in California, decades before Hitler came to power. California eugenicists played an important, although little-known, role in the American eugenics movement's campaign for ethnic cleansing....Elitists, utopians and so-called progressives fused their smoldering race fears and class bias with their desire to make a better world. They reinvented Galton's eugenics into a repressive and racist ideology. The intent: Populate the Earth with vastly more of their own socioeconomic and biological kind -- and less or none of everyone else. " This is what Pianka embraced when he told the audience at Lamar University, "Smarter people have fewer kids." He said those who don't have a conscience about the Earth will inherit the Earth, "...because those who care make fewer babies and those that didn't care made more babies." He said we will evolve as uncaring people, and "I think IQs are falling for the same reason, too." We have highlighted cases where under the sterilization program in the US, which ran until 1979, people like Ruth Morris were forcibly sterilized, used as guinea pigs in medical experiments, and denied the opportunity ever to have children because the state deemed their IQ not to be high enough. Virginia Governor Mark Warner had to publicly apologize for the program in 2002. The practice continues to this day in China, a model which Pianka advocated when he said that the one child policy, enforced by a brutal police state, was a good thing. Pianka and his ilk have embraced a new form of eugenics that forms a crossroads with ecology. Whereas the pioneers of eugenics like Margaret Sanger and Hitler discussed racial hygiene, Pianka professes the need for global hygiene and the disease is human beings. One of Pianka's followers states on her own blog, "He's a radical thinker, that one! I mean, he's basically advocating for the death of all but 10% of the current population! And at the risk of sounding just as radical, I think he's right." "It's the harsh reality that many people alive right now should be dead. And even harsher to think that the world would be better off with them dead too," writes 'Serenity'. After lamenting how her own grandparents should be dead, she then goes on to echo Pianka's eugenics stance in stating, "An insightful observation was made during the talk that education should be the key to learning how to take care of the Earth, but the problem is that the educated have fewer children and the uneducated have many children. So eventually, the uneducated will take over the Earth. It may have already happened." Again, the acceptance of this kind of rhetoric is exactly why Hitler was able to pursue his nightmare vision of the super race, where only the strong and enlightened ones chosen by the the state would have the right to live. These sick bastards have the nerve to couch their feverish pro-death rants in the context that they're lovingly caring for the planet and that they're actually pro-life! The disconnect and duality of this insanity is difficult to behold. In addition, another Biology student and supporter of Pianka, Rebecca Calisi (pictured below), mirrored this Nazi ideology when she expressed her loathsome desire that the world would be a better place with every single human being dead! "There is NO DENYING the natural world would be a better place without people - ALL people! Not a selective bunch. Get it straight," wrote Calisi. And the Associated Press and local NBC news make out as if we're the radicals here for pointing out that killing off the entire human race with biological weapons is wrong! if Pianka started barbecuing babies in the UT cafeteria and we opposed it, would Pianka be portrayed as the victim and us as the extremists? The Statesman article quotes one of Pianka's colleagues David Hillis, who defends him by saying that Pianka, "has such a passion for life and diversity. How anyone could paint him as pro-death is unbelievable." The man who said AIDS didn't kill people fast enough for his liking is not pro-death? The man who supports China's brutally enforced one child policy is not pro-death? The man who said he was "looking forward to the collapse" after a disease controls "the scourge of humanity" is not pro-death? The man who proudly displays an ebola plush toy on his front desk is not pro-death? Did we just enter the twilight zone here? "Pianka said [he] only meant to warn about the potential for epidemics in the face of uncontrolled population growth," states the article. If it was meant as a warning then why did Pianka order the cameras to be shut off before his speech and why did he say that the general public was not yet ready for what he had to say? If it was meant as a sober warning then why did 95% of his students and peers jump to their feet and raucously applause him at the end of it? Dr. Death and his drooling disciples should not be allowed to incite genocide and promote Nazi models of eugenics without encountering resistance. We do not in any way advocate death threats or intimidation towards Mr. Pianka or any of his students. However, the repugnant response of the establishment media has been to soft-peddle the story and paint Pianka as the victim. This is exactly why we will continue to challenge and counter monsters whose ideals if acted upon would result in the indiscriminate slaughter of our entire families. ~~~~~~~ Due to the overwhelming popularity of our $39.95 yearly special, we are bringing it back for Spring! This is your chance to receive over 5 months of access completely free compared to the standard price. Click here to subscribe!

Abortion, Breast Cancer and Population Control Many physicians are concerned about dramatic increases in breast carcinoma in women. Despite the fact that 18 scientific studies in domestic and foreign medical journals have demonstrated the direct relationship between first-trimester abortions and breast cancer, all efforts to disseminate that information here in the United States have been consistently blocked by those favoring abortion and population control. In the fall of 1996 a new scientific paper consisting of a meta-analysis of 23 scientific studies on the relationship between first trimester abortions and breast cancer was published in a British medical journal. It demonstrated a higher incidence of breast cancer in women who had first-trimester abortions. In response to that publication, the American Medical Association (AMA), the American Cancer Society (ACS), and pro-abortion/population control advocates joined together to attack the conclusions of the authors, and to block all efforts to disseminate that information to American physicians. The AMA, the ACS, and the pro-death lobby continue to insist that women must not be advised of the risk they incur when they destroy the life of their unborn child. Current abortion policies in America are absolutely necessary to reduce our population. That is why a minor child can be taken from school to an abortion clinic without parental notification. Yet that same child cannot be given an aspirin without parental consent. It all has to do with population control. MORE

HURRICANE DEATHS Hurricane Deaths: US Govt At Fault The Herald (Harare) OPINION September 19, 2005 Mukoma Wa Ngugi Harare THE devastation of New Orleans by Hurricane Katrina is being compared to disasters in the "Third World", but with no specific countries or disasters named. And if not compared to this black hole or repository of disaster that is the "Third World", a comparison to Africa is as specific as it gets. Comments and phrases like "New Orleans is a scene from the Third World", "Like the Third World", "US handles the crisis like a Third World country", "Bodies floating on water reminiscent of Africa" etc, have been a constant with news commentators, analysts, members of the United States Senate and Congress and other sections of American society commenting on New Orleans. The accompanying statements to these have been "I cannot believe this is America" or "This is not supposed to happen in America". It is supposed to, and can only, happen somewhere else. Attending a food festival event in Madison, Wisconsin, in the mid-west of the US, I overheard a joke: "Where is New Orleans again? Reply: New Orleans is next to Somalia." What role is the "Third World" playing in how Americans are dealing with the disaster? Where does the "Third World" fit in the imagination of the American? What does it mean to say that this is not supposed to happen in the US? To me, it is almost as if by displacing disasters and human suffering to the "Third World", the New Orleans disaster is not really happening in the US. New Orleans is "out there" and everyone else is safe in America that the crisis in New Orleans is happening in a "Third World" outpost and the US remains rich, strong and invulnerable. The American citizen has been stewing in nationalism, manifest destiny and the myth of the democratic society that errors but never oppresses or marginalises for so long that even a natural disaster cannot be seen and understood outside this lens. And the fact that most of the victims are predominantly poor and African American is not being understood as a creation of very specific domestic policies and conservative ideologies. It has to be filtered through the "Third World" as if a disaster from that "part of the world" somehow managed to sneak through the porous Mexican borders. Bush's remarks It is interesting, therefore, to look at US President George W. Bush's remarks after touring New Orleans on September 2 following four days of inaction. His first sentence was: "I've just completed a tour of some devastated country." A detached statement but it gets worse - a little later he says: "I know the people of this part of the world are suffering . . ." and he goes on to talk about how progress is being made. Then he says: " The people in this part of the world have got to understand . . ." Shortly after this, he says: "You know, I'm going to fly out of here in a minute, but I want you to know that I'm not going to forget what I've seen" and again refers to his constituents as "good folks of this part of the world". It is almost as if he is in a different country consoling its citizenry. He himself is so detached about what is happening in the very country he leads that he refers to it as "this part of the world". As far as I know, no one in the mainstream media picked this up because they, too, are reporting on that "part of the world". Believing that humour is the best medicine, in the same speech Bush also makes a rather tasteless joke: "I believe the town where I used to come (to) from Houston, Texas, to enjoy myself, occasionally too much, will be that very same town that it will be a better place to come to." Now, this is a President who, up to this point, has not visited New Orleans, a disaster area that is being acknowledged as probably the worst in recent US history. Yet, speaking to an evacuated, wounded and dying constituency, he refers to their drowned city that was their whole life as his old partying ground. All in all, Bush gives the kind of speech a visiting leader would make during a hurriedly prepared Press conference after being caught unawares by a natural disaster. It captures his inability to empathise, to really be one with the victims. The Myth and the "Third World" An American dying in a natural disaster will look like a human being dying in any natural disaster and not necessarily like an African. A homeless American looks like any homeless human being and not always like an African. And a natural disaster should not be seen as somebody else's natural disaster, but as one that afflicts all humanity. We are of a common humanity. It is this myth that only other countries torture and detain that has led to Abu Ghraib. It is the myth that only other countries have political prisoners that keeps political activists like Mumia Abu Jamal and Leonard Peltier in American jails for fighting American marginalisation. It is the belief that only other countries exile those that oppose their policies that has led to the bounty on Assata Shakur - exiled in Cuba for fighting for African American rights - being raised to US$1 million. And it is the myth that only other countries ignore and exploit their poor that led to the disaster in New Orleans. But there are ways in which America is like the "Third World". Privatisation, which in "Third World" countries becomes structural adjustment programmes, has been happening in the US since the Reagan years of small government; through the Clinton years that saw a full assault on welfare and affirmative action originally designed to buoy the marginalised and through the Bush years that have been rewarding the rich while taking away from the poor through Federal and Supreme Court nominations that support big business and reduce the power of labour unions, among other things. These have been the years of "blaming the victim" while preying on them. They are poor because they are lazy - enter the "welfare queen". While mainstream US was busy trying to convince itself that poverty and racism were things of the past or happened only to other nations, the marginalised were becoming even more vulnerable. Most of the victims in New Orleans are black and poor - race and class - an inversion of Franz Fanon's "One is rich because he/she is white and one is white because he/she is rich" to read: "One is poor because he/she is black and one is black because he/she is poor." Just like in the "Third World" in times of natural disasters and wars, it is the most victimised in New Orleans that are doing most of the dying. Contradictions The reasons why the poor couldn't leave the city are quite easy to understand: They couldn't afford doing so. They simply did not have cars or money for transportation, are jobless, or live pay check to pay check and couldn't have had any money saved up for relocation. Where poor people owned houses to which they had mortgaged their lives, where their homes had become the marker of their humanity and achievement, staying put and essentially fighting for their lives was the only option. Like the genocide in Rwanda in 1994, or the ongoing genocide in Darfur, this particular disaster had been telegraphed - we all knew it was going to happen. More political and economic will, including a more comprehensive effort to evacuate the city of New Orleans, could have minimised human suffering. What makes it even worse is that the millions being pledged now by private citizens and corporations and the US$10,5 billion initially pledged by the government could have saved New Orleans 10 times over through improvement of infrastructure. Because of the federal government's push for privatisation - which translates into public services being slashed or sold to private companies - perhaps the government simply no longer has structures in place to handle disasters. This could explain why Bush ended his speech with these words: "If you want to help, if you're listening to this broadcast, contribute cash to the Salvation Army and the Red Cross." Each death in New Orleans was preventable. But money is not made in prevention, but in reconstruction. Soon, like in Iraq, the big contracts for reconstruction will be on their way - some corporations will make a killing. Let the bidding begin. Also, it is with a sense of irony that one reads of corporations like Wal-Mart contributing millions of dollars to the relief efforts yet were their employees in New Orleans working in better conditions and with better pay, some of those who couldn't afford to evacuate would have been able to do so. These corporations are responsible for the loss of jobs through outside contracting to sweatshops in "Third World" countries where, in turn, occasional fires break out leading to hundreds of deaths. In "Third World" countries, they no longer pay government taxes in the tax-free trade zones, leading to further destruction of already fragile and poor economies. Where these corporations have remained in the US as retailers and manufacturers, they have seen to wages being cut. They are rabidly against unions and essentially use the community the same way colonial companies used colonised communities - for cheap labour, extraction of raw materials and, of course, as buyers of products whose production is finished elsewhere. Thus, coupled with a government that has engineered its own version of structural adjustment to maximise profit, and corporations that economically and politically colonise a community, the vulnerability - which in real terms is the result of victimisation - seen in New Orleans is not a surprise. Rather, it is the culmination of well-planned and well-orchestrated policies that consolidate wealth in the hands of a few at the expense of the poor. Globalisation is not resulting in a world that becomes better as it gets smaller, but rather in a world where poverty becomes more prevalent and more apparent. This globalisation of poverty makes New Orleans a village in everybody's backyard. Instead of outsourcing disaster to an unnamed "Third World", it seems to me that citizens of the US should be placing the responsibility for the preventable deaths and suffering in New Orleans on their government and corporate board rooms. l Mukoma Wa Ngugi is the author of Conversing with Africa: Politics of Change (KPH, 2003); and A Malignant History: Looking at America, forthcoming from Kimaathi Publishing House (KPH). Death toll in the New Orleans hurricane, mostly due to broken levees which the government refused to repair:  2,000 kids still missing Hurricane death toll jumps to 816, with 6,000 adults unaccounted for See:  http://www.greatdreams.com/weather/hurricanes_2005-page3.htm Posted: September 18, 2005

Subj: 'PRO-CHOICERS' APPLAUD AFTER PARTIAL-BIRTH ABORTION Date: 10/20/2003 From: news-announcements@worldnetdaily.com SPECIAL LIMITED-TIME OFFER: Get jaw-dropping CD or audiotape, plus inspiring July 4 speech by Alan Keyes -- and receive most acclaimed pro-life book FREE (a $19.95 value). Attendees of a national conference for abortion providers watched and listened with rapt attention as the inventor of the partial-birth abortion procedure narrated a video of the grisly procedure – and then burst into applause when the act was over and the unborn child destroyed. The disturbing and eye-opening event, featuring abortion doctor Martin Haskell addressing members of the National Abortion Federation, was captured on audiotape. Calmly and dispassionately describing each step of the process – up to and including the insertion of the scissors into the base of the baby's head, followed by the sound of the suction machine sucking out the baby's brain – Haskell walks his audience through the procedure that opponents hope will finally be banned during this congressional session. At the end of the procedure, after the late-term, fully developed unborn child's life has been violently and painfully terminated, the audience breaks out into applause. Now, WorldNetDaily is making available to its readers a CD (or audiotape) of this shocking abortion-industry insider event. "For the first time, America will actually hear a child being brutally killed by this procedure while the abortionist coldly and dispassionately describes every step of the process," says Mark Crutcher, founder of Life Dynamics, the Denton, Texas, pro-life organization that obtained the tape and has reproduced it. "Now the American people will be confronted with the reality of abortion. And this time no one will be able to claim that the pro-life movement is exaggerating. After all, these are the abortion industry's own words!" Titled "Fire & Ice," Side A exposes partial-birth abortion as never before, culminating with extended excerpts from Haskall's macabre presentation and the audience's applause at the end of the controversial and brutal abortion. Side B contains a powerful address given by Dr. Alan Keyes on Independence Day, 2003. Considered by many to be the most passionate and articulate pro-life speaker in America, "Keyes speech is guaranteed to light a fire in the heart of every patriot who still respects the principles upon which this nation was founded," said Crutcher. "This needs to be heard in every home and church in America." Special Offer: Those ordering the "Fire & Ice" recording will receive free a copy of Crutcher's unique book, "Lime 5: Exploited by Choice." Crutcher's book is an uncensored look at America's most wrenching social issue. Crutcher's Life Dynamics brought about the 1999 congressional hearings on the sale of aborted baby parts as well as the more recent undercover investigation in which it demonstrated that virtually all Planned Parenthood affiliates fail to report clear cases of statutory rape to authorities. "Lime 5: Exploited by Choice" fully documents that women are being sexually assaulted, mutilated and killed inside perfectly legal abortion clinics in numbers that have never before been made public. (Editor's note: This book includes graphic descriptions of sexual molestation in abortion clinics, and is not suitable for young readers.) The book also shows: * how pro-choice organizations have used raw political power to fight off regulation of their industry; * how a massive cover-up of abortion-industry disasters is being carried out by an agency of the U.S. government; * how the abortion industry is collapsing because of the toll abortions take on the people who perform them; * the medical evidence of a connection between the rise in America's abortion rate and a parallel rise in breast cancer; * the barriers faced by abortion-injured women who seek compensation in the courts; and * suggestions for solving all of these problems. For a limited time, "Lime 5," which normally sells for $19.95, will be sent FREE to readers who order the new CD (or audiotape) "Fire and Ice" for only $9.95. (Offer good for U.S.A. only.) http://www.shopnetdaily.com/store/item.asp?ITEM_ID=1361 Other inquiries may be addressed to customerservice@worldnetdaily.com Copyright 2002 WorldNetDaily.com

THE CATHOLIC STATEMENT ON OVERPOPULATION FROM: http://www.simbahayan.org/B5-demartino.html INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON POPULATION AND DEVELOPMENT "The Cairo Conference" In 1994 the United Nations began its work in evaluating the results of the conference on population that had been held ten years earlier, in Mexico City. From the very beginning of the preparations, it became evident that the ground work that had been laid would be set aside and a new 'agenda' would soon manifest itself. It quickly became clear that the understanding and respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, as most of the world recognized them, including the right to life and human responsibility would come under attack. Several factors aggravated the situation, most probably fueled by a widespread panic over the specter of a so-called "dangerously over-populated earth". Many people, including anti-population planners seized on the issue. At the same time, all the evil fruit of the sexual revolution of the 1960s came to the fore. Radical groups joined forces with representatives of population-control lobbies, long practiced in manipulating issues, attitudes and statistics. As it eventually became clear that this fear of overpopulation was unfounded, the more radical governments’ demand for "women’s reproductive rights" appeared; and eventually in the negotiations over the draft of the meeting’s Programme of Action, some delegations launched an attack on the idea of the traditional family. Many of the same delegates pressed for the proclamation of "an international right to abortion." In response to this, the Holy See delegation, with the help of a few courageous countries, entered upon an intense series of negotiations over the language to be contained in the document which the Conference wished to adopt. In the end, no international right to abortion was proclaimed, and one paragraph of the Cairo document specifically rejects abortion "as a means of family planning." However, they were unable to prevent the Conference from finishing by calling for billions of dollars to be spent for "reproductive health" and "family planning" which would serve to further the ends of population control, while only vaguely conceding that "additional funds" would be needed to develop poor nations. Subtle attacks against family and population links from the Catholic viewpoint

AIDS by  Bill Cooper (now deceased) AIDS is Man-made by Bill Cooper 07/27/90 To All, During my talks in Las Vegas last weekend I revealed a few things about aids that I have been keeping close to my chest. I have already revealed that I saw that AIDS was man made to eliminate the undesirable elements of society while I was attached to Naval Security and Intelligence. I stated this fact in my paper "The Secret Government." Now for the rest of the story. The first study was made in 1957 by scientists meeting in Huntsville Alabama. That study resulted in "Alternative 3." Another study was made by the Club of Rome in 1968 to determine the limits to growth. The result of the study was that civilization as we know it would collapse shortly after the year 2000 unless the population was seriously curtailed. Several Top Secret recommendations were made to the ruling elite by Dr. Aurelio Peccei of the Club of Rome. The chief recommendation was to develop a microbe which would attack the auto immune system and thus render the development of a vaccine impossible. The orders were given to develop the microbe and to also develop a cure and a prophylactic. The microbe would be used against the general population and would be introduced by vaccine administered by the World Health Organization. The prophylactic was to be used by the ruling elite. The cure will be administered to the survivors when they decide that enough people have died. It will be announced as newly developed. This plan was called Global 2000. The cure and the prophylactic are suppressed. Funding was obtained from the U.S. Congress under H.B. 15090 where $10 million was given to the Department of Defense to produce "a synthetic biological agent, an agent that does not naturally exist and for which no natural immunity could have been acquired." "Within the next 5 to 10 years it would probably be possible to make a new infective microorganism which could differ in certain important aspects from any known disease causing organisms. Most important of these is that it might be refractory to the immunological and therapeutic processes upon which we depend to maintain our relative freedom from infectious disease." The project was carried out at Fort Detrick Maryland. Since large populations were to be decimated the ruling elite decided to target the "undesirable elements of society" for extermination. Specifically targeted were the black, hispanic, and homosexual populations. The name of the project that developed AIDS is MKNAOMI. The African continent was infected via smallpox vaccine in 1977. The U.S. population was infected in 1978 with the hepatitis B vaccine through the Centers for Disease Control and the New York Blood Center. You now have the entire story. The order was given by the POLICY COMMITTEE of THE BILDERBERG GROUP based in Switzerland. Other measures were also ordered. The one you will be able to check the easiest is the Haig - Kissinger Depopulation Policy which is administered by the State Department. When you put this information out do not edit it and please give me and this board full credit as the source of the information. Please post the board phone number with this file. That is how I stay alive. This board is THE CITIZENS AGENCY FOR JOINT INTELLIGENCE, SYSOP - WILLIAM COOPER, (602) 567-6725 To aid you in your research of this CRIME the name of the report was "THE LIMITS TO GROWTH" A REPORT FOR THE CLUB OF ROME'S PROJECT ON THE PREDICAMENT OF MANKIND. In April 1968 the study began in the Academia dei Lincei in Rome Italy. They met at the instigation of Dr. Aurelio Peccei. The Top Secret recommendations of the results of the study were made by Dr. Aurelio Peccei who pledged not to use the prophylactic and not to take the cure should the microbe be developed and should he contract the disease. Dr. Peccei was hailed as a great hero for deciding to take the same risk as the general population. The public results of the study were published in 1972. The MIT project team that participated in the study are listed below: Dr. Dennis L. Meadows, director, United States Dr. Alison A. Anderson, United States (pollution) Dr. Jay M. Anderson, United States (pollution) Ilyas Bayar, Turkey (agriculture) William W. Behrens III, United States (resources) Farhad Hakimzadeh, Iran (population) Dr. Steffen Harbordt, Germany (socio-political trends) Judith A Machen, United States (administration) Dr. Donella H. Meadows, United States (population) Peter Milling, Germany (capital) Nirmala S. Murthy, India (population) Roger F. Naill, United States (resources) Jorgen Randers, Norway (population) Stephen Shantzis, United States (agriculture) John A. Seeger, United States (administration) Marilyn Williams, United States (documentation) Dr. Erich K. O. Zahn, Germany (agriculture) When the study was completed in 1969 U.N. Secretary General U Thant made this statement: "I do not wish to seem over-dramatic, but I can only conclude from the information that is available to me as Secretary-General, that the Members of the United Nations have perhaps ten years left in which to subordinate their ancient quarrels and launch a global partnership to curb the arms race, to defuse the population explosion, and to supply the required momentum to development efforts. If such a global partnership is not forged within the next decade, then I very much fear that the problems I have mentioned will have reached such staggering proportions that they will be beyond our capacity to control." U Thant, 1969 MKNAOMI was developed by the Special Operations Division (SOD) scientists at Ft. Detrick, Maryland under the supervision of the CIA and for the CIA. A reference to the project MKNAOMI can be found in "The Intelligence Community" By Fain et al, Bowker, 1977. I swear that all of the above information is true and correct to the best of my memory and knowledge. I give this information to the people of the world in hopes that someone will have the courage and resources to help me end this madness. The illuminati (the order) are in complete control of most of the world and they have declared war against the general populations of all nations. We must stop them at all costs. Please help me for I cannot do it alone. Please send this file without editing to everyone that you know and ask them to do the same. God bless you all. William Cooper 19744 Beach Blvd., Ste. 301 Huntington Beach, Ca. 92648 To the best of our knowledge, the text on this page may be freely reproduced and distributed. Taken from www.totse.com.

N.A.A.A.P. Perspective FROM: http://www.shawneelink.net/~pridger/naaap/fa94.htm Fall 1994—Vol. I, No. 2 AIDS vs. the Population Bomb As I write, (8 Sept.) there is a major international conference underway in Cairo, Egypt. The topic of discussion is how to put the breaks on the world population explosion. Government sponsored birth control and abortion are always hot topics of debate at such gatherings. The accepted terminology is "family planning." But what we are really seeing discussed is how governments, individual governments and eventually a world government, will be controlling our personal reproductive lives in the future. For decades the population explosion has been recognized as a potential threat to human comfort levels — especially those of the industrialized West. Though the problem is probably not as critical as it is being made out to be, it is nonetheless a matter for concern. After all, there's only enough room for so many. Nature's own population control mechanisms have been thwarted by the good intentions of those in the developed countries who have worked tirelessly to save lives and reduce child mortality rates. Now the same people are overcome with concern for the problems their successes have caused. Modern medicine has stymied nature's own attrition systems and mass warfare, (which has always served as a form of population control) has become too dangerous for the ruling elites of the world to consider. (At least until they consolidate their power into a single world government with a monopoly on all weapons of mass destruction.) The reasoning in the ivory towers of the world elite is if something isn't done about alarming Third World birth rates, the teaming masses of poor and under nourished could someday threaten their own peace and tranquility. The growing numerical imbalance between haves and have-nots is looked upon as a potential powder keg, fused and awaiting a spark to set it off. The explosion, they reason, will lead to the have-nots rising up and taking whatever they need from the haves. Better defuse the bomb now than face the hordes later. The leaders of industrialized nations feel that the problem can best be addressed by limiting reproductive freedom. They see stopping the ungodly high birth rates in the poor countries as the most promising solution. Third World leaders, on the other hand, tend to think the primary problem is the ungodly high per capita levels of consumption in the industrialized West. The solution they seek is a more equitable distribution of wealth and resources. The great debate, therefore, centers on a two-pronged approach. 1. International birth control . Of course this primarily effects the poor to whom children are either wage earning capital assets, or extra helping hands, and their old age social security (in the case of the Third World), or little welfare-enhancing bread tickets, (in the case of the Western welfare state, such as the United States). Wealthy people, to whom children are often little more than a pain in the neck, are self-limiting. They don't have time for more than the one or two children necessary to carry on the family name. Working people in industrialized nations are also self-limiting, since they usually cannot afford more than one or two children. (In the U.S. many white people have come to feel a little doubtful of the seemliness of perpetrating their race at all. Anglo-Saxons, in particular, seem to have been conditioned to accept guilt and a form of racial self-loathing.) 2. A forced lowering of living standards in the advanced nations. This is so the poor under-privileged classes in the Third World can hope to get their rightful share. This is international redistribution of wealth from those who produce it to those who, for whatever reason, do not. Naturally, the first option is played up in the rich nations while the second is played up in the poor nations. Both are on the table, and both are part and parcel of the globalist agenda. Neither solution threatens the ruling elites, of course, since they are securely above the fray. Their intent and expectation is to rule and do well no matter what happens. The idea of population reduction through nuclear war, of course, has long been discarded as too dangerous to the ruling elite. Now the problem is preventing such wars, at least until they've found out how to do it without taking too much risk themselves. The concept of population control through super-secret biological warfare is never mentioned, but it is probably also very much on the table — or more accurately, under the table. Both world wars ushered in and developed the technological concepts of a variety of methods of selective mass destruction of large populations. Now, with the advances in the fields of genetic engineering, truly startling things are possible and probably likely, if not already underway. Take the AIDS epidemic for example. Now I don't pretend to have any special expertise or knowledge in this field. I merely point out some rather suspicious and conspicuous points of interest that have caught my attention. Call me a cynic and perhaps an over-eager conspiracy theorist, but it appears that AIDS could easily have been a modestly successful pilot population reduction project. I say modest because people don't seem to be dying of AIDS in quite as large of numbers as at first predicted and feared. It now seems very unlikely that the epidemic will come near solving the population problem. But take a close look at the groups who have suffered most from AIDS. At a glance it is obvious that they comprise a spectrum of peoples that a Hitler might have targeted. Essentially, poor blacks and other minorities, homosexuals, and drug abusers. Coincidence? Perhaps. Look at all of the other strange incongruities relating to AIDS. Everything about the disease and how it has been handled has been somewhat peculiar from the very beginning. One would have had to be blind and deaf to fail to note the strange character of the official response to it. Several authoritative books have been written on the peculiarities of this new killer in our midst. Many are written by AIDS dissidents to counter the conventional wisdom on the subject. Some have argued convincingly that AIDS is indeed a man-made disease that was either intentionally or unintentionally unleashed upon humanity. Was AIDS developed in a biological warfare lab? If so, the perpetrators would go to great lengths to prevent the truth from being told. Initially there were charges and counter charges by the U.S. (presumably CIA) and the Soviet KGB with regard to the origin of AIDS. Each pointed an accusing finger at the other. These charges promptly disappeared from the print media and were never mentioned on national TV. Then it was discovered that the outbreaks of AIDS in central Africa and other places coincided geographically with the World Health Organization's smallpox vaccination programs in those areas. The experimental hepatitis-B vaccine pilot program in the United States that essentially targeted the homosexual community appears, according to some, to correlate with the outbreak of AIDS among homosexuals. These things made headlines around the world, but not in the United States. Was this "responsible reporting," on the part of our news media, by failing to report at all? Maybe so, but something smells fishy. We did hear quite a bit about the green monkey connection, however — a laughable, likely story. No newspaper bothered to mention, however, that the green monkey is used extensively in laboratory research. In any case, the whole green monkey hypothesis has subsequently been allowed to quietly disappear. Coincidence? Maybe. What really struck me was that while the medical and scientific community professed to know so little about the disease, they also professed to know just a little too much, too quickly. Tracing it to the green monkey in the wilds of Africa, was just one instance. Confidently assuring us that AIDS couldn't be spread by casual contact, while at the same time declaring that it was spreading into the general population at an alarming rate, and that it had a latent period of up to a decade and more was another. This seemed like classic double-speak bordering on the criminally insane — unless, of course, they actually knew a lot more than they were telling. Both were glaring instances of claiming to know a little too much too quickly in my opinion. Either AIDS was the dangerous killer it was being made out to be, or it wasn't really that much of a threat. The message seemed to be both. But how could that be? Right off the bat I got the distinct feeling that more was known about the disease than was being told to the American people. The alternate was that somebody with too much power was spreading comforting "facts" that were not yet possible to know. Even more telling, and less under- standable, was the fact that when the HIV virus was officially declared the cause of AIDS, and it became generally acknowledged, (or wrongfully declared) that the disease was spreading into the general population, HIV testing to determine how widespread it might already be, and perhaps get a handle on it, was effectively outlawed! This, more than any other single thing, demonstrated that there was something strikingly unusual and unprecedented about the alleged AIDS epidemic. An official policy to prevent normal medical procedures and preventive measures in the case of a deadly communicable disease epidemic made no sense whatsoever. Even I, an ignorant hillbilly, could see this. AIDS had apparently become more of a political problem than a public health problem. Why? Was AIDS so special that it warranted an entirely new, and seemingly bizarre, patently reckless, approach? It appears so. Why? The question begs at least some speculative answers. Perhaps, if a broad testing program had been undertaken, more people would have been found to have HIV than was politically or medically expedient in light of stated "facts." It might have been somewhat embarrassing had the numbers turned out to be too large — or even too small. Then, too, if HIV had been found to be almost entirely confined to the homosexual community, the homosexuals, (now a powerful political force) would have been embarrassed, and perhaps a little suspicious. Maybe even a little mad. Maybe it was true, and known to be true, (as many distinguished dissident doctors and scientists claimed, and were consequently disowned, disenfranchised, and discredited by the AIDS establishment) that HIV really wasn't the culprit in the first place. Another possible reason, (particularly plausible because of the homosexual community's aggressively active role in formulating AIDS policy) was that testing was intentionally delayed in order to give the disease time to become more widespread in the heterosexual community, and thus hopefully shed its apparent homosexual connection in the public eye. Unthinkable? Sorry, the seemingly inexplicable nature of our official AIDS policy provokes unthinkable thoughts. Another possible reason — and this one is the most diabolical, conspiracy- mongerized theory of all — was that spread of the disease was to be intentionally unchecked in order to eliminate large segments of certain populations. Selective population reduction. Planned mass liquidations to enhance and supplement ineffective family planning efforts. Another unthinkable possibility? Remember, the population problem is perceived by many at the very highest levels of authority as perhaps the most serious problem ever to face mankind. It may be deemed, by a diabolical few, to justify radical, unthinkable, solutions. Even if it were true, who would ever believe such a thing? Anybody suggesting it would be laughed, or put, away. As startling as it may seem, long after we had all been assured that the nation's blood supply had been cleaned up and could be considered pretty safe, I was recently shocked to read in an establishment newspaper that (Surprise!) the blood supply hasn't been cleaned up at all! What could possibly be the justification for one of the nation's largest blood banks to knowingly, and seemingly criminally, refrain from screening its blood supplies for HIV these past many years? What is shocking is that they admit it, and don't seem to be overly concerned at the repercussions. Nor are they apparently in any hot water with the Public Health Service. In spite of this admission, the latest reports claim that although African and Asian HIV infection rates continue to sky-rocket, HIV infections in the U.S. and other Western countries seem to have leveled off or are falling. How can this be? Are we all practicing safe sex, avoiding doctors and dentists, and staying out of hospitals? Are we being careful to send all our contaminated blood to Africa and Asia? Apparently so. The one and only measure being actively promoted to cope with the spread of AIDS, both domestically and internationally, is condom usage. If everybody in the world, through fear of AIDS, can be coerced into habitually using condoms, an effective means of birth control has automatically become a byproduct of the AIDS epidemic. Could this be the real purpose and reasoning behind the AIDS scare? An elaborate birth control scheme? In any case, the apparent message is that condom use is up and AIDS is down, so go on enjoying unlimited safe, non-procreative sex kids! (I'd like to have a list of Trojan stockholders. I'm sure it would be revealing.) There are many reputable AIDS dissidents who don't buy into the official lines. But they too often disagree and sometimes contribute to the confusion. One school of thought has HIV and AIDS spreading like wildfire, faster than ever imagined, and the future death toll truly cataclysmic. This school believes that HIV is spread more easily than is assumed, and that safe sex, as promoted by the international health powers, is not safe at all but patently suicidal. Another school claims that HIV and AIDS are rather difficult, or almost impossible according to some, to spread from person to person by either casual or normal sexual contact. In this line of thinking, the initial spread of the disease must have come through massive inoculations using contaminated vaccines, as mentioned above. Subsequent spread of the disease, according to this theory, is almost exclusively through blood to blood transfers or direct inoculation, i.e., promiscuous, rough, reckless, and kinky sex, I.V. drug use, blood transfusions, invasive surgery, or visits to diabolical dentists. GOOD NEWS? There is yet another twist, and this one makes as much sense as any of the other allegations and "truths" surrounding AIDS and HIV. Perhaps more. Only time will tell. This third line of thinking is that the HIV virus has nothing to do with AIDS in the first place. Many prominent medical people have held this position from the beginning but have been shouted down in the multi-billion dollar feeding frenzy that has evolved around officially accepted HIV/AIDS doctrine and approved research. HIV/AIDS has become a multi-billion dollar industry rivaling even the cancer establishment. AIDS medical research grants are eagerly sought by those willing to agree with the accepted AIDS dogma. Those who don't are locked out from the goodies. This school of thought concedes that HIV is probably wide-spread but that it is really of little concern. It is a generally acknowledged fact, (even among straight-faced AIDS establishment types) that not all AIDS patients test HIV positive, and that not all HIV positives come down with AIDS. Since general testing for HIV is illegal, nobody has the slightest idea how many people are HIV positive. (HIV statistics are extrapolated.) It may even be more common than the flu. Magic Johnson is still alive and apparently well, as are many other "long term survivors." Children born of HIV mothers are often found negative. Some HIV positives turn negative. How can this be if HIV is supposed to be a death sentence? A medical doctor named Robert E. Willner is so sure that HIV and AIDS are unrelated that he has publicly inoculated himself with blood from an HIV positive hemophiliac to prove it. His contention is that the whole AIDS scare is nothing more than a gigantic and deadly fraud. He has written a recently published book called Deadly Deception: The Proof That Sex and HIV Absolutely Do Not Cause Aids which documents his research and findings. AIDS, Dr. Willner claims, is not a disease at all but a cruel hoax. At best, it is a syndrome which leads to death only because the AIDS patient is sick and immune deficient in the first place — due to factors relating to lifestyle, general health, or medications, rather than HIV. HIV, he states, can accompany any number of medical conditions, but is not itself a factor of concern. But once a person is diagnosed HIV positive, (and remember, only a very few people are tested) the diagnosis tends to become a self-fulfilling prophecy. The patient then "knows" he will sooner or later get full-blown AIDS and die. In order to stave it off, and enhance his quality of life, he is encouraged to take AZT, the approved AIDS drug. This particular treatment for HIV infection is apparently almost universally prescribed. Yet it has long been known to be a very dangerous drug, crippling the immune system and causing the very diseases and symptoms and complications associated with AIDS, according to Dr. Willner. It makes healthy HIV patients sick. Then, after some time of declining health, they get AIDS and die. Others with HIV, who avoid AZT treatment, often live on in apparent good health for years. The establishment doctors are baffled by this. Even many of the mainline researchers who subscribe to the official AIDS line admit that there is probably an unknown co-factor, or co-factors, involved in AIDS — that HIV may not act alone. Could the co-factor be an unhealthy life-style or the use of recreational drugs? Could AZT be the co-factor that seals their doom? It seems unthinkable, but Doctor Willner believes that AZT is what is actually killing AIDS patients, and that HIV is innocent of all charges. Being neither a medical doctor, scientist, or prophet, I don't know where the truth of the matter lies. But I have the distinct impression that lies abound in what the government and medical establishment has been telling us about AIDS, as well as many other things. Just why our own, or any, government would fall into lock-step on the wrong side of the fence on any given issue, especially something like AIDS, is difficult imagine. (Unless you are a cynic like me.) Obviously, there is an ongoing fear campaign with regards to AIDS. I see it regularly on TV. It was admitted a long time ago that a cure or vaccine for AIDS is highly unlikely in the foreseeable future. Since there is no hope in the offing for a medical solution, (though billions of dollars are being poured down the rat-hole) the answer for well into the next century appears to be confined to more and better condoms. No matter what the truth is regarding AIDS, a massive, world-wide, defacto birth control program is already well underway whether or not any agreements are reached in Cairo. Pretty sneaky! Camden

FROM: http://allafrica.com/stories/200209250169.html NIGERIA - OVER POPULATION NOT THE PROBLEM September 25, 2002 Sonnie Ekwowusi Lagos Population issues have once more re-surfaced in the front burner of public discourse. I watched the edition of the Patito's gang which dealt with the issues on Minaj TV on August, 3l, 2002. Prior to this, the honourable Minister of Health, professor A.B.C Nwosu was quoted as saying that over population was responsible for the poor quality of life and standard of living in Nigeria. First, anybody who is conversant with what Rev. Fr. George Ehusani dubbed in his book as the complex politics of population control in Africa and the Third World which reached its crescendo in the 80s will understand that Nwosu was neither speaking for himself nor for the federal government. Certainly, he was speaking for the neo-colonialists and powerful international agencies like the IMF, World Bank, United States Agency for International Development (USAID) etc which have been ceaselessly labouring to reduce the population of Third World countries. They have been achieving this goal through powerful, advocacy and by making population reduction a pre-condition for granting developmental aids to developing countries. Their popular hype goes this way; "Nigeria is over-populated. Consequently, quality of life in Nigeria is low. Therefore, if Nigeria needs any loan or other assistance from the IMF or the World Bank, the pre-condition is that she must be ready to reduce her population through compulsory mass sterilization of men and women, infanticide, abortion, euphemistically referred to as family planning etc". Part of the strategy is to put something in women to make them impotent, unable to bear children in the future. Can you imagine your wife coming back from a government hospital with her womb closed without your consent?. I heard that some of these "do-gooders" carrying out immunization programme do mix the vaccines they administer to kids with other concoctions capable of making the kids impotent for life. So, parents beware! You can see how desperate these people are in reducing our population. There are many sinister motives behind the well-funded advocacy for the reduction of the population of Africa. Some argue that because Europe and America are becoming extinct they are bent on perpetually keeping the African population under control for fear that Africa might rise one day to become a world power. You may dismiss this as a simplistic and illogical reasoning but you might change your mind after the excursion into the history of Margaret Sanger, birth control and her Magazine called the Woman rebel, Marie Stopes, Charles Darwin and the superior race theory, Rev. Thomas Malthus theory, International Planned Parenthood Federation of London which begot Planned Parenthood Federation of Nigeria. I think that after the scramble for Africa by the turn of the 19th century, another insidious and pernicious scramble has been persistent in the continent. Whereas the first scramble was largely motivated by commercial interest, the second scramble hinges on distorting the social economic and political reality of Africa or what Tunji Bello has dubbed as the American doctoring system. One of these major distorting or doctoring is that Africa is suffering from hunger and disease due to over population. Consequently, the African soil has remained a testing and re-cycling ground for all sorts of strange ideas and propaganda. The American connection in this game plan through the USAID is evident. This body has spent scores of years supplying contraceptives and funding population control in Africa and Nigeria. The population propaganda has been successfully sold to successive Health Ministers in Nigeria. In 1987, USAID and the Federal government under the wooing-hands of Professor Ransome-Kuti, the then Health Minister, spent a staggering sum of N288 million on the government population policy of one-woman-four children. Of course that policy, being the most fragrant abuse of human and family right, failed woefully. Today, Nwosu is the latest victim of Western conspiracy. He is again following their written script from the same re-cycled erroneous idea of yesteryears. In the 80s they used all kinds of adjectives and coined such frightening terms as population "explosion"bomb" etc to illustrate the demographic catastrophe that will befall Nigeria if she failed to heed the call and reduce her population. Even journalists, writers, artists, TV presenters, musicians were recruited to forecast a false demographic Armageddon. Remember Sunny Ade and Onyeka Onwenu's album entitled "Wait for me"? By the mid 90s it seemed as if the hype on the population hoax was drowned. No. The propagandists and doomsayers had only changed tactics. Impelled by the HIV/AIDS scourge they have shifted from population explosion to the marketing of condoms. One of them said that AIDS is good for Africa because it will reduce her high population. Now that the population doomsayers are staging a dramatic come back, let's ask this old same question: Is Nigeria truly or really over populated. The answer is emphatic No. Granted that Nigeria demographic position is highly politicized, our population could be somewhere around 130 million, if I am not wrong. It is wrong for one to calculate the population of Nigeria by just looking at the large concentration of people in one's locality. For example, after being shocked by the countless sea of human heads at Oshodi, Lagos one cannot conclude that Nigeria is over populated. Everybody is in Lagos. My village is depleted because most village folks have fled in search of elusive jobs in Lagos. The same thing, I guess, applies to your village folks. Lagos is over populated but Nigeria is certainly not over populated. But let's close our eyes for one moment and assume that Nigeria is over population. Is over population a curse ?. Can population growth lead to falling standard of living? The answers are double No. The anti- population argument is that if there are many people sharing the same cake, it will get smaller and smaller. They forget that the same people will not continue to eat one cake because they can bake more cakes so that could satisfy everybody. Besides, extremely densely populated countries like Monaco, Singapore, Hong Kong even Japan that recently co-hosted the World Cup enjoy higher standard of living. In fact high population is inversely related to the Gross National Product (GNP). The higher a country's population, the higher its GNP. Conversely, the lower the population the lower the GNP. Most renowned economists affirm that rapid population density is not an obstacle to economic development. What may be an obstacle is the rate of growth but not the growth itself. High population remains the key indicator of industrial growth. The causes of unemployment, poverty, street begging in Nigeria are mismanagement of the economy, inefficiency of government, monumental corruption, plundering of national treasury, government over spending and over subsidy, executive robbery either by the stroke of the pen or barrel of the gun. Not over population. Think of the monies stolen by our past leaders?. If all those stolen monies were recovered and directly spent on things that could improve the lot of the people, Nigeria would have been a better place today. As Mahatma Ghandi rightly said, there is enough for every man's need but not for every man's greed. We are a greedy lot. This is why we are plagued by genteel poverty amidst our natural and human resources. Was it not Alhaji Tafawa Balewa who said our political independence was nothing if not matched with economic independence?. Today, everybody talks oil, dreams oil. All our stakes are in oil. Nobody is interested in agriculture or subsistence farming any longer. That Nigeria is the 26th poorest country in the world is not caused by over population. It is caused primarily by sheer neglect for others sectors and lack of productivity. All our National Development Plans from that of 1962 downward failed due to lack of implementation. For example, our Third Development Plan harped on food production. The then Obasanjo/Murtala military regime fashioned a slogan for food production called the Operation Feed the Nation (OFN). Shehu Shagari coined the Green Revolution. We even had the Umaru Dikko rice, the integrated rural agricultural programme, National accelerated food production programme etc. But they all failed principally due to corruption and mismanagement. Perhaps, if they had worked we would not be complaining about our population. The food crisis worsens every day. The oil boom is becoming our doom. The Naira currency has continued to noose-dive and depreciate in value. The painful thing is that the solution seems not to be in sight. Now many of our political office holders are so pre-occupied with their respective re-election gambits that they have no time to think about the welfare of the people. Ekwowusi writes from Lagos

The Massacres in Africa What really happened to Christians in Rwanda between April and July of 1994 is a shocking story. After the Christian Tutsis were disarmed by governmental decree in the early 1990s, Hutu-led military forces began to systematically massacre the defenseless Christians beginning in April 1994 and continuing until July 1994. Using machetes rather than bullets, the Hutu forces created a state of terror within the helpless Christian population as they systematically butchered thousands. The United Nations immediately convened hearings on Rwanda, but Madeline Albright, American Ambassador to the United Nations, argued strenuously that neighboring African nations should not be allowed to intervene until the "civil war had come to an end." In reality, there was no civil war, since those being slaughtered had no weapons with which to defend themselves; it was simply a matter of mass murder. In addition to blocking intervention by neighboring nations, Madeline Albright also insisted that the word "genocide" not be used, and that United Nations forces stationed in Rwanda were not to be allowed to intervene. In the three months that followed, between one-half and three-quarters of a million Christians were systematically dismembered, hacked to death, and slaughtered in the bloody carnage that ensued. Tens of thousands of Christians were murdered in churches; tens of thousands more were murdered in hospitals and schools. On several occasions, United Nations soldiers stationed in Rwanda actually handed helpless Christians over to members of the Hutu militia. They then stood by as their screaming charges were unceremoniously hacked to pieces. At the end of the carnage in late July 1994, the American government rewarded the Hutu murderers with millions of dollars in foreign aid. The American press has been silent about the fact that almost all people slaughtered were Christians, and that it was our government's policy that was primarily responsible for blocking efforts by neighboring African countries to intervene. There are dozens of other examples of population control programs which have been implemented throughout our world by modern-day "Malthusians" in their effort to ensure that the world population is dramatically curtailed. To date it is estimated that far more than one billion human lives have been terminated as a result of the worldwide abortion programs financed by the United States. In addition, we are beginning to see the devastating effects of the AIDS epidemic as this plague begins to depopulate large areas of Asia and Africa. Rational efforts to address the HIV epidemic throughout the world continue to be blocked. Rather than utilizing proven public health methods, advocates of population control continue to promote both hedonistic sex education and condom distribution, which will only assure the disease will continue to spread. MORE

DDT FOR INSECT CONTROL DDT Saved Lives Another more effective method of reducing world population was devised in the early 1960s by environmentalists and population-control adherents: blocking the use of DDT for mosquito and malaria control, which had been found to be extremely effective in saving human lives. In 1970 the National Academy of Sciences, in their book Life Sciences, stated that, "In little more than two decades DDT has prevented 500 million deaths due to malaria." To population control advocates, this preservation of human life was intolerable, so they set out to outlaw further use of the pesticide. Up until 1970 all reliable scientific data had consistently demonstrated that DDT was safe for both humans and animals. Indeed, DDT was the safest pesticide ever known to mankind. Furthermore, it was inexpensive and could be widely used in third-world countries to control the spread of insect-borne diseases. Accordingly, population control adherents set out to have DDT banned in the name of saving the environment. You probably remember the contrived stories declaring that DDT caused softening of eggshells, interfered with the balance of nature, and endangered humanity by entering the food chain. In truth, all of those stories were fabricated and part of a carefully coordinated program to block further use of the lifesaving pesticide. William Ruckelshaus was a longtime member of the Environmental Defense Fund and Director of the EPA. He outlawed further use of DDT in 1972 despite the recommendation of the EPA Chairman Investigating Committee, which had heard six months of testimony on use of the pesticide, and had determined that DDT was completely safe. When Ruckelshaus outlawed further use of DDT, he signed the death warrant for hundreds of millions of helpless human beings living in third-world countries. In Remembering Silent Spring and Its Consequences, Professor J. Gordon Edwards quoted from a speech by Victor Yanconne, founder of the Environmental Defense Fund. In that talk, Mr. Yanconne related a story told to him by a reporter who had asked Dr. Charles Wurster, one of the major opponents of DDT, whether a ban on DDT wouldn't actually result in far greater use of more toxic pesticides. Dr. Wurster is reported to have replied, "So what? People are the cause of all the problems. We have too many of them. We need to get rid of some of them and this is as good a way as any." When asked by the same reporter, "Doctor, how do you square the killing of people with the mere loss of some birds?" Dr. Wurster is reported to have replied, "It doesn't really make a lot of difference, because organophosphate acts locally and only kills farm workers and most of them are Mexicans and Negroes." If the National Academy of Sciences was correct in its 1970 assessment, we have probably lost over 600 million human lives during the past twenty-five years since advocates of population control succeeded in outlawing DDT. MORE

IN DEFENSE OF CONSPIRACY THEORISTS FROM  www.disinfo.com/pages/article/id1767/pg4/ What is perhaps most alarming to many conspiracy theorists are powers that the President and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) can assume during a state of national emergency, which the President can (and has) declared at any time. Each president going back in recent history declared 75-200+ national emergencies to justify issuing executive orders that have the power of legislation. Most of these executive orders have to do with the operation of government and foreign policy; one of Bill Clinton's executive orders, for example, required Federal buildings to become more energy-efficient. Other executive orders, however, are more ominous, which rendered into law powers of the Federal government during a national emergency. On September 30, 1973, Senators Frank Church (D-Idaho) and Charles McMathias (R-Maryland) made a joint statement regarding these orders: "The President has the power to seize property, organize and control the means of production, seize commodities, assign military forces abroad, call reserve forces amounting to two and a half million men to duty, institute martial law, seize and control all means of transportation, regulate all private enterprise, restrict travel and in a plethora of particular ways, control the lives of Americans . . . "Most [of these laws] remain a potential source of virtually unlimited power for a President should he choose to activate them. It is possible that some future President could exercise this vast authority in an attempt to place the United States under authoritarian rule. "While the danger of a dictatorship through legal means may seem remote to us today, recent history records Hitler seizing control through the use of emergency powers provisions contained in the laws of the Weimar Republic." How did the President gain these broad and dramatic powers? Again, by granting them to himself via executive order. In current times, despite the present wave of patriotism (with the Michigan Militia reportedly offering to help President Bush with homeland security), these powers, coupled with genuine emergencies now and in the future, could make one concerned. Coupled with ECHELON, a vast global intelligence-gathering network (and Carnivore, the FBI capability to read emails), they could make one nervous. Even paranoid. I believe that Earling Carothers "Jim" Garrison, District Attorney for New Orleans who put local businessman Clay Betrand on trial in connection with the assassination of John F. Kennedy, sums it all up perfectly in the October 1967 Playboy interview: PLAYBOY: Many of the professional critics of the Warren Commission appear to be prompted by political motives: Those on the left are anxious to prove Kennedy was murdered by a conspiracy within the establishment; and those on the right are eager to prove the assassination was an act of "the international Communist conspiracy." Where would you place yourself on the political spectrum--right, left or center? JIM GARRISON: That's a question I've asked myself frequently, especially since this investigation started and I found myself in an incongruous and disillusioning battle with agencies of my own Government. I can't just sit down and add up my political beliefs like a mathematical sum, but I think, in balance, I'd turn up somewhere around the middle. Over the years, I guess I've developed a somewhat conservative attitude--in the traditional libertarian sense of conservatism, as opposed to the thumbscrew-and-rack conservatism of the paramilitary right--particularly in regard to the importance of the individual as opposed to the State and the individual's own responsibilities to humanity . . . I was with the artillery supporting the division that took Dachau; I arrived there the day after it was taken, when bulldozers were making pyramids of human bodies outside the camp. What I saw there has haunted me ever since. Because the law is my profession, I've always wondered about the judges throughout Germany who sentenced men to jail for picking pockets at a time when their own government was jerking gold from the teeth of men murdered in gas chambers. I'm concerned about all of this because it isn't a German phenomenon; it's a human phenomenon. It can happen here, because there has been no change, there has been no progress and there has been no increase of understanding on the part of men for their fellow men. What worries me deeply, and I have seen it exemplified in this case, is that we in America are in great danger of slowly eroding into a proto-fascist state. It will be a different kind of fascist state from the one the Germans evolved; theirs grew out of depression and promised bread and work, while ours, curiously enough, seems to be emerging from prosperity. But in the final analysis, it's based on power and on the inability to put human goals and human conscience above the dictates of the State. Its origins can be traced in the tremendous war machine we've built since 1945, the "military-industrial complex" that Eisenhower vainly warned us about, which now dominates every aspect of our life. The power of the states and the Congress has gradually been abandoned to the Executive Department, because of war conditions; and we've seen the creation of an arrogant, swollen bureaucratic complex totally unfettered by the checks and balances of the Constitution. In a very real and terrifying sense, our Government is the CIA and the Pentagon, with Congress reduced to a debating society. Of course, you can't spot this trend to fascism by casually looking around. You can't look for such familiar signs as the swastika, because they won't be there. We won't build Dachaus and Auschwitzes; the clever manipulation of the mass media is creating a concentration camp of the mind that promises to be far more effective in keeping the populace in line. We're not going to wake up one morning and suddenly find ourselves in gray uniforms goose-stepping off to work. But this isn't the test. The test is: What happens to the individual who dissents? In Nazi Germany, he was physically destroyed; here the process is more subtle, but the end results are the same. I've learned enough about the machinations of the CIA in the past year to know that this is no longer the dreamworld America I once believed in. The imperatives of the population explosion, which almost inevitably will lessen our belief in the sanctity of the individual human life, combined with the awesome power of the CIA and the defense establishment, seem destined to seal the fate of the America I knew as a child and bring us into a new Orwellian world where the citizen exists for the State and where raw power justifies any and every immoral act. I've always had a kind of knee-jerk trust in my Government's basic integrity, whatever political blunders it may make. But I've come to realize that in Washington, deceiving and manipulating the public are viewed by some as the natural prerogatives of office. Huey Long once said, "Fascism will come to America in the name of anti-fascism." I'm afraid, based on my own long experience, that fascism will come to America in the name of national security.

STEMMING THE FLOOD OF MAN FROM: www.asianjournal.com/  (page no longer available) by RAMON ROCES AREVALO Sunstar News Service MANILA, Feb. 20 (Sunstar) -- In 1965, before the UN, Pope John Paul VI stated, “You must strive to multiply bread so that it suffices for the tables of mankind,” and added that it would be nasty to “diminish the number of guests at the banquet of life,” suggesting that population-food policies must be dealt with according to the Christian tenet which emphasizes on the “right to life.” No doubt, much of the earth’s surface is uncultivated and that the sea contains immeasurable riches. But it is an absurd extreme of technological optimism to expect great increases in food production to occur through the placing of more land under cultivation. Since man breeds so recklessly fast, they could ultimately crowd each other out of every available space. Suffice it to say that they are bound to reach that point where want and hunger multiply like themselves and then, at last, the needs of all these multitudes would drive mankind into madness. They will raise crop yields on fewer acres, push back deserts and jungles for more room, mine, bore, blast, delude, warp—and then destroy each other. What a dreary, stupid way to perish! Make no bones about it: The human population explosion and its declining spiral of natural resources is the greatest threat to the whole future of the species. Confronted with an overflowing sink, one doesn’t have to be a genius to choose whether to reach for a mop or the faucet. Time is dangerously over-ripe as far as the population control problem is concerned. There are too many people and too little food. Therefore, don’t give me the crap that says, “Man doesn’t live by bread alone.” Jesus Christ, Himself, had to feed the multitude before He could preach the Beatitude. We cannot forever continue to multiply and subdue the earth without losing our standard of life and the natural beauty that is part of it. We have to show concern for God’s other creatures, too, you know. I submit that they, too, have the right to life. There is an ongoing battle of man versus his numbers and he is far outstripping nature’s bounty. Food production has fallen further behind burgeoning population growth. Thus, while there are temporary reversals of the trend, it seems inevitable that this will wrap-up to its logical conclusion: mass starvation. Then, survival of the fittest. And eventually, armageddon. Man’s unslackened appetite for destroying the Providence of the Earth will guarantee that whatever resources are still held by virgin lands will never sustain man in his quest and insatiable appetite for unlimited growth. One of the ominous facts of the current situation is that roughly more than half of the population is made up of the youth. Thus, as this mass of young people move into the reproductive years (what with the kind of role model young stars who lose their virginity like it’s gone out of style_have become to today’s kids), we’re going to see the greatest baby boom of all time. These youngsters are the powderkeg of the population explosion, you better believe it! Sad to say, the future generation will inherit a different world in which standards of survival would be more atavistic than rational. Our situation requires immediate action. The church that has not been notorious for pussyfooting about methodology recommends the rhythm method of contraception. Yet, even under the most careful controlled conditions, women using this technique still run about 25 percent risk of pregnancy. Worse, the church refuses to turn over friar lands for food production or share its enormous wealth to alleviate the plight of the have-nots. Thus, the “Vatican Roulette” would still be classified as potential demographic catastrophe. Family planning is important, no doubt, from the standpoint of health and welfare of individuals; but it does not control population. Stressing the right of parents to have the number of children they want, evades the basic question of population policy—which is how to give society the number of children it needs. By offering only the means of couples to control fertility, it neglects the means for society to do so. Alas, one couple may plan to have three children, another may want seven. In both cases they are a cause of the population problem, not a solution to it. By population control we mean a conscious regulation of the number of human beings to meet the needs not just of individual families but of society as a whole. Government, must therefore, be allowed to use its political power to combine agricultural development and population control and simultaneously reverse the deterioration of our environment before population pressure permanently ruins the future of the Filipino race. The secretaries of Health, Agriculture, DECS and DENR should put their acts together to minimize deleterious effects on ecology, stressing that the scheme should include an effective program of ecosystem restoration. To be sure, the essence of evolution is reproduction. But birth rate must be brought into balance with the death rate, just as a population-environment goal must be devised or mankind will breed itself into oblivion. Today, we are involved in events leading to famine as less lands are cultivated for food production while education is geared towards some disciplines other than agriculture. Sadly, in our haste to consume the fruits of the earth, we may yet be destroyed by its consequences. Indeed, lives may still be saved through dramatic programs to stretch the carrying capacity of the globe by increasing food production. Yet, they only provide a stay of execution. Unless they are accompanied by determined and successful efforts at population control using a system of incentives and penalties—if need be—or by compulsion, if voluntary methods fail—we may be reaching the end of living and the beginning of survival—sooner than necessary. (SNS)

Overpopulation is a concept people need to understand. Overpopulation affects the environment, economy, and many other aspects of the world as we know it. As the population grows, the amount of trash produced also grows. Landfills are the United States main way of getting rid of the waste products we produce, however as the