Again, thank you. But you’re going to have to stop flirting with me. Hubby reads my posts, you know.

I suppose that since GOD has not done such a good job it’s up to these arrogant, self important morons to take over and do the job better.

Wait...thought they were God...

I suppose that’s what they see when they look in the mirror.

World De-population has been the official policy of the US Government since at least 1974. Many rich folk agree with this and have helped fund it.

http://www.lifesitenews.com/waronfamily/nssm200/index.html

NSSM 200

National Security Study Memorandum 200

Blueprint for world de-population and western domination

NSSM 200 - blueprint for de-population - Interim Newspaper - July 1998

Excerpt - The population-control ideology and the means to achieve it can be found in a U.S. executive-level government document entitled National Security Study Memorandum 200 (NSSM 200), published in 1974 and declassified in 1989. Although this plan of action was to be activated in developing countries, it was designed as a two-edged sword that could be swung with equal determination in both developed and developing countries alike. The document was signed by Henry Kissinger and directed to the secretaries of defense, agriculture and central intelligence, the deputy secretary of state, and the administrator of the Agency for International Development, with a copy to the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The focus of the study was the "international political and economic implications of population growth."
The UN, the IMF, the World Bank and abortion - Interim Newspaper - January 1999

Excerpt - The official policy of the U.S. regarding population control in foreign policy is spelled out in NSSM 200. The Memorandum became the official guide to U.S. foreign policy on Nov. 26, 1975 and has not been replaced since. NSSM 200, subtitled "Implications of Worldwide Population Growth for U.S. Security and Overseas Interests," warned that increasing populations in developing countries threatened U.S. strategic, economic, and military interests.

Official, Now De-Classified Documents

The following are all in Adobe Acrobat format and require the free Acrobat reader for viewing. Acrobat has been used to maintain the format of the original documents. As well, acrobat allows easier navigation through the documents and easier printing of selected pages from the documents.

http://www.hli.org/nssm_200_exposed.html
Population Control: NSSM 200 - Exposed!

was George h. bush there? he co-wrote the original title X, family-planning bill in 1969 (signed by nixon) for which today, many “devout” Catholic and Evangelical, so-called, pro-life congressmen vote. It's part of a large labor-and-health appropriation bill and they vote “yea” every year. what a shame.
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2005/roll321.xml#Y

they would rather keep planned parenthood open so they can go back to their constituents and proudly say they voted for education, cancer research and health care.

Oops! Someone forgot to send me a copy of that memo. We have way too many kids! ;o)

FIRST: Your statement does not affect the fact that these billionaires are acting rationally when attempting to reduce population growth by means of greater prosperity, etc. After all, they could hardly call for increased famine and civil unrest as a solution to alleged overpopulation. On the whole, their logic is reasonable. (I make NO STATEMENT about my opinion on its political aspects.)
I think population is not a problem in itself to solve, and prosperity is best achieved by adopting those cultural habits that lead to prosperity. Teaching people to have fewer babies is bound to appear arrogant and self-serving. Throwing money at the problem is at best a short term solution with no long term impact.
SECOND: Your statement is valid only given EXTREME (Armageddon-like) conditions - conditions not found in the bulk of the countries in which these billionaires might wish to enact their policies or launch their programs.
These are real world conditions: the Third World was rife with periodic bouts of famine and high infant mortality rates only a few decades ago.
On the other hand, a sudden increase in prosperity will reduce mortality much faster than it changes reproductive habits.
I believe that this is pure speculation on your part. I namely don't believe that there are any historical precedents for it in recent times, in "normal" countries. On the contrary, evidence indicates that reproductive patterns and habits can change very quickly (resulting in fewer offspring) when economic conditions improve. It is impossible for me to debate your statement's validity without a more-rigorous formulation and definition of terms (like "sudden").
I acknowledge a bit of handwaving, but the rapid growth of the relative population of the Third World in the past 100 years should make that assertion manifest. About 97% of population growth is now from the Third World. That obviously was not always so. Infant mortality, famine, plague, etc, dropped dramatically, but birth rates did not immediately follow suit. That makes sense since the latter is based on cultural and personal choices that are not so quickly changed by technology, food, medicine or money.

Moral Absolutes Ping!

Freepmail wagglebee or DirtyHarryY2K to subscribe or unsubscribe from the moral absolutes ping list.

FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
[ Add keyword moral absolutes to flag FR articles to this ping list ]

Here’s *where in the world* from last year’s meeting. Notice all the Obama admin. appointees.

http://www.stopthenorthamericanunion.com/2008BilderbergAttendees.html

Kissinger has plotted against this country in the past.

http://www.modernhistoryproject.org/mhp/NewsDisplay.php?Entity=KissingerHA&Date=2007-07-15

Pinged from Terri Dailies

It sounds like the N.I.C.E. Group from C.S. Lewis'That Hideous strength. Those who remember the book will know that the aims of the group were not so nice.

I’m okay with their taking a look at this.

So, think locally and start with yourself.

What is your solution and will you support theirs, either by killing yourself, or your children, or parents, or grandparents, or your neighbors that you don't like.

Or will you just stand idly by while others are killed?

How about forced sterilization? You for that?

How about forced abortions? You for that?

When you say you are okay their taking a look at this, will you be okay with the next step? Whatever they decide. I am so glad you are okay with others making decisions for you that affect your countrymen.

People like you make me sick.

Who says forced? Who says affecting our country?

1. You are naive to think things like this don’t become forced solutions. These people aren’t out to protect freedom.

2. Our Country? So its OK to kill Asians and Africans but not Americans.

These people want a 90% reduction in population, 10% to continue.

What percentage do you think you fall in?

Where do you possibly get the idea that they want a 90% reduction in population? That they want forced solutions? These are people who donate billions and billions, often for third-world aid, and you don’t think they should bother to try to think any of it through themselves? They should blindly depend on NGO ‘experts’? I think your paranoia may have got the better of you.

Billionaires club :

You don’t hand out condoms to people who live in huts with no water within 1000 yards.

You don’t force abortions on women who cook all the meals with wood or dung and have lost 4 of the 5 babies they have birthed.

You CHANGE THEIR LIVING STATUS FIRST, then THEY will change their family planning themselves.

NSSM 200

National Security Study Memorandum 200

Blueprint for world de-population and western domination

Official, Now De-Classified Documents