World Population, Environmentalism and Occultism

World Population, Environmentalism and Occultism

It’s official. The leaders of a growing number of western governments and their advisors/consultants are openly telling us of the need to restrict the size of families, to reduce the booming global population. This as part of their environmentalist message. A typical example has recently appeared in the London newspaper ‘The Times’. It reads -

Couples who have more than two children are being irresponsible by creating an unbearable burden on the environment‘, the Government’s green adviser has said. Jonathon Porritt, who chairs the UK Government’s Sustainable Development Commission and was Tony Blair’s adviser on the environment said that curbing population growth through contraception and abortion must be at the heart of policies to fight global warming. ‘Political leaders and green campaigners should stop dodging the issue‘, he said.

And a report shortly to be published by this same UK Commission will say governments must reduce population growth through better family planning.

I am unapologetic about asking people to connect up their own responsibility for their total environmental footprint and how they decide to procreate and how many children they think are appropriate,” Mr Porritt said. (‘The Times’ - London - 2nd February 2009).

Similar views have long been openly discussed at the United Nations. And in the USA that well known globalist, Henry Kissinger had his, ‘National Security Study Memorandum on Implications of Worldwide Population Growth on US Interests’.

Now, these views may at first sound entirely reasonable. In communist China families have long been restricted in size in this way. And experts are telling us a million and a half new children are born in the world each day, that the global population is 'booming out of control', etc. and that global resources are being ‘stretched to breaking point‘, etc. etc. etc.

But there are a series of plain facts these people (all of whom just happen to be keen supporters of the globalist ‘New World Order’ agenda) don’t bother to tell you and which are rarely, if ever, acknowledged publicly. Here are a few -

1. The environmental issue is certainly a global issue. Globalists love it. It already gets a lot of exposure in the mainstream media. Hidden supporters of the ’New World Order’ love it. Its propagandists sound very convincing. But, unchecked and unquestioned it leads, eventually, to control of entire nations in the name of ‘environmentalism‘, of entire populations in the name of ’saving the planet’ etc etc.

2. In FACT populations of most western countries are DECREASING ! Take the UK, for example. Here in the UK the current birth rate for couples is smaller today than it has ever been since birth statistics were first kept ! The plain fact is it’s currently at 1.8 children per couple. Compared with the birth rate in Victorian England which was around 4.9 children per couple. But the globalist doesn’t want you to know this. Scientific facts such as this tend to be suppressed. (There are hundreds of similar examples available worldwide).

3. Again, an analysis of no less than 61 independent studies made between the years of 1938 and 1991 and consisting of no less than 14,947 semen samples from fertile men living in no less than 23 countries worldwide has conclusively confirmed a huge decline in sperm count. These, massively confirmed by science ever since (and whose results are being greatly suppressed by globalists) are scientific fact.

4. The relatively high birth rate amongst couples who do not practice birth control does not alter the facts above.

5. The world ability to produce food and to produce commodities is portrayed as arriving at ‘breaking point‘ but is actually, today, greater than it has ever been. Today, factory farming is able to supply a huge proportion of global needs even within many nations. But, in the past, small scale farming was the rule. Today, many nations are able to produce but not to sell their products owing to the lack of finance, trade restrictions, tariffs etc etc. It’s nonsense to say the world is today producing less, or that its resources are being stretched to breaking point. Again, there is today in the world twice as much arable land as there was a century ago.

6. The high birth rates of nations which have large families are almost entirely those not highly industrialised and who are not the main agents of pollution. In these nations it’s normal for large families to be involved in working on the land. There’s nothing new or ‘shocking’ in such a fact. Indeed, the heads of these families know very well how many children they can support. It’s simply dishonest to say global population is spiralling ‘out of control’ and that global resources are ‘stretched to breaking point’.

SO, WHERE DOES THE POPULATION CONTROL AGENDA COME FROM ?

Great question. Let’s go back in history. To those who first pushed the idea that global populations must be restricted by the state. Well, it all began with the Venetian occultist of the late 18th century, Giammaria Ortes. In a work of his published in 1790 (‘Riflessioni sulla popolazione delle nazioni‘) this dismal message was given.

And his fraternal associates in Europe were quick to follow it up with similar crazy views. 8 years later appeared Thomas Malthus’s, ‘On Population’ (though it was nothing more than a plagiarised version of Ortes’s earlier work).

The globalists love to say they know better than individuals. That they know better than plain fact. The so-called globalist ‘New World Order’ want nothing less than total control/neutralisation of nation states, to impose a curb on civil and individual liberties using any manufactured excuse, extending even as far as inventing a perpetual war on 'terror', the introduction of countless absurd and often politically correct laws, even dictating the size of families through their globalist propaganda, a major part of which is rapidly becoming the ’environmentalist agenda’. It’s nonsense and should be challenged by every honest person. Responsibility for the environment is of course necessary. But that responsibility is matched by rights. The right of families to have children has nothing to do with nation states, globalists or anyone else. It's entirely up to the family.

//
 
Last edited:

dll927

New member
Interesting how the guy at one point says "I am unapologetic". Well, I am unapologetic in telling him where he can go. It's now 25 years past "1984", and Big Brother is still out there. A pox on all of them.
 
Yes, absolutely, these guys are ruled by evil, plain and simple. Like most people I believe in responsible stewardship of the planet. But environmentalism has been hijacked by these bandits of the globalist elite whose occult background is there for all to see.
 
Last edited:

methodistgirl

New member
I can agree with dll. I think the whole thing is a bunch of bologna and I
have news for them. Abortion is murder. If you don't want to start a kid
right away just don't do it. There's other kinds of fun.
judy tooley
 
These people are paving the way to a new (and short-lived) Romanised empire. Stop and think about it ! The nonsense of globalism is pushed and, when it is finally reversed, we all think it's marvellous. We then welcome the very people who have been inventing it all along.

Rome sweeps in. And then what happens ? Their ecumenical society takes over. The old marriage of church and state revived, ruthlessly imposed on society.

As for the quite separate abortion issue, what subject is more distinctly linked with Catholicism than it ? It certainly deserves a thread of its own.

Regards
 

methodistgirl

New member
For one thing about abortion, there are plenty of people who would give
anything to have a child. I'm now 48 and never got to even taste the
life of motherhood. Oh I've taken care of other people's kids. But it's
not really like having your own. The parents and takes the kids and I'm
lonely and blue again. That hurts!
judy tooley
 
Hi there Judy,

Not long ago I was listening to a discussion on the subject of abortion. I've certainly changed my views on the subject over the years. Well, at least, modified them. And perhaps one day we can have a thread on it ?

I'm sure you would make a wonderful mother. God knows.

Very best wishes

Robert
 

marval

New member
Well I do not think that big brother should be telling us how many children we should have. Surely if two people are in a loving relationship, and can afford to have children they should be allowed to. I do not like it when people decide to have loads of children, and then expect the rest of us to pay for them. But how governments think they can take away freedom of choice, is beyond me.

I am like Judy and have no children, I just looked after other people's darlings. But I think choice of how many is up to individuals. I used to work with someone who now has nine children, but at least he has worked hard all his life to support them.


Margaret
 
Yes Margaret,

I agree with all you say. They will telling us next how many chicken bones or soup cans we can put into a rubbish bin, how much string we can use to tie it, and how many litres of milk can be bought in a visit to a supermarket. LOL !!

Regards

Robert
 

marval

New member
Well I have read stories of people not having their rubbish emptied, just because the bin is slightly overfull. Our rubbish bags the council provide tell us what rubbish to put in which. If they start to tell me how much milk etc. I can buy at one time, they might get told (politely of course) where to go. There are much more important things in this world to worry about.


Margaret
 
Well Margaret, people can put up almost any kind of inconvenience. But take away tea and life becomes, well, somehow less wonderful. I drink large quantities myself. God forbid that it should ever be out of reach.

I read recently that dandelion leaves can make a tolerable kind of tea if carefully baked, shredded and made in to tea leaves. This was apparently used during the Second World War. But I like Kenyan tea specially (it's grown in volcanic soil) and what's called here 'Yorkshire Tea' - a very nice blend that's made here in tea bags and in the usual packets.

Robert
 
Last edited:
Top